Three Reviews?

It would definitely be a great idea! It would get other people's sites reviewed because people who want their site reviewed would have to review other's sites first. It is a never-ending cycle that would be very beneficial, I'm all for it, Chad...

I think it would be a bad idea. Requiring a review would lead to a person dashing off 3 meaningless reviews just to reach the limit. A dishonest quickie review from an unknown source is worse than no review at all. Why don't the reviewers just exercise a little common sense? If you get a "rate my site" request from a person with 1 post, can't it be ignored? Or politely request that the person asking become an active community member for a week or two before asking for a critique. That would lead to fewer abuses of the system than a public policy of "3 posts no matter how worthless".

I'm leaning towards Maverick. I never like requiring visitors to do something. It might turn some new visitors away...

I could give you a long list of reasons not to do that, but only a few to do it.

In my opinion it is not a good idea! I know your competition requires it (sitepoint), but I don't think it is appropriate, and it is even harder and more time consuming to enforce.

Here's an idea that just popped into my head: I'm not quite sure if vBulletin supports this kind of thing, but maybe we could have a sub-post count, so where whenever somebody posts in the Web Site Reviews category, it not only reflects on their actual post count, but also on the sub-count. We could use this as kind of a 'trust' system, like on Eopinions, where the more posts the better you're 'trusted.' I think this gives people incentive to post more reviews, but also relieves the pressure of HAVING to do it. I mean, heck, we sit here and rack up our post count, don't we?

Well this "suggestion" is in effect in other forums such as eDevBoards and SitePoint Forums. What they do is they moderate the forum (meaning the Mods have to approve each post), and have to check each member and see if they've posted a certain amount of times in that forum. It's a lot of work, and I don't think it's needed...

I think it would pay off, sitepoints review forums seem to run good , and the moderators seem to handle it, there3 moderators in the website critique area im sure they could handle it.

'Make sure the reviews you send are good before you get any reviews for your site.'

Whats wrong with that idea, im up for it..

An 'Eye' for an 'Eye'. Grrr

Personally, I don't think it is good to require visitors to do something such as post 3 reviews before getting a critique. So, I am going to vote a big NO against this.

All points posted are being considered. They are all good points making this decision tough. I am leaning toward a "in the middle" solution which would be a little more enforcing that what we have now, but it wouldn't be a "three reviews or else" solution.

Please keep posting your opinions. This is something I am going to make a decision on as soon as I get the technical and design stuff finished up in a week or two.

Hmmm.... As co-mod of the Critiques forum I really don't like the idea of having to approve every post before it actually gets posted (and it seems like Justin and I agree on this).

I do think that our section is probably the worst for one time visitors. It might be good to have a certain participation requirement before posting a site for review though, like you have to have 10 posts or something. I also like Maverick's idea of politely suggesting that people participate for a week or two before posting a site for review.

I will do my part and try to encourage first time posters to stick around and participate in other areas of TWF. Maybe if we make more of an effort to welcome new members they'll be more likely to stick around??

I also agree with Megan and Justin on the fact of reviewing each post before it goes on there. I am against that too.

I don't like the idea,

When this forum first started I did my best to critique sites. However I am not artisticly inclined. Therefor my comments don't carry lots of weight. However I do post on stuff that I am knowledgable about. Why should I not be able to have someone help me on my limitations(artistic) when I help them out with theirs.

Just two cents from an old guy.

You don't need to be artistic to critique sites.
Tell the develope what you think, what you like and dislike. Load times and how it looks on your machine.
You dont need to ahve a college degree to do that.

So i think the 3 reviews thing is still a good idea.

I also think that bad reviews, made just to reach a quota are worse than no reviews.

I think that you should put some sort of announcement in the forum (administrator's announcement that stays for good). In it you should explain why we need people to review sites and why people shouldn't expect many reviews, if at all, unless they're active members in the forum). I believe that many of them may be newbies who simply aren't aware of the nature of the forums. You just need to let them know, that's all.

I also think that if you let people review the site of someone who's new to the forum, he'd be more likely to get active in the forums. Think about this: someone arrives at the web critique forum, all excited with his new site. He came because someone told him about this neat forum, where people give you feedback on your work. Then, the first thing he sees is that he's not actually allowed to post his site for review, until he carries out some task. I think most people would just leave.

I agree with anat.
JP

Instead of having a cut off before they can participate, is it possible to have the Critique forum invisible for registered users under say 10 posts?

Or have a membership policy for that forum, so that people have to commit? It won't guarantee the one-post-wonders don't just drop their site off and leave, but it might encourage them to participate.

Or on the registration page (to sign up) have an important notice for newbies to please read over the existing reviews and add their input before posting their own site, so as to familiarize themselves with the types of responses they can expect, and to give back a little.

Of all the options I have read and suggested, I like the polite encouragement to contribute best, but that's probably my damned old Canadian ways.

Suzanne

I must say that I too like the encouragement to participate without setting any hard rules into place. Anat said it best I think.

If I were a newbie to the forum and I was actually required to provide input before people could give me input, the chances of me doing so would be slim.

I think we need to take a more encouraging approach by just making sure that users know that really can benefit from providing input on other sites before asking for input on their own.

We could always just let people post without registering. I've seen this done in other forums...

I like the idea of allowing unregistered visitors to post.
This will keep our posted number of members more accurate.

Well, I have tried to encourage some of the recent first time posters to participate elsewhere at TWF and it seems to have worked for at least two of them so far! I think that we should just try this route for a month or so and see how it goes. If we still have a lot of problems maybe then we can think about another course of action.

I think that the idea of allowing unregistered users to post could cause some problems. There must be good reasons why most forums require registration and I think that those should be taken into account.

[Edited by Megan Jack on Nov. 10, 2000 at 11:45 AM]

That's a great idea Megan! I will second that thought, and I'll try doing that when posting replies...

I feel that the webmaster-forums are here to help people - to help each other. If someone needs help, why do they have to do reviews first? I know you are trying to get them involved in the forums, but they might not feel comfortable giving reviews.

Many of the people that come here are first time designers and just want to "listen" to what others have to say. They are here to learn and not necessarily to participate.

Even me, for example. I have been with the webmaster forums since the beginning. I don't have a ton of posts because I spend a lot of time just "listening" to what others have to say. That does not make me any less involved than those who post all of the time.

Just think about why the forums are here in the first place.

Brooke