#EdenTasks - Proofreading Program

Alright, I decided to compile a list of the faulty tasks (either cannot be edited/published, already published, etc.) because I'm tired of having to click through tons of reviews to find one that needs to be published.



3772, 3781, 3767, 2804, 2897, 3421, 3521, 3524, 3527, 3528, 3533, 3534, 3536, 3537, 3538, 3615, 3732, 3734, 3767, 3841



These are all that I saw for now! less

Yes.

There are TONS of people who write TONS of reviews. That is why this whole EdenTasks has come about in the first place. I work on multiple reviews at a time and publish little by little..

Also Eden does indeed spoil the hell out of us therefore it should not be a big deal for anyone if they don't get their points, IMHO.

Also don't forget it's the holidays and it seems that Eden is completely swamped as of late. JUST. BE. PATIENT. EVERYONE.

I suggest waiting until changes have been announced as being live on the site and THEN submit a support ticket . I'm pretty sure that any issues arising from here on out have already been talked about in this thread. Multiple times. less

Same here. I tried twice to get into the program; the first time I assumed it was because they were still doing test runs of it. The second time, well, I don't know. I wonder if it's because I'm already a mentor?

I would rather do the editing because we get more points and we don't have to worry about lost students that just disappear for months. less

I have scoured the Offsite Review Requirements page, but I am still left with questions. link



Is it okay for an off-site reviewer to link their readers to another online retailer (a competitor) to purchase the product? Also, does a SexIs article count as one of the two required links to Eden?



Five days ago, I picked up an offsite review to edit it, but I released it back to the tasks page because the reviewer linked her readers to purchase the item from another online retailer that undersells EF on the product. The only link to EF that I could find was to a SexIs article (so there was only one Eden-related link . . . and I wasn't even sure if a SexIs article counted because I thought the links had to be to the retail part of Eden where potential customers could easily navigate the site to shop). However, the review was still published.



I'm confused. I thought there were supposed to be two links to edenfantasys.com. (And I am even more confused as to why it is okay to route customers elsewhere to purchase the product.)



Could anyone clarify this for me? I've messaged a couple of people to inquire about this but have not received a response. As an editor, I genuinely want to have a better understanding of the offsite review requirements. less

Based on Carrie Ann's response in this thread copied below, I edit the title, pro's/con's, summary, and check that the link actually connects to a review.



The problem is, certain bloggers have different arrangements with us. Some have been doing offsites in a specific way for years, well before we put the current guidelines into effect. Some do "HNT" reviews that are primarily images. Some do JUST a video, no text.



NO reviewer has the right to say "you shouldn't have published this at all" and rate someone's editing badly.



The ONLY things you guys can edit (and, hence, the only thing you should be rated on for your editing) are the pros, cons, summary and check that the link leads to an actual blog with a post/review.



Anything that is on the actual site/blog is out of your hands and not your responsibility as editors to deal with. (It would be great if we could have y'all checking for word count and links but the fact of the matter is none of the editors know what arrangement we have with which bloggers so it simply doesn't work to have you do so. It ends up being far too much messing around when the bloggers then email me and say "wtf? I've been doing it this way for 2 years, why did this person tell me I have to do something different?"Winking



So. In short.



Edit pros, cons and summary. Check that the link works. That is all. If something looks bad or incomplete to you, feel free to message either me or Jenn - I do sex blogs, Jenn does regular blogs and mom blogs. We'll take a look. But please don't decline offsite reviews or send them back. less

I don't know where to go with this so I figure this thread will allow most people to see it and hopefully find the person(s) responsible for the glitches or broken links.

Review #5371 doesn't seem to be up. I click it to proofread it and it just sends me to the my review list page. less

I have a question about the proofreading guidelines. A few days ago I sent a review back for revision (because it didn't have a working URL for the offsite review). Should I release the task or hold onto it until they finish the revision? How long should I wait?

The guidelines say the following:
"Each task has a due date of 3 days for reviews and 2 days for follow-up reviews. If you don’t complete the task on-time, it may be unlocked by the administrator and returned back to the Task Market."

Does sending it back for revision count as completing it as far as the due date goes? I don't know how long it's going to take for the reviewer to update the URL and I can't work on any other tasks while I'm waiting, which is somewhat annoying. Should I just release the task myself? less

I don't mean to speak out of turn here, but I believe that opening the editorial process to an audience beyond just the one individual is a good thing. I suspect I'm advocating a wiki-style process that a pool of vetted people could access. In effect, I am advocating for a two-stage review. Rather than the chain to publication being writer->reviewer->publ ication; I am advocating for it to appear as follows: writer->reviewer->memb er of the review pool->publication.



Grammatical, syntax and use errors stand out and make for a particularly deranged reading experience. On the Internet, where text is the primary form of communication, poorly-written copy and reviews stand out in stark contrast to standard writing.



I hate to detract from any reviewer's work or belittle their effort, but if I see more than two or three glaring mistakes, I will start to walk down the ratings list--in accord with the float-over help text.



If errors are egregious, however, I will simply stop reading. It's just not worth my effort, time, and possible butt-hurt that I'd cause the reviewer and editor. If neither writer nor reviewer know that plurals are typically formed with the addition of "s" or "es," rather than an apostrophe, I'm unclear on what help I can really provide.



That said, the English-speaking Western world these days have no idea what to do with apostrophes. And semi-colons? Forget it. This "style" seems a training/work ethic/pride issue rather than tied to any nationality. I digress.



I don't mean to paint with a big brush here; I had a very nice discussion with a member regarding some technical typesetting decisions, and came away richly rewarded.



Rather than punish, I'd like to see an option to make the writing better. Is there any way, outside of the messaging system, that we could flag something for another review, and then come back when the text has received another look? In this way, it would be possible to tone flabby use and diction without being punitive. This would permit the product to shine rather than showcasing writing errors. less

Does anyone monitor these editors? Cause I have come across 2 that leave a lot to be desired. They did an extremely poor job and these people get paid in points to not do the job properly.

Example - An 'i' instead of 'I' is a pretty stand out mistake to me.


Or is there someone we can report editors to, who are not doing the job properly? less

You can rate the Editor's job at the bottom of each review. However, understand that it is the editor's job to make the review readable while still maintaining the writer's voice. It is not the editor's job to make the review 100% grammatically correct. Also, a different person potentially edits the follow-up review from the person that edited the original review. Lastly, try not to be overly harsh. People make mistakes. The main question is was the review understandable. less

Q: What is Eden Tasks?

A: Eden Tasks is a new ‘Market Place’ that allows contributors to earn points through performing various tasks posted by EF.

***

Q: What is the ‘Review Proofreading’ task?

A: The ‘Review Proofreading’ task is the first of hopefully many exciting Eden Tasks. ‘Review Proofreading’ will allow contributors to edit and publish the reviews that until now, only the Review Team have been able to edit and publish.

The ‘Review Proofreading’ task is a privilege that will be available to the more experienced reviewers (for obvious reasons). We will start out with a small test group initially to see how the program works. We will then add people as needed to balance out the flow or reviews.

An exciting side effect of the ‘Review Proofreading’ task is now mentors will have more control over the reviews of their students. (to highlight, correct, or make notes)

***

Here is some additional info:
- requests will generally be approved within 48 hours, M-F
- not all requests will be approved, some will be declined. Every request is approved or declined by a real person on The Review Team.
- factors for approval include rank, writing ability, community participation, and so on. Editors must be well-rounded
- any editor found to be overzealous in their corrections will be removed from the program

I hope this answers all of your initial questions, and I hope you all enjoy Eden Tasks (we have worked very hard on this for a while now). We look forward to working more closely with the community, as well as giving the community more control over the content and rewards for their activity. less

Okay, I dont ever remember reading the answer to this question in this thread, but I'm not going to go back and reread all 17 pages...


What is the determining factor of how many points a review gets (what makes a review worth 400 points, rather than 250?) less