Comments on: Assigning Reviews?

By: scribbelini

scribbelini — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 17:24:03 +0000

It’s really a great idea. The first draft of two can change dramatically and someone who has reviewed before can comment on improvements or digressions. Also lets reviewers know some of thier feedback is being seriously considered.

By: Steve

Steve — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 20:10:46 +0000

@Anonymous2
As more people start using Review Fuse, the reviews assignments will be more and more targeted to the submission of the reviewer. Right now we have 4 main top level categories active, however, the software is ready to accept hundreds of different submission types and genres. Right now in beta, the number of people using the system is relatively small. If we only assigned reviews based on those very specific categories, it could be a long time before someone was assigned to do the review. However as it grows, we will start opening up those other categories and that should make for a more enjoyable reviewing experience.

By: Anonymous2

Anonymous2 — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 19:03:14 +0000

I agree with Intentionally Anon. It’s hard as a reviewer to get the same work that has not been edited. What if we already gave them a detailed line by line review, but its submitted again? Do we have to do it all over again? If we don’t, will that lower our reviewing score? There should be some type of choice to whether we want to review that persons work again. At least they should have changed some of the things that were pointed out. I don’t want to short change the writer.

As a writer I would not mind the same reviewer agian, but I would understand if they did not want to review it again. We’re not really reviewing things based on our preferences, so it’s hard to read and review a story over and over that you’re just not into. Perhaps I’m tired of reading Sci-fi or Fantasy. Is there a way to group our reviews into the category we write or prefer to read?

By: Intentionally anonymous

Intentionally anonymous — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 06:19:51 +0000

There are both positive and negative effects, mostly dependent on the writer’s intentions.

Situation 1: The writer feels that the three reviews of his/her work were inadequate and didn’t help improve the story in any way. Perhaps the reviews were positive and motivating, but they didn’t provide any suggestions beyond maybe a typo here or there. This writer, if he/she did a decent job editing their three papers, should hopefully receive the same quality feedback as given. In this case, the writer has all the reason to upload again after fixing a typo or two. However, the intention is to be reviewed by different people than before.

Situation 2: The writer receives sincere and heavy edits, and has rewritten the piece to display these edits. If this writer wants to have the new draft reviewed, by all means that is what it deserves (as long as the quality edits were taken into account). If this writer particularly liked a review of one editor, then by all means, that editor should be able to edit again through coincidence (or an elaborate system of checking and balancing).

The problem is, that Situation 1 writers don’t want the same editors, and Situation 2 writers want the same editors. The solution? Why not give them a choice? Just a simple check-mark-able box before submitting. Or another solution: establish editor “black lists” and editor preferences. Suppose that one editor was blunt and rude with the edit, by no means would the writer want to be edited by him/her again, so establish a personal blacklist. The main problem with both of the suggested solutions is that the current user database is too low to allow for heavy blacklisting. A writer may like being edited by Joe1×1 (fake name as far as I am aware), but Joe1×1 may hate reviewing their stories.