Is it objective? (Epiphora's challenge)

Contributor: Epiphora Epiphora
Quote:
Originally posted by Carrie Ann
"What would be a better way to describe it?"

This is not a firm toy. It's quite floppy with a lot of give and very little rigidity.
Exactly.
02/08/2009
Contributor: Dragon Dragon
All of the links posted show a much more well-written and objective review than mine. I'll leave the review as if for a few days, then update it.

Given the debate over what a objective review should look like, I like the examples both of specific wording and the links.

One thing seems clear to me - in a "Descriptive" review, you are writing about the product and the Experience section is generally irrelevant, and probably best excluded. Thoughts here?

It also seems that I could have just as easily written a accurate and "objective" review without ever having used it.
02/08/2009
Contributor: Epiphora Epiphora
"It also seems that I could have just as easily written a accurate and "objective" review without ever having used it."

That's a good point. I agree with the others that if we are supposed to be entirely objective, then they should not be called "reviews" and should not include star ratings. However, as I understand the description program rules, we CAN be subjective as long as we state that something is personal preference.
02/08/2009
Contributor: Backseat Boohoo Backseat Boohoo
Quote:
Originally posted by Epiphora
"It also seems that I could have just as easily written a accurate and "objective" review without ever having used it."

That's a good point. I agree with the others that if we are supposed to be entirely objective, then ... more
That was my understanding.

I also tend to be much more subjective in the experience section BECAUSE it's about my personal experience. If the review body is for the facts, the experience section is for my personal take on the toy.
02/08/2009
Contributor: Dragon Dragon
Quote:
Originally posted by Backseat Boohoo
That was my understanding.

I also tend to be much more subjective in the experience section BECAUSE it's about my personal experience. If the review body is for the facts, the experience section is for my personal take on the toy.
Correct me here - didn't I actually do that?
02/08/2009
Contributor: Backseat Boohoo Backseat Boohoo
Quote:
Originally posted by Dragon
Correct me here - didn't I actually do that?
I never said you didn't. I was just adding my 2 cents to the conversation that was going on on the side.
02/08/2009
Contributor: Miss Cinnamon Miss Cinnamon
Well, all of the things that I would have commented on have been commented on already and all the points I would have made about the Description Review program in general have been made (and well!). I have no wish to be redundant, so I'll just sit back and bask in the glow of how awesome this entire thread is. I like the overall constructive energy of this thread. I really appreciate how DBD has stepped forward to find out, first-hand, what it's like try to write a descriptive review even though she personally chose not to apply to be part of it. It shows that she is trying to understand things from different perspectives, which is really great.

I'm so happy with all the positive energy we've shown in this thread--it sure beats drama! We're all learning and discussing and playing well together. This is the EF community that I love :]
02/08/2009
Contributor: Dragon Dragon
Quote:
Originally posted by Backseat Boohoo
I never said you didn't. I was just adding my 2 cents to the conversation that was going on on the side.
Just checking. I wanted to actually get full feedback on the entire review, and use it as an example for everyone. I agree that you didn't say anything specific, but if you "felt" otherwise I wanted the opportunity for that to be up for discussion. (Still do!)

Thanks Miss Cinnamon, There is more of a twist to "objective" then I think that people outside of the description program actually get. More to the point everyone has their own opinion of what "objective" actually means. Hopefully, this will clarify it a bit.

I started this because something that Epiphora said. It just struck me as personally interesting to try when she said that it was hard. Especially when I had a toy that I was actively avoiding because I had no interest in it. I think that there is a particular point of conflict when you are trying to write a "objective" review for a toy that is a particularly bad fit for you personally.

I do love how Saurou and I approached this from completely different angles. It said "waterproof" so I recognized that it should be tested in the shower. She hasn't done that. Together the reviews show a different side.
02/08/2009
Contributor: Oggins Oggins
Wow! I'm flattered that one of my reviews was suggested as a good example of objectiveness! I have doubted myself on them and the reassurance is wonderful!

Also, this is a great thread to help with the description review writing! Hopefully some questions can be answered here for everyone!

I personally tend to omit the "experience" section from my description reviews simply because I would not be very objective on them. I really don't see how my personal experience would be objective but, then on the other hand, I'm not sure why I should feel obligated to omit it because it is an included option for the description reviews so, why can't we give our personal experience. I'm just too torn on that one to be able to include anything there.....

As far as the star rating goes, I don't rate my description reviews on personal preference or on how well the toy worked "personally" for me. I do the rating on the quality of the toy and how well it performed as opposed to what it was advertised as doing per the packaging/manual.

I write my review body just as we have been told to write it, as if it were a tour of the toy. I try to be descriptive about the toy, it's functions, it's material and things such as that for description reviews. I focus more on those things rather than pointing out things that may be subjective such as color or size.

If I run into a problem or want to say something about its horrible color, it's really a matter of how it's written. If you hate the color, rather than saying, "The color sucks." You can say, "It is possible that some may not prefer the pea green color." Or if the vibrations are weak, instead of saying, "It's so weak that I couldn't get off." You could say, "The motor on this toy does not produce an intense vibration and might not be a good choice for those who require a stronger vibration." It's really just all about how it's written.

I hope this helps some! Once again, this is a great thread with some great pointers for everyone! =)
02/09/2009
Contributor: Adriana Ravenlust Adriana Ravenlust
Quote:
Originally posted by Miss KissThis
Oggin's review of the Night Moves Infatuation is a great example of an objective review!
Objective? Yes. But it's not a review at all. It's simply a description and for the program, it's good but it should not be called a review. Period.
02/09/2009
Contributor: Miss KissThis Miss KissThis
Quote:
Originally posted by Adriana Ravenlust
Objective? Yes. But it's not a review at all. It's simply a description and for the program, it's good but it should not be called a review. Period.
Well that's the point I was trying to make earlier in the thread.

If complete objectivity is being asked for, it shouldn't be called a review. Descriptions should be reformatted if they are to be solely objective.
02/09/2009
Contributor: Dragon Dragon
I was thinking about this thread when I woke up this morning. We came up with a version of "objective" that seems to be clinically dry and boring. All of the four links posted were descriptive reviews that I, personally, was not the least bit interested in reading. I really want some of the reviewers personality to show in the review.

In the Night Moves review, I at least smiled because Oggis said, "Hey. At least it floats."

Is this actually what Eden really wants?
02/09/2009
Contributor: Nashville Nashville
Quote:
Originally posted by Dragon
I was thinking about this thread when I woke up this morning. We came up with a version of "objective" that seems to be clinically dry and boring. All of the four links posted were descriptive reviews that I, personally, was not the least ... more
A lot of the description reviews I've read were neither dry nor boring. Of course, some writers here love to use adjectives that spice up their reviews which can help to make them punchy.

If someone were to say that my reviews were boring or dry when I was trying to stick to facts and keep my personal opinion out of them I'd be insulted.. because even if it isn't full of "I" or "me" statements, it's still my work and it still has my flair.

Apparently, it's not what you want if you're asking if it's what Eden wants... What do YOU want DBD? If description reviews don't make you happy what would? What can Eden do to improve their program?
02/09/2009
Contributor: Dragon Dragon
Quote:
Originally posted by Nashville
A lot of the description reviews I've read were neither dry nor boring. Of course, some writers here love to use adjectives that spice up their reviews which can help to make them punchy.

If someone were to say that my reviews were boring ... more
I don't want to offend anyone here, and I'm sorry if I did.

This isn't about what I want, because in general I don't spend a lot of my time reading reviews. A bit. I write them.

Sleeping Dreamer, can you post a few links to some of your description reviews. I know that you have a lot of reviews in general.

My point, when I glanced at the reviews was that they are all well-written. They are all very objective- perhaps too objective, and I was generally bored reading them. They are doing an excellent job of describing the product, but not an excellent job of reviewing the product in a interesting fashion compared to normal reviews - in my opinion. As they are in place of any description, perhaps that is a perfect review, but it was a question that I wanted to see if anyone else had any thoughts on.
02/09/2009
Contributor: Dragon Dragon
This may be an extension of Adriana's point that Oggin's description review, while extremely well written is not a review.
02/09/2009
Contributor: Adriana Ravenlust Adriana Ravenlust
Quote:
Originally posted by Nashville
A lot of the description reviews I've read were neither dry nor boring. Of course, some writers here love to use adjectives that spice up their reviews which can help to make them punchy.

If someone were to say that my reviews were boring ... more
Without trying to be insulting - because some of the descriptions are very good and helpful. They're useful but they're not as interesting for me to read than regular reviews. It's good to know but not necessarily entertaining and I don't want perusing reviews to feel like work.. but maybe I'm just burned out on reviews.

I also think that some of the descriptions tend to be too long because people are still thinking of them in terms of reviews and that actually is a hindrance than a help. Yes, they give more information than a manufacturers blurb but if you're not talking about your personal experience, there's only so much you can and should say.
02/09/2009
Contributor: Dragon Dragon
Quote:
Originally posted by Adriana Ravenlust
Without trying to be insulting - because some of the descriptions are very good and helpful. They're useful but they're not as interesting for me to read than regular reviews. It's good to know but not necessarily entertaining and I ... more
Exactly! But this is the subject that we all need to look at - with more opinions.

Is this the goal of "objective" that Eden is looking at for the descriptive review program or do they want something else?

There is nothing wrong with these reviews - except they may not read by some reviewers who have seen the basic information.
02/09/2009
Contributor: Carrie Ann Carrie Ann
Quote:
Originally posted by Dragon
Exactly! But this is the subject that we all need to look at - with more opinions.

Is this the goal of "objective" that Eden is looking at for the descriptive review program or do they want something else?

There is nothing ... more
But that's the whole point with the description reviews. They're only done on new products where no one has seen the basic info. (Here, at least. They may well have seen one on another site)

I really do think the whole problem comes in calling them reviews. It's always been my opinion that they should be *just* descriptions that just happen to be done by reviewers. That the two - review and description - should be kept separate.
02/09/2009
Contributor: Nashville Nashville
Quote:
Originally posted by Adriana Ravenlust
Without trying to be insulting - because some of the descriptions are very good and helpful. They're useful but they're not as interesting for me to read than regular reviews. It's good to know but not necessarily entertaining and I ... more
That's not insulting at all. What's insulting is calling them dry or boring.

As far as length goes, that's my problem. I tend to drag things on and on, I did write one short description review for nipple clamps because there wasn't a whole lot I could say. But I know for most toys there's always more that I could say based on features, vibrations, settings, if it's rechargeable and so forth.

They aren't as juicy as verified reviews, that's plain to see. They're just a glorified summary of a toy. One thing is, that maybe we don't rate them. We describe what they do, what features they had when we tested them, how the material felt, if they were powerful comparatively to similiar toys- but by rating them that's PERSONAL, it's like a "me" statement. By ranking a toy with 3 stars or 5 star's that's Sleeping Dreamer's opinion of how the toy was- if we want them to be objective, than personal ratings don't follow guidelines of objectivity.
02/09/2009
Contributor: Carrie Ann Carrie Ann
Quote:
Originally posted by Adriana Ravenlust
Without trying to be insulting - because some of the descriptions are very good and helpful. They're useful but they're not as interesting for me to read than regular reviews. It's good to know but not necessarily entertaining and I ... more
Omg. I totally agree about length. I love long, detailed, entertaining reviews. (Backseat Boohoo is one of my favs) But it seems to me when the only thing the customer has to read as a description is the "description review" then it should be more short and to the point. Cuz... the average customer has the attention span of a gnat.

Like everyone else, I"m not ripping on any of the reviewers. Just stating how *I* feel about the program in general. (Cuz, yanno, if I don't say that people get all bent out of shape even though I"m saying the same stuff as half the other folks. Lol. I swear, I need to take a class that teaches me how to say things less abruptly.)
02/09/2009
Contributor: Adriana Ravenlust Adriana Ravenlust
Quote:
Originally posted by Carrie Ann
But that's the whole point with the description reviews. They're only done on new products where no one has seen the basic info. (Here, at least. They may well have seen one on another site)

I really do think the whole problem comes ... more
I didn't really think of the descriptions only being done on new products where no one has seen the basic info - that really puts another spin on things, hmm.
02/09/2009
Contributor: Adriana Ravenlust Adriana Ravenlust
Quote:
Originally posted by Carrie Ann
Omg. I totally agree about length. I love long, detailed, entertaining reviews. (Backseat Boohoo is one of my favs) But it seems to me when the only thing the customer has to read as a description is the "description review" then it ... more
Definitely. I wouldn't want people thinking they need to plump up their reviews and I have found myself doing a lot more skimming lately.

I think the big issue is calling them reviews. They're not. I think if they were completely separate from reviews it would be better. As descriptions, I get to know the toy better but it doesn't really help me decide whether this toy is good for ME - that's why I go to reviews.
02/09/2009
Contributor: CaptainBunnyKilla CaptainBunnyKilla
The purpose of descriptive reviews, as I understand it, is purely to convey information. As Carrie Ann said, that's the whole point. So, no, descriptive reviews might not be as juicy as one could make a normal verified review, but neither was the old product description tab (which is what a description review replaces). They might be "clinical" or "dry", but they're not there to entertain you. They're there to provide basic information about a toy.

As a million people have noted here and on other threads, this whole thing might be easier if we stopped considering/calling them reviews.
02/09/2009
Contributor: Adriana Ravenlust Adriana Ravenlust
Quote:
Originally posted by CaptainBunnyKilla
The purpose of descriptive reviews, as I understand it, is purely to convey information. As Carrie Ann said, that's the whole point. So, no, descriptive reviews might not be as juicy as one could make a normal verified review, but neither was ... more
I think that's the point DBD is making - if it's not meant to entertain or give us personal information, do not call it a review. I think we're all in agreement.



So what does the boss think?
02/09/2009
Contributor: Dragon Dragon
Quote:
Originally posted by CaptainBunnyKilla
The purpose of descriptive reviews, as I understand it, is purely to convey information. As Carrie Ann said, that's the whole point. So, no, descriptive reviews might not be as juicy as one could make a normal verified review, but neither was ... more
Yes, but they ARE reviews. AND if I understand the entire system right, there is the option for TWO reviews on a product including a description review before you have to make a special case for reviewing a product a third time.

That's just basic economics for Eden.

It's one thing to see a vibrator that is similar to a lot of other vibrators in a product line. It's something else to see a product that looks completely different from anything you've seen before. (Case in point of the Symphony review that I started this thread with...)

(sorry - I'm working on other stuff now.)
02/09/2009
Contributor: Oggins Oggins
I just wanted to add my opinion. I'm not insulted at all and yes, I guess my description reviews can be considered "dry" to some and that's okay with me because everyone has their own style. My style is rather limited with the description reviews though. It's just a description. Maybe I drag them out too much too but, I just pretend that I am introducing someone who has never seen or used a toy before to this toy that I'm describing. What if that is the first toy they have ever looked at and have no idea what it does or anything? At least I try to cover all the bases in that respect. I guess they could be considered as "dry" to read as say......how a particular type of shingles will work for your home, I dunno.....

I am also in agreement that calling them "reviews" is a bit wonky since it isn't essentially a review. It is a description....period.
02/09/2009
Contributor: Red Red
Quote:
Originally posted by Miss KissThis
A few more objective reviews:

Spiral of Bliss Review
Ophoria Bliss #12 Review
Ah wow I'm both surprised and flattered to find my spiral of bliss review list as an example of an objective review.

The review, as first submitted, was rejected for being too emotional and subjective. I literally just chopped out all the "me" and "I" statements and replaced them with objective ones. It was 5 mins of editing to get it up to speed

I'm not so worried about description reviews being called "reviews", but if it's causing issues with reviewers understanding the aim of the things, maybe that could be changed. I bet the EF folks would be happy to hear any suggestions of how things can be improved.
02/10/2009
Contributor: CaptainBunnyKilla CaptainBunnyKilla
Quote:
Originally posted by Red
Ah wow I'm both surprised and flattered to find my spiral of bliss review list as an example of an objective review.

The review, as first submitted, was rejected for being too emotional and subjective. I literally just chopped out all ... more
I think it's less a problem of the reviewers in the program understanding what's asked of them than it is a misunderstanding by the community as a whole.

Miss KissThis suggested oh so many days ago in that other thread that more of a distinction should be made between normal verified and descriptive reviews: I think it's a good idea and would love to get admin feedback on it.
02/10/2009
Contributor: Dragon Dragon
Quote:
Originally posted by CaptainBunnyKilla
I think it's less a problem of the reviewers in the program understanding what's asked of them than it is a misunderstanding by the community as a whole.

Miss KissThis suggested oh so many days ago in that other thread that more of a ... more
No sign of admin yet. We could blitz them with email, but I don't think they would appreciate it.

I have a question for those that actually write "descriptions?" (Hence - not reviews!) Do you think that they are rated lower then your regular reviews?
02/10/2009
Contributor: Airlia Airlia
Quote:
Originally posted by Dragon
No sign of admin yet. We could blitz them with email, but I don't think they would appreciate it.

I have a question for those that actually write "descriptions?" (Hence - not reviews!) Do you think that they are rated lower ... more
Mine aren't rated any differently. I've either written a good piece or a bad one and people (mostly) rate accordingly.

When I write the descriptive reviews I tend to write in the third person - leave out all personal feelings and emotions and still try to make it an appealing read. However with this project your review is the only piece of information on the toy and I try and include as much information as I would want to know if I'm buying a toy.

Toygirl2 is right in saying it's more of a community misunderstanding. Apparently one word gets everyone's knickers in a twist.
02/10/2009