[request/rant] To all reviewers, amateur and pro...

[Voadam]

Actually if you follow a review link from the main page you don't see that...and I'd be willing to bet that most of the casual guys here get to the reviews by those links.

You mean the part where it says things like "New fan review in the EN World d20 System Guide:" or "Staff reviewer Joe G Kushner has added the following review to the EN World d20 System Guide:"

From the main page if you go to the menu on the left and click on product guide reviews you get that intro page with the text I quoted above. If you go to the site menu navigation menu button on the upper left and then to reviews same thing.

Do you mean that you feel misled because you don't see that full text statement in the individual reviews? That you are only told briefly on the front that it is a fan or staff review?

 

[WhimsyTheFae]

In more ways then you know. :\

I get it and I used to do it. But I got tired of doing it because it reads bad and it's bland and when I stopped no one cared. This is a the first time in three years that anyone has even brought it up that I've seen.

...that is the sloppiness that I initially refered to (emphasis mine)...

Most of the time sloppiness is bred by laziness, contentment and artistic license (the latter two apply in this case). Laziness and contentment are my usual flaws, but I have also used artistic license on occasion, and while the end product was more asthetically appealing it was still not according to the standards that were set.

Once again, whether or not you do this may not affect you in the least. It may not affect your reviews. It may not be brought up for another three years.

If it is brought up, however, just understand that it is an honest and valid concern.

 

[Crothian]

Actually, the one I would like to know is what's the difference between a staff reviewer and Joe blow gamer? I mean, you have a title...so does it actually mean anything? Or is it just a matter of who your mates are?

It's a fair question.

A Staff Reviewer is someone that has impressed Morrus (owner of the site) enough to basically give them a staff position. It lends an ability to have some publishers send things to you to review but it doesn't gaurentee it. It makes us a moderator of the review place, so I can monitor other reviews and make sure they are up to par. I guess a Staff Reviewer is someone who has proven over time they that can write good and fair reviews. Staff reviewers tend to have more reviews and do more reviews then the Joe Blow gamer reviewer. As you can see it is not a well defined position or as is probalby more accurate; I'm terrible at describing it.

But if you want to know who of the reviewers you can trust, I leave that up to the reading public. Start a thread up asking people to evalute the reviewers.

 

[Shadowslayer]

You mean the part where it says things like "New fan review in the EN World d20 System Guide:" or "Staff reviewer Joe G Kushner has added the following review to the EN World d20 System Guide:"

From the main page if you go to the menu on the left and click on product guide reviews you get that intro page with the text I quoted above. If you go to the site menu navigation menu button on the upper left and then to reviews same thing.

Do you mean that you feel misled because you don't see that full text statement in the individual reviews? That you are only told briefly on the front that it is a fan or staff review?

Dude, I never said I felt misled about anything.

The point is, on the internet, eveyone has an opinion. I want to know how boards like this one differentiate the learned opinions from the moronic..assuming I don't have the book in question in front of me to decide for myself. Some of the reviewers on these boards have titles...I wanna know how they got em.

edit-and while I was typing, Crothian answered it.

 

[Voadam]

Let me tell you how this works for me, offline. In my regular life, I'm a newspaper reporter. And among the things I cover are local politics. During the last political season, every time I'd cover a fund-raiser, people wanted to give me a plate of whatever they were eating. I turned it down, not because a plate full of tacos can sway my opinion, but because people are already inclined to read bias into journalism in this day and age, and if they find out that I got a cut of prime rib from one of the local politicians, those inclined to believe I was biased in favor of him will suddenly go "AH HA!"

As a result, I eat nothing, even when I have to race to a fast food restaurant after leaving a location with mouth-watering food.

Is it necessary? No. Honestly, if I could be bought, my price would be a lot higher than that. But it makes the people in my small community feel better since I am notorious for turning down gifts.

Now, in the review game, it's obviously impractical to buy everything oneself. But to prevent the (usually irrational, sometimes not) suspicion from falling on them, I think every reviewer should, as a matter of course, just say whether or not they got a review copy for free.

The good reviewers suffer a perception problem created by the bad reviewers. The way to combat that is with more openess, and more honesty than the bad reviewers can afford.

Do you put in your stories that even though food was provided, you turned it down? Do you feel reporters should always say in their stories that they accepted or did not accept food at a mealtime briefing when food was provided?

You seem to be suggesting that reviewers should not recieve review materials period. Not that they should declare how they got the materials they review.

 

[diaglo]

In more ways then you know. :\

I get it and I used to do it. But I got tired of doing it because it reads bad and it's bland and when I stopped no one cared. This is a the first time in three years that anyone has even brought it up that I've seen.

i bring it up every time i see it.

it is important to me.

 

[Crothian]

...that is the sloppiness that I initially refered to (emphasis mine)...

I don't deny that. I'm just stated my reasons and the way it happened.

If it is brought up, however, just understand that it is an honest and valid concern.

If I didn't think it was a valid concern I would have ignored it instead of asking questions and seeking understanding. I appriciate the view point you brought to this and you gave me something to think on for the next review.

 

[diaglo]

You seem to be suggesting that reviewers should not recieve review materials period. Not that they should declare how they got the materials they review.

that's me. i definitely agree 10000000000% with this.

 

[Crothian]

You seem to be suggesting that reviewers should not recieve review materials period. Not that they should declare how they got the materials they review.

In theory it would be great if peopel would review things and we would get a wide variety of things reviewed. But in practice, and its a sad thing to say, there are some companies that will only get reviews if they give it away. Even very popular companies rarely seem to get fans that buy their books to write a review on it.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Do you put in your stories that even though food was provided, you turned it down? Do you feel reporters should always say in their stories that they accepted or did not accept food at a mealtime briefing when food was provided?

In a small town like this, those who follow politics are already aware of it. It's kind of like a message board community, but with sunshine and weather and stuff.

You seem to be suggesting that reviewers should not recieve review materials period. Not that they should declare how they got the materials they review.

Only if you ignore me explicitly saying otherwise in the post you quoted.