Are you in favor of Inactive status options? Your thoughts? - Created by Not Here Anymore f/k/a Happy Lady on Jun 03, 2009: EdenFantasys Forum

Are you in favor of "Inactive" status options? Your thoughts?

Set alerts

Updates

Not Here Anymore f/k/a Happy Lady

We've been discussing this in other forum threads, but it really deserves its own.

The facts:
1. There are a LOT of people who have submitted one or two reviews and then have never done anything else here on the site.
2. There are more than a couple of contributors who have decided not to continue their relationships with Eden for various reasons.
3. Sometimes people need to "take a break" from Eden, whether by choice or by circumstances.
4. Sometimes contributors appears as "experts" for certain products/types of products, but said contributors are not actually active on Eden any more.

Proposal:
An "Inactive" status be available for contributors who are not currently active on Eden.

The Idea:
The "Inactive" status would show on contributors' profiles. Those who are "Inactive"' would also be moved from the "all reviewers" category to their own "inactive" category. "Inactive" contributors would also NOT be included as "experts" in the automated calculations that choose said "experts".

I realize this will likely be a serious computer programming ordeal that I can't really understand, but I also see that it would be of some pretty decent benefit to the general consumers.

I've come up with some options to "vote for" concerning this matter. Other comments are welcome. I think if we have ideas like this that we want implemented we should give as much input as possible to assist EF in making changes.

Also
I believe the original idea for this was Red's, but I am not sure. Just wanted to make sure I don't take credit for a great idea that wasn't mine!

Answers (public voting - your screen name will appear in the results):

I am NOT in favor of "Inactive" status options.

Contributors should be able to change their own status to "Inactive" if they wish - and change it back if they wish.

Rose Unlocked , Not Here Anymore f/k/a Happy Lady , Carrie Ann , Jimbo Jones , Boxers Over Briefs , Liz2 , Backseat Boohoo , Nashville , Femme Mystique , Sammi , Avery Dragon , LikeSunshineDust , Red , Mamastoys , Luscious Lily , Miss Cinnamon , imp , Tuesday , Dragon , Naughty Student , Pumpkin Lady , Jessica Elizabeth , Epiphora , LicentiouslyYours , ZenaidaMacroura , Goodkittygnbad , Miss KissThis , ~*SurrealisticFantasy*~ , Cinnamon Chambers , User Unknown , tim1724 , Saraid , Sir , Fun Lover , J's Alley , MuffysPinguLove , Juliettia , Angel deSanguine , Alan & Michele , Ciao. , Chorus Line , Mp4 , deceased , Lithaewyn , RosesThorns , Viktor Vysheslav Malkin , ArmyWife Kira , Kynky Kytty , Dangerous Lilly , Valyn , Luvasaurus , Domineight , jakjak , Coralbell , Lady Venus , AU , sexysweetieshan , Kim! , PassionQT , SydVicious , 00 , Pleasure Piratess , Splendwhore , ~LaUr3n~ , DeliciousSurprise , Love Buzz , Dusk , SexyTabby , Twist , PuplePleasures , Shellz31 , dv8 , Mistress M. , SapphirexIce , indiglo , Miss T , aBeastlyLittleThing , TumorCrunch , Cream in the Cupcake , girl next door , BlueDog , mama2007 , MaryExy , ily , Kdlips , lovemuscle n cookie , Beck , K101 , null , Nazaress , Cherry21 , Apirka , Djiffy , winterseve , Hibangel , icyqueen , KatPawz2003 , Gone (LD29) , pootpootpoot , Incendiaire , Falsepast , ghalik , Emerlyn , KrissyNovacaine , Ice1 , Owl , Maximusx , Talena , SimpleHedonist , AHubbyof2SexualMinds , unfulfilled , MissAnna , EdenUser , joolie , CaliGirl , Feisty , BG529 , sexxxkitten , Kitka , charmedtomeetyou , Katzer , Alyxx , xxombie , JackRaiden , Raymaker , amenti , geliebt , kat17 , eri86 , sarah81 , MrsandMrbunnysoffun , Pierced Blaqk Skies , jr2012

133

EF should change the status of those with no activity (reviews or otherwise) to "Inactive" after 6 months of inactivity.

Rose Unlocked , Not Here Anymore f/k/a Happy Lady , Carrie Ann , Jimbo Jones , Boxers Over Briefs , Liz2 , Nashville , Femme Mystique , Sammi , Avery Dragon , LikeSunshineDust , Red , Mamastoys , Luscious Lily , Miss Cinnamon , imp , Tuesday , Naughty Student , Jessica Elizabeth , Epiphora , LicentiouslyYours , Goodkittygnbad , Miss KissThis , ~*SurrealisticFantasy*~ , Cinnamon Chambers , Renewing Desire , User Unknown , El-Jaro , tim1724 , Saraid , sarahbear , Sir , J's Alley , Juliettia , EffinSara , Angel deSanguine , MonaFry , Alan & Michele , Kinky Skier , Ciao. , Dove , Pleasureman , Lithaewyn , Viktor Vysheslav Malkin , Jul!a , Dangerous Lilly , Maiden , ♥ Amanda ♥ , NY Toyfan , Luvasaurus , Coralbell , Lady Venus , AU , sexysweetieshan , Kim! , P'Gell , PassionQT , SydVicious , 00 , Pleasure Piratess , Splendwhore , ~LaUr3n~ , DeliciousSurprise , Love Buzz , Lummox , kinky girlfriend , Dusk , SexyTabby , TexasFire , PuplePleasures , Shellz31 , Stagger13 , indiglo , Miss T , Cream in the Cupcake , BlueDog , mama2007 , MaryExy , The Curious Couple , JessCee , lovemuscle n cookie , Beck , null , Nazaress , winterseve , ViVix , jmex83 , pootpootpoot , Falsepast , ghalik , KrissyNovacaine , Ice1 , Chami , Talena , SimpleHedonist , Artishok , AHubbyof2SexualMinds , unfulfilled , Lildrummrgurl7 , Feisty , sexxxkitten , Kitka , charmedtomeetyou , tami , Alyxx , xxombie , JackRaiden , Boyfriend , Lavendar

109

I like the idea of "Inactive" status, but I don't know if it would actually be helpful.

Red Riding Hood , Airen Wolf , Sohotdinosaur , kinky girlfriend , PuplePleasures , indiglo , Moein , jmex83 , Falsepast , ghalik , Chami , unfulfilled , SoloJoe , jennifur77 , Genderfree , kat17

Total votes: 258 (167 voters)

Poll is closed

06/03/2009

All promotions

Rose Unlocked

Yay I was first to vote lol but on to the point at hand this could help a lot but I agree it would most likely be a lot of work for EF to set up and they are already doing a lot of work.

06/03/2009

Jimbo Jones

I have thought that some kind of 'inactive' status would be a nice thing to have here and I think being able to choose to be inactive as well as giving a time frame are good ways to apply it. The first time frame I was hearing was only two months I think and that seemed a little short to me as I thought three or four months would be better. Six months is even more reasonable because everyone should be able to write a review two times a year, right?
According to my records, that time frame would put over 900 of the 1,550 reviewers at an inactive status. Like you say, most of those are individuals who have only written a couple or reviews and then have disappeared never to contribute again. If people want to remain active, just write a review every six months.

06/03/2009

Backseat Boohoo

I almost chose the last option, because I'm not quite sure what the point of having an inactive status marker would be. You're here or you're not.

06/03/2009

Boxers Over Briefs

I really like this idea. I've definitely tried to get more information on a toy, only to find that the reviewer has been inactive for some time.

06/03/2009

Lara

I'm not clear on what the advantages of this would be. My random thoughts...

- If this is an issue of making sure "experts" are available for questions, wouldn't it be easier for Victoria or someone else to create a set of standards and then apply them? This could be a question of asking specific contributors if they'd want to pitch in, issuing an open call for volunteers, going by a different algorithm, etc. I'm assuming if the current "expert" system is by overall usefulness of reviews, that could also be changed to number of reviews in a particular category or whatever other criteria people want to use.

Perhaps an icon next to a users name to indicate they're willing to take questions? I'm sure that even people who are active (in the sense of writing reviews) may not be too thrilled with the idea of talking with people about products.

Lots of ways to skin a cat that don't involve revamping contributor classifications.

- New categories invariably create discussion. Here I'm thinking about all the advanced/basic reviewer, descriptive/subjective reviewer, etc. conversations that went on. Unless there's a clear added value that comes from the active/inactive distinction, I would be hesitant to support the creation of a new category. I guess it all comes down to a certain reluctance on my part to seeing something that could even remotely be viewed as a hierarchy. That very well may not be the issue here, but it is what I thought of first.

I'm totally open to hearing more about why active/non-active statuses make sense. My first response, however, is that there are other alternatives that can achieve what people seem to want without the drawbacks that come from these sorts of classifications.

06/03/2009

Victoria

We discussed the 'active' and 'inactive' options, whether auto or voluntary - and the time frames - in a meeting a few months ago. We have put other projects at a higher priority, as they are more beneficial to the community as a whole. We have to work on things as we see fit, because we only have but so many resources.

So, I can check in and see what the status is during our meeting tomorrow. I'll let you know what the plan is and a loose time frame.

I do think it would be helpful to have some way of noting if you're going away etc - for now, you can always change your headline/quote to read somehting like "will be away until July." or "I am on hiatus, will be away until further notice".

About those who do one or two reviews then disappear without a trace, I don't see them getting a lot of questions or being ranked in any way that would lead people to ask them for advice - so that is not a pressing aspect of this option. Sure, it's possible to have the system automatically mark them as 'inactive' after 3 months of zero activity - but I think people generally communicate with the contributors who have a strong presence in the community.

06/03/2009

Red

Its not a bad idea, but yep, I appreciate that these things take work

06/03/2009

Luscious Lily

Thanks for re-visiting this idea for us. We know that, if anything like this ever happens, it will be a long time in coming and will take a lot of work, and we understand that more important issues must come first. Using our headlines for such notifications is a great idea, though!

06/03/2009

Not Here Anymore f/k/a Happy Lady

Quote:

Originally posted by Lara

The biggest help I think it would be for is a general consumer who clicks on "All Reviewers" and sees 78 pages of reviewers listed, when really only a small portion of those are actively participating currently. It's just misleading.

My other "thing" (for lack of better word at this moment) is concern for courtesy for those contributors who have chosen to leave EF for whatever reason. I know their profiles/reviews/etc. are property of EF, but I think they should be able to note that they no longer actively participate here.

06/03/2009

Dragon

You did not have the option of "inactive" marked by the individual reviewer and also generated by the system when due to inactivity.

I know that this is a low priority, and I understand that but there are logistical issues with the current system. Let's look at a few examples.

On the page of sex toy reviews it lists both Dame Demi and Bulma. (Both of whom I love.) Dame Demi's recent review was January. Bulma's recent review is also January, and she has completely left Eden.

When you look at the first two pages of the contributors, I count 5 maybe 6 reviewers that I know have left. Those are just the ones that I know. Most of which also have numerous posts or comments on the forum - indicating activity, that may not be noticed as not recent.

I absolutely believe those reviewers should be listed on those pages as high ranked reviewers. There reviews are valuable. Dame Demi is listed as an "expert" available for chat. A prior forum thread indicated that she wasn't often available. As Red pointed out - Essin Em and Bulma are listed as BDSM experts and have left Eden. Several other reviews show up that have left.

On the book review page there are two reviewers that have left, one with a 5.3 rank whose last review was in Nov 08.

(Out of curiosity, not desire... I'm now wondering why I'm not listed on that page.)

With the current set up, Eden is setting up a trend of saying that the experts are the people who aren't around. I think that sends the wrong message.

06/03/2009

Jessica Elizabeth

I also think this is a very good idea. The way I see it...

- first, it would be nice if the reviewer could put themselves on "hiatus" or what-have-you due to life circumstances: illness, vacation, moving, etc.

-secondly, it would be nice for EF to be able to put reviewers who have permanently left Eden. this would help those searching to be able to weed through the reviewers.

Yes, it would be a crazy lot of work, however I think it would be greatly beneficial to the site.

06/04/2009

Epiphora

I think it's a good idea, ESPECIALLY for people who have left Eden. I think those people would appreciate it, too.

06/04/2009

Rockin'

I kind of see this from Lara's perspective in that I feel like there should be an easier way than implementing some big change in the algorithm, at least for now.

Here's the first idea I have: Let people put "inactive" notices in their profiles at their discretion (I suppose we can do this anyway if we choose), and, more importantly/noticeably , in that little subtext of our names. Right now mine says "...would love to help!" after my name on reviews and on lists. People could easily change their subtext to "Inactive - returning in July" or whatever they want.

For people who are not returning to Eden for some time, or have been inactive for X months, perhaps there could be an automatic (one-time?) email after X months of inactivity, politely asking the contributor to set their subtext to "Inactive" for the sake of consumers on the site who have questions (and perhaps for the community in general).

I think this puts the bulk of the work on the contributors themselves (although it's not much work), and less on Eden and their site design/workings. What do you think? I know it wouldn't sort out the inactive people from the active people in lists, but it would give an easy-to-spot notice to people who might have a question. Then they can pick someone who is active and would get back to them in a timely fashion.

06/04/2009

Adriana Ravenlust

Quote:

Originally posted by Rockin'

I like this idea because it will also give people a reminder to be active. Of course, there's no forcing anyone to do so but I know I would personally like to be able to change my status to Hiatus.

06/04/2009

Liz2

Considering the large number joining EF, as of late, I think the total number on the books could become unmanageable and almost impossible to sort out with any degree of sense making. (Yes, I know, run on sentence)

06/04/2009

Mamastoys

I think this would be great..a lot of work on the part of EF and their puter geeks..but a nice feature to have in place. There are so many reviewers listed now and who knows how many are really active!?! It would be nice if the inactive reviewers could pick up if they chose to return later..

06/04/2009

Backseat Boohoo

Epiphora and Liz make good points: people who want it to be known they are no longer active and clutter prevention. If we could implement inactive status in a manner that would help with those situations, it would definitely be a great idea.

06/04/2009

Victoria

We will be implementing optional and auto status in a few months. We discussed it again today (as you may recall, this was discussed a few months ago) and it will be in the pipeline over the summer.

The general idea is just 2 statuses: Active or Inactive. You can switch it over yourself if you know you're going to be away for more than a few days or we'll switch it over after 3 months of no activity. It can always be switched back by the contributor should they become active again. If you wish to change your headline message, you are always free to do that as well.

The Inactive accounts will not get pulled into queues for 'Experts' and such.

So - that's my news for ya'll.

We have some *huge* projects in the works right now, so this one is going into development but won't be active for a while.

06/04/2009

Carrie Ann

Quote:

Originally posted by Victoria

You say "huge" and I get all fidgety.

06/04/2009

Mamastoys

Quote:

Originally posted by Victoria

thanks for the information..sounds great but I'm like Carrie Ann..getting fidgety!! )

06/04/2009

Luscious Lily

Eden crew, you guys majorly rock! And the hints of awesomesauce to come are making us ALL excited! ^__^

06/04/2009

User Unknown

I've only been here a short time, and all this advancement and change is making me do the excited dance, lol Yay for impending new-ness!!
=)

06/16/2009

El-Jaro

any new words on this?

11/02/2009

Sir

Quote:

Originally posted by El-Jaro

any new words on this?

I agree, I'd love to know.

11/02/2009

MonaFry

I think it's important that if a user remains active outside of reviews (like in the forum) they remain "active". I know lately I just haven't had the time or energy to sit down and put effort into writing a good review, but I still poke around in the forums. I wouldn't want to be considered inactive.

11/03/2009

Mamastoys

Quote:

Originally posted by MonaFry

I do my reviews and sometimes look at the forums but have not found them very interesting to me. I have a limited amount of time to spend on here and I think that my time should be devoted to writing the best reviews I can. I give priority to them. If only doing reviews makes me inactive, then so be it. But first and foremost, I thought we were on here to provide a service of giving information about the items for sale. This is a company who is trying to make a profit before it is a socialization site. Or at least that is what I thought.

11/03/2009

Alan & Michele

Quote:

Originally posted by MonaFry

I agree with this. Someone might be active in the forums and ready/willing/able to answer questions about their reviews and such, but what if they were battling an ongoing health issue or something that might keep them from being able to use toys for awhile. I guess the question would be... what would an "inactive" status do to someone? Would it simply mean that they were marked in a manner that would deter people from asking questions of them? Or would it mean that they couldn't participate in the forums or write/vote on reviews until they went through a process to get re-activated?

11/03/2009

J's Alley

Quote:

Originally posted by Lara

I really like Lara's point:

"If this is an issue of making sure "experts" are available for questions, wouldn't it be easier for Victoria or someone else to create a set of standards and then apply them? This could be a question of asking specific contributors if they'd want to pitch in, issuing an open call for volunteers, going by a different algorithm, etc. I'm assuming if the current "expert" system is by overall usefulness of reviews, that could also be changed to number of reviews in a particular category or whatever other criteria people want to use. "

I hadn't thought of anything like that, but it is a great alternative to an inactive status, which could potentially take a lot more work to set up and maintain.

11/03/2009

Adriana Ravenlust

Quote:

Originally posted by Alan & Michele

People are not suggesting mandatory status changes but ones you can set yourself. At least, that's what I got out of it

11/03/2009

Total posts: 61 Unique posters: 49

Make a post