Nov 30, 2015 1:35 PM
How to fix the review system and improve quality of writing
Anime Relations:
Violence Jack: Jigoku Gai-hen
Review system score tiering and top review distribution/calculation:
The overall score the user assigns to the review at the time of writing is is split into two (or three is better) categories:
Positive, Mixed, and Negative.
For scores 8-10, that would designate a positive review
For scores 5-7, that would designate a mixed review
For scores 1-4, negative.
If this were just two categories, then 1-5 critical, 6-10 positive.
This would be a behind the scenes means of categorizing them, and then assign either the most helpful or most helpful % (or any of these new sorting options) of each of the three categories to top review slots. If we're determined to keep 4 slots, then the 4th would be just the overall best voted one, regardless of score.
How to improve the quality of writing, and by proxy- the section:
1. Introduce a holding period on new accounts
2. Implement a word count minimum
3. Either remove scoring (to eliminate abuse based on scores) or categorize them based on overall score assigned
All of these ideas are passive ways to improve the section, without active interference on behalf of the moderators. Once the code is set, no one even has to lift a finger, as the criteria will sort out the garbage on its own.
NOW, on top of that, there has to be moderation for the eventual spam, non English, terribly written/illegible, and troll reviews- but these would help dramatically.
The overall score the user assigns to the review at the time of writing is is split into two (or three is better) categories:
Positive, Mixed, and Negative.
For scores 8-10, that would designate a positive review
For scores 5-7, that would designate a mixed review
For scores 1-4, negative.
If this were just two categories, then 1-5 critical, 6-10 positive.
This would be a behind the scenes means of categorizing them, and then assign either the most helpful or most helpful % (or any of these new sorting options) of each of the three categories to top review slots. If we're determined to keep 4 slots, then the 4th would be just the overall best voted one, regardless of score.
How to improve the quality of writing, and by proxy- the section:
1. Introduce a holding period on new accounts
- New accounts should have to be at least one month old at the time of writing a review. I can't tell you how many horrible reviews I've seen posted the same day, or at least inside of one week from throwaway accounts. A wait period would slow this down dramatically.
There should also be a set amount of reviews that cane be posted in one day, to prevent spam
2. Implement a word count minimum
A barest of minimum word count should be 400 words. That's less than 100 words per section, for each of the five- Art, Sound, Character, Story, Enjoyment, and that doesn't even include an Overall, preface, recommendation, or anything extra.
The average reader (high school level) reads at about 200 WPM. A 500-800 word review should take 3-5 minutes to read. That's an acceptable length for something you're interested in spending 25 minutes to 4.5 hours of your life watching.
Anything longer than 13 episodes I think should be more in the 1000+ range. You can't fully express your thoughts and interpretations/imaginings in less than that with 9+ hours of content to cover.
Oh, and ANN requires any and all reviews to be 800-1200 words, no matter the length of the show.
3. Either remove scoring (to eliminate abuse based on scores) or categorize them based on overall score assigned
Many have said that score is the #1 reason the not helpful button was abused- as it's a simple indicator of whether the user liked or disliked a show. Not everyone holds scores to mean the same thing, however.
If scoring were removed, then the reintroduction of the Not Helpful button could be possible- as one would have to either make a concerted effort to read a review before deciding whether the author's views and the reader's views coincide, or at the very least, click the "show more" to reveal the button without reading - which some would not make an effort to do.
All of these ideas are passive ways to improve the section, without active interference on behalf of the moderators. Once the code is set, no one even has to lift a finger, as the criteria will sort out the garbage on its own.
NOW, on top of that, there has to be moderation for the eventual spam, non English, terribly written/illegible, and troll reviews- but these would help dramatically.
Posted by
lawlmartz
| Nov 30, 2015 1:35 PM |
8 comments
 |
Mugetsu- | Nov 14, 2016 11:09 AM
I absolutely agree with every point. ^_^
|
 |
Chuunichan | Jun 19, 2016 11:55 PM
That sounds like a reasonable way to fix the review section :) But instead of removing the scoring system, why don't we put the score at the bottom of the review?
|
 |
Touniouk | Mar 14, 2016 5:31 PM
Yo man, I'm totally with you on this one. Also make it that you need to have watched at least 1/3rd of the show before making a review because I'm tired of people spamming reviews of the currently hyped seasonnal saying "It might only be ep 1, but it's already a masterpiece huehue." |
 |
gedata | Jan 6, 2016 6:08 AM
I'd say instead of eliminating scoring, just give us the option to not score things.
|
 |
kuuderes_shadow | Dec 27, 2015 6:12 AM
I'm afraid I would have to disagree to the idea of separating out most helpful based on ratings. Implementing this would, unfortunately, just lead to an increase in fake-positive reviews intended to take away the top positive spot from a series where the cool thing is to hate on it. There's too many of these trash reviews on the site already (this is probably the most well known but there are hundreds, if not thousands, of them out there), and they unfortunately generate a lot of "helpful" ratings from idiots who find them funny making it very easy for them to take the top spot. And it's sometimes not easy to tell whether a person is being sarcastic or not so banning them isn't exactly doable, although I'd love it to happen if it could.
|
 |
Thedude3445 | Dec 18, 2015 11:33 PM
I would definitely not say 7 is a mixed score by any means, though MAL's current user scoring is so skewed upwards that I guess it is by default on this site alone. Mixed would be better off as 6-4. I would prefer that they rename 4 from (Bad) to (Okay) or something else softer because the gap between (Average) and (Bad) is a pretty big one. I think the score descriptions themselves actually end up influencing users and are the reason why MAL's scores are so skewed.As for everything else, I really do agree. The "top reviews" on nearly every anime I see are really poorly written, and there's nothing I can really do about it but read the incoherent rants or ignore them. If the review system were balanced better with helpfulness, and potentially doing a Rotten Tomatoes-style "Super Reviewer" status for people whose reviews are consistently high-quality, it would significantly improve the experience on this site. |
 |
Nervin | Dec 3, 2015 10:35 AM
Yep, I can definetely agree on this, the short badly written reviews should't be there. At least in the past those were downvoted into oblivion, making the posters of said reviews not trying it again.
|