I've rewritten one so far (the A-bomb), but the review makes no sense unless I can edit the followup as well, so I'm waiting for that feature to be added before I put more time into revising. I've looked back and realize that my first reviews were pretty bad, so they need to be reworked. less

I wonder if EF might set up something so you can do a 'New' review for the same product (Take 2 or Revisited something like that)...and still keep the original (with a tag and link to the new one, so no one thinks 'that's the best they could do?') but show the change in both opinion and writing skill.

Personally, I think I'd prefer that. Shows people are always on the job here, which they are... less

I like this idea, too. Personally, I find rewriting reviews a bit unfair. Obviously, our reviews get better with time (well, one would hope so) and that's okay. Editing them after the fact can skew the votes/ratings. Going back to edit the reviews, especially if it is a major edit seems like an unfair advantage - like cheating. less

It is a competition to a point - hence the ranking system.

Let's say your first review was poor and you get a "somewhat useful" overall ranking. You go back, rewrite it and all the votes from that point forward are much higher. The review review ranking goes up thus so does your contributor rank. If my original review sucked, that's my fault and I can take those lessons forward, add comments or do a follow up review but changing the entire review? That just doesn't seem honest to me. less

I know that the ranking system is "curved" (that's why your rank can change even if you didn't do anything, etc.), but I really don't perceive it as competitive. Thinking about it that way makes it seem like we're all racing against each other to churn out the most reviews and get the best ratings and post the most on forums and... really, if a contributor ONLY does that for the ranking, then that takes the fun out of it.

I don't think that rewriting reviews is cheating. We have that option for a reason. We write reviews to share our experiences and thoughts about products we like and didn't like with others who are either shopping around for their new batter operated boyfriend or just plain curious. When we first start out, it's ok for us to write a "somewhat useful" review, or even "worth reading, but not useful". We're still learning to become better reviewers. We learn from reading others' reviews, from learning more about the community and its demands. As time goes by, we become better writers. We start getting "useful" and "extremely useful" ratings. We look back and see that dilapidated first review and think "hey, I can rewrite that now and make it shine".

Putting a little extra work into it and rewriting an old review to create a BETTER REVIEW isn't cheating. If it gets higher ranking, then it is deserved, because the contributor WORKED for it. It's not like going back and changing the answers on a test after you know what the right answers are. One of the most important parts of writing is revision. I have been in more than one writing course where the final paper was to revise the first paper we turned in that semester. It really helps you see how far you've come as a writer. less

I guess I just see it differently. The competition of being a contributor is something that makes being active very fun for me (among other things, of course). To me it is EXACTLY like "going back and changing the answers on a test after you know what the right answers are" less

I'm not looking on it as a game/competition with other reviewers. For the verified reviews, Eden is sending me a toy in return for a review that will help their customers decide whether that toy is a good fit for them or not, correct? Therefore, if further experience or a better review style can improve a poor review it is a good thing to revise it, correct? less

Hmmm. I sort of wish management would chime in on this one. I pretty much feel like we've been given the option to edit so we should be able to edit; that editing is okay. That being said, I haven't majorly edited even my worst reviews. I've added some safety information and gotten rid of some cheesy "sexy" text but not done any major overhauls. Mostly because I know so many folks feel it's wrong.

I still don't understand how it can be cheating when we all have the same capability. It might make sense if only one of us were given the ability to edit, hence only one of us being allowed to raise our rank or whatever but we can all do it. It's a level playing field. I don't "get" how it's cheating to use the tools given to us.

Then again, if management frowns on it, if they'd prefer the edit button to be used only for grammatical errors or something... it'd be nice to know.

Or, if they approve of it, then those of us who WOULD like to fix older reviews wouldn't have to feel guilty of doing something... wrong. less

Here I come to errr...save the day

YES, as Carrie Ann and Scott point out, please edit your reviews to be more useful and thorough! It's NOT cheating! It's about the big picture. Especially if you’ve already submitted a follow up review and can’t formally make any further comment on the toy otherwise.

Besides, if it was a crappy review when you first posted it, you're stuck with those low votes. Editing a review doesn't wipe the slate clean - it just makes the review more useful for the readers. So, in a way, it's a pretty selfless act, as you personally don’t stand to gain much from revising it. You don’t get extra rank or higher editorial ratings or even a place on the new sex toys review list. It stays where it is, just changed for the next person who stumbles upon it. I hope that clears up any concerns.

I have seen many contributors change their tune in their follow up review or even after follow up, in the comments area below their own review. So it is acceptable. It’s easier to read when the content is in the review, not scattered among comments.

This is a personal choice. I don’t think anyone should be criticized for wanting to apply what they’ve learned. I can see how one might look at it as an ethical issue, but isn’t it unethical to leave incomplete information up when you have further experience and better information to share? less

It is a competition to a point - hence the ranking system.

Let's say your first review was poor and you get a "somewhat useful" overall ranking. You go back, rewrite it and all the votes from that point forward are much higher. The review review ranking goes up thus so does your contributor rank. If my original review sucked, that's my fault and I can take those lessons forward, add comments or do a follow up review but changing the entire review? That just doesn't seem honest to me. less