Originally Posted by LittleFreak

I'd do more, but I can only really play SP stuff, sux internet. >.<

What about HOSTING MP LEVELS and paying no attention that your server doesn't show up?

Pageclaim.

Back On Topic about the reviewing system:

I think that if the review is N/A, the helpful ratings should be disabled for it. People shouldn't be punished for having no helpful stuff in an N/A review. It doesn't affect the rating at all anyway!

Originally Posted by Cooba

What about HOSTING MP LEVELS and paying no attention that your server doesn't show up?

Pageclaim.

Nobody could enter the server anyway. I'm too lazy to exactly explain the problem, but the fact is that I can NOT play online. So why should I host MP levels? I have hardly any online playing experience, and therefore MP level reviews would be kind of unfair. I don't want that to happen.

More on topic:

I guess most people need some kind of "prize" to review something. Helpful ratings are cool, but still most people are too lazy to write a good review for them. So the question is, what could we offer them? We can't give them money or something, that'd be kind of dumb.

LittleFreak probably didn't read half of my post. I meant all the N/A reviews. "Review Helpfulness" should be disabled for all N/A ratings. Any N/A review doesn't need to be good, because it doesn't affect the rating in any way.

However, the helpful rating system explicitly states that you should rate reviews based on their quality and not their rating. So, technically, rating N/A reviews is completely legitimate.

Originally Posted by the WINNER

LittleFreak probably didn't read half of my post. I meant all the N/A reviews. "Review Helpfulness" should be disabled for all N/A ratings. Any N/A review doesn't need to be good, because it doesn't affect the rating in any way.

Huh?

I was talking to Cooba actually.

Anyways, it's annoying when reviews meant as comments get rated, so I agree with you.

Originally Posted by White Rabbit

However, the helpful rating system explicitly states that you should rate reviews based on their quality and not their rating. So, technically, rating N/A reviews is completely legitimate.

N/A reviews don't NEED to have quality, because they don't affect the rating. So if someone goes rate "Not helpful" to a N/A review, it's pretty annoying. Especially if it's not a review, but a comment.

I agree with the WINNER on this one.

http://www.jazz2online.com/J2Ov2/new....php?newsID=19

But people have chosen to ignore Trafton, as usual.

Originally Posted by Cooba

But people have chosen to ignore Trafton, as usual.

Yeah. How sad.

One thing I don't like aswell is that bad reviews are still over unrated ones.

So, according to Trafton, rating N/A reviews is perfectly fine. ;p Whether you see the review as a comment and not a real review is a different matter. If, however, someones writes a review tha doesn't fit into J2o's rules and gets edited to N/A, then you should still be able to rate it. IMO the rating is for the author of the review, telling him how good he has done and not for the author of the upload, telling him how good the reviews of his upload is. The review rating system is supposedly supposed to discourage bad reviewers, or at least encourage them to put in more effort.

EDIT: Don't forget that some ppl may rate a review with a rating only to find that the admins have taken the rating away and set it to N/A. Now, if you follow the winner, what are you going to do? There's no way to take away the helpful/unhelpful rating you gave and you have also, all of a sudden, begun to annoy ppl because they think you have rated an N/A review.

Solution: Make N\A (edited reviews or ones without rating) and comments different.

So people can rate N\A reviews and can't rate comments. :P

The real reason I am reviving this topic is though, that I wanted to ask something about the currently-in-work reviewing ranks (as far as I heard they are in the works, correct me if I'm wrong).

If one has already done lots of reviews before the reviewing ranks are back, do those old reviews count on his rank or do you have to start as "New Reviewer" even if you reviewed lots of stuff in the past?

I say we begin from scratch. With new ranks.

Me aswell.

The reviewing system is working well for me, I think people go to harsh on people. That's why my reviewing style is very different from everyone else.

The problem is that most people do not bother to review anything, which should be changed.

I think I don't understand why people post these really long reviews. Personally, I find that pointless even though It's informative. But the fact of the matter is, I don't care about reviews usually unless It's a movie or product review. This is because I download the thing anyway. And anyway, I can get my point across in 5 sentences instead of a 2 page report.

Originally Posted by Tubz

I think I don't understand why people post these really long reviews. Personally, I find that pointless even though It's informative. But the fact of the matter is, I don't care about reviews usually unless It's a movie or product review. This is because I download the thing anyway. And anyway, I can get my point across in 5 sentences instead of a 2 page report.

Because if you were the author of the level, you would want not only feedback and criticism about how the level faired in the categories (eyecandy, gameplay, etc) but also suggestions about what to do and how to improve it so it can be better/so the author of the level would know what to avoid doing in the future, and that takes more than 5 sentences..

I disagree with that.

I find 5 sentences a bit too short.

I don't know why I'm doing it, but I'm doing it for the sake of doing it and because I can.

Originally Posted by Blackraptor

Because if you were the author of the level, you would want not only feedback and criticism about how the level faired in the categories (eyecandy, gameplay, etc) but also suggestions about what to do and how to improve it so it can be better/so the author of the level would know what to avoid doing in the future, and that takes more than 5 sentences..

Oh yes, I'm just good at getting my point across in a few sentences. Perhaps I was exaggerating but my reviews are very short, concise, and to the poitn and everyone knows that. I point out flaws and pros about the downloadable and tell the creator how to improve. My style of reviewing has never changed, even on my old account.

Nothing wrong with being different though.

I did not want to force you to write longer reviews or something. ;D (even mine are pretty short sometimes)

I also think ppl are too harsh on other ppl when reviewing. BR was not happy with my review and we talked about it for ages, eventually, after a few nuclear missile volleys exchanged, we agreed to each others demands. He edited his lvl and I pushed the rating up. ;P

I also write reviews for my sake, and for my reader's sake, which means that I'm writing for EVERYONE. For the author, so he knows what I think, for ppl who haven't DLed the lvl and for the review raters, those that give us all very nice Featured review. ;P Basically, I don't believe in too short reviews because that would make everyone except the author get bored. My strive for length and quality has more often than not ended in total, utter failure. This shows just how tough reviewing can be, at least for me. Er..what's my point, you ask? Well, #jj2 got boring, so I typed a bit here. There. Happy? *eats*

Hmm, I'm surprised ppl even cared about this thread ;D .