You've all made some really great suggestions on ways to improve our weekly contest! I have filtered out some of the suggestions that are just not possible at this time, and put all the others into polls for you to vote on. Your votes will decide what gets changed.
Improving the Weekly Review Rumble - Vote/Poll
Discussion Topics
1.
What should be nominated and voted on?
(15 posts)
2.
Can you be in the Rumble two weeks in a row?
(25 posts)
3.
How many people should you be allowed to nominate each week?
(8 posts)
4.
Should the eligibility period for reviews be changed?
(9 posts)
Quote:
Make sure you vote now, the changes are gonna go into affect this week.
Originally posted by
Gary
As it is now, every review is included separately. This gives reviewers more than one entry if more than one of their reviews is nominated.
Should we leave it how it is now, or should we limit each reviewer to one entry including all reviews ...
Should we leave it how it is now, or should we limit each reviewer to one entry including all reviews ...
As it is now, every review is included separately. This gives reviewers more than one entry if more than one of their reviews is nominated.
Should we leave it how it is now, or should we limit each reviewer to one entry including all reviews nominated?
Should we leave it how it is now, or should we limit each reviewer to one entry including all reviews nominated?
02/08/2010
Quote:
I think I will still list all the reviews, so it will look the same, but then just tally all the votes together for the reviewer. Since it appears this is the popular choice.
Originally posted by
Red
I'm a little worried people will start voting for reviewers based on how prolific they were, but I'm not sure that's actually worth worrying about.
02/09/2010
Quote:
I like this option since this will give others a chance to win the rumble. Some people have awesome reviews and do not have as many out there yet due to their jobs, kids, etc. This would even up the odds and be more consistent as far as review quality and popularity.
Originally posted by
Gary
As it is now, every review is included separately. This gives reviewers more than one entry if more than one of their reviews is nominated.
Should we leave it how it is now, or should we limit each reviewer to one entry including all reviews ...
Should we leave it how it is now, or should we limit each reviewer to one entry including all reviews ...
As it is now, every review is included separately. This gives reviewers more than one entry if more than one of their reviews is nominated.
Should we leave it how it is now, or should we limit each reviewer to one entry including all reviews nominated?
Should we leave it how it is now, or should we limit each reviewer to one entry including all reviews nominated?
07/09/2011
I know this is an old thread, but I think that perhaps winners should be limited annually, on a rolling year system. Like, for example, if I win ten (six, eight, twelve; this number is a bit arbitrary, but it should be enough so that people can fairly win a few, without getting to the point of excessiveness) weekly review rumbles, then I would be ineligible until one year from the week I won the first rumble.
I just feel like we see so many repeat winners, people who consistently win--which means that they write AMAZING reviews. But, in that same respect, it almost makes it impossible for other newcomers who may have had REALLY GOOD REVIEWS to win, because you've got these powerhouses dominating the rumbles.
Personally, I don't like the rumbles as a concept, but this is just my suggestion on how to, perhaps, level the field a bit for newbies.
I just feel like we see so many repeat winners, people who consistently win--which means that they write AMAZING reviews. But, in that same respect, it almost makes it impossible for other newcomers who may have had REALLY GOOD REVIEWS to win, because you've got these powerhouses dominating the rumbles.
Personally, I don't like the rumbles as a concept, but this is just my suggestion on how to, perhaps, level the field a bit for newbies.
07/22/2011
Quote:
Combine multiple nominations, and vote on the reviewer
Originally posted by
Gary
As it is now, every review is included separately. This gives reviewers more than one entry if more than one of their reviews is nominated.
Should we leave it how it is now, or should we limit each reviewer to one entry including all reviews ...
Should we leave it how it is now, or should we limit each reviewer to one entry including all reviews ...
As it is now, every review is included separately. This gives reviewers more than one entry if more than one of their reviews is nominated.
Should we leave it how it is now, or should we limit each reviewer to one entry including all reviews nominated?
Should we leave it how it is now, or should we limit each reviewer to one entry including all reviews nominated?
Jan 1, 8:00 pm
I'd say individual reviews. Because If you reviewing the whole persons body of work... well maybe their current reviews have improved from later ones. Individual gives them a chance to grow. Seems like it would end up being a popularity contest if it was voting on the reviewer... Or the person with the most reviews..
I think it should be individual reviews. And one person cannot be nominated for two reviews in one week- if this happens they can pick the best review out of the bunch, instead of letting them get two chances to win. Fair for everyone.
I think it should be individual reviews. And one person cannot be nominated for two reviews in one week- if this happens they can pick the best review out of the bunch, instead of letting them get two chances to win. Fair for everyone.
Jan 6, 2:59 pm
Quote:
I think it should definitely be one or the other---limit the number of nominations for a single reviewer or put them all under one name if there's more than one for that person that week.
Originally posted by
Curiouscat
I'd say individual reviews. Because If you reviewing the whole persons body of work... well maybe their current reviews have improved from later ones. Individual gives them a chance to grow. Seems like it would end up being a popularity contest if it
...
I'd say individual reviews. Because If you reviewing the whole persons body of work... well maybe their current reviews have improved from later ones. Individual gives them a chance to grow. Seems like it would end up being a popularity contest if it was voting on the reviewer... Or the person with the most reviews..
I think it should be individual reviews. And one person cannot be nominated for two reviews in one week- if this happens they can pick the best review out of the bunch, instead of letting them get two chances to win. Fair for everyone.
I think it should be individual reviews. And one person cannot be nominated for two reviews in one week- if this happens they can pick the best review out of the bunch, instead of letting them get two chances to win. Fair for everyone.
I don't want to use the term unfair, because nothing in life is fair except a blonde-headed child, but it seems not right to have multiple nominations for the same person in the same week. Their votes get divided between multiple reviews.
The consensus of the community members who have participated in this poll, up to this point, is that multiple nominations should be allowed, but they should be grouped under the person's name.
Granted, this poll is a year old but I'd be willing to bet most of those people are still around today.
Maybe we can pimp this thread, get more votes and then give it a closing date and go from there?
Jan 6, 5:20 pm
Total posts:
15
Unique posters: 11
Unique posters: 11
I agree that in a "perfect" world (and EF is close, very close) a reviewer should be able to be nominated each week, provided that the current week's review is truly exceptional, which is a very subjective and potentialy inflamatory criteria. Having said that, I have noticed some "cliques" or "fan clubs", as it is, and I think that greatly influences how people may or may not vote. It is a difficult thing to "police" so that it is fair to all. We just need to rely on people's good ethics. I have observed that EF as a company, and many, many of the members have the highest ethical standards, but, there are those few...
11/11/2011
Total posts:
26
Unique posters: 25
Unique posters: 25
I don't know which number is going to end up being the "key" number to get the rumble balanced out, but it's probably less than 5. To be completely honest, in weeks where I'm extremely busy, and don't have a lot of time, I often find that there's just too many nominated reviews for me to sit there and read through all of them in one sitting, to cast a fair vote. Many times in those situations, I end up not voting at all. I think that if we could limit nominations so that everyone will TRULY only nominate the reviews they found BEST, instead of 5 reviews they thought were "pretty good", it might help to make the voting process easier.
Just my $.02
Just my $.02
02/10/2010
Total posts:
8
Unique posters: 7
Unique posters: 7
This poll is to determine the window of eligibility from which reviews can be nominated each week.
- To be eligible review must have been submitted between ?/?/? & ?/?/?.
- Nominations must be submitted by 11:59PM on Thursday each week.
- The Weekly Review Rumble will be posted Friday evening each week.
- To be eligible review must have been submitted between ?/?/? & ?/?/?.
- Nominations must be submitted by 11:59PM on Thursday each week.
- The Weekly Review Rumble will be posted Friday evening each week.
02/04/2010
Quote:
Good point. It would really suck if a review came in a few hours before the deadline, but it couldn't be nominated for either week because of the timing.
Originally posted by
Sammi
I think in order not to miss reviews that come in right before the deadline, the cutoff for eligible reviews should be 24 hours before the nominations must be made.
02/09/2010
Quote:
no change
Originally posted by
Gary
This poll is to determine the window of eligibility from which reviews can be nominated each week.
- To be eligible review must have been submitted between ?/?/? & ?/?/?.
- Nominations must be submitted by 11:59PM on Thursday each week. ...
- To be eligible review must have been submitted between ?/?/? & ?/?/?.
- Nominations must be submitted by 11:59PM on Thursday each week. ...
This poll is to determine the window of eligibility from which reviews can be nominated each week.
- To be eligible review must have been submitted between ?/?/? & ?/?/?.
- Nominations must be submitted by 11:59PM on Thursday each week.
- The Weekly Review Rumble will be posted Friday evening each week.
- To be eligible review must have been submitted between ?/?/? & ?/?/?.
- Nominations must be submitted by 11:59PM on Thursday each week.
- The Weekly Review Rumble will be posted Friday evening each week.
07/25/2011
Quote:
I agree with this. It doesn't leave much time for people to have read reviews close to the deadline and nominate them.
Originally posted by
Sammi
I think in order not to miss reviews that come in right before the deadline, the cutoff for eligible reviews should be 24 hours before the nominations must be made.
Jan 27, 3:52 pm
Total posts:
10
Unique posters: 9
Unique posters: 9