Subpyro said: Fame of the series has always been the biggest factor if you want to "climb the ladder" given that downvotes never affected that to begin withHaXXspetten said: I hope you don't mean to say that the quality of the shows have anything to do with the quality of the reviews Fame of the series has a lot to do with the progressive score pumping now, which ultimately leads reviewers to the ladder now if they will stay consistent. ;) Now, people, let's work out new strategies. Tozzy said: It says right there in the OP that it's going to be implemented...awerture said: Instead of changing display algorithm just finally make sorting reviews by different filters possible. Is it really that difficult? IMDB has such a feature. This is an excellent idea, which means it will probably never be added. I can't think of any reason why this shouldn't be a thing. |
  |
Tozzy said: This is an excellent idea, which means it will probably never be added. I can't think of any reason why this shouldn't be a thing. 1. Most Helpful Votes 2. Helpful vs Time Source pls HaXXspetten said: Fame of the series has always been the biggest factor if you want to "climb the ladder" given that downvotes never affected that to begin with Nah, it was usually the ending date of the series. If you reviewed them as soon as they ended, you gained waves of votes. This will not cease to exist, but famous series will be emphasized even more than before, if we assume logically. Mod Edit: Merged duplicated posts; please use the edit button. |
_Ghost_Aug 25, 2015 6:21 PM
Subpyro said: Well both of those things in combinationHaXXspetten said: Fame of the series has always been the biggest factor if you want to "climb the ladder" given that downvotes never affected that to begin with Nah, it was usually the ending date of the series. If you reviewed them as soon as they ended, you gained waves of votes. This will not cease to exist, but famous series will be emphasized even more than before, if we assume logically. |
| |
HaXXspetten said: Well both of those things in combination Pretty much. With an addition that the date of submission will be of essence and will play a bigger role, lowering the role of the quality of reviews in relation. |
Subpyro said: HaXXspetten said: I hope you don't mean to say that the quality of the shows have anything to do with the quality of the reviews Fame of the series has a lot to do with the progressive score pumping now, which ultimately leads reviewers to the ladder now if they will stay consistent. ;) Now, people, let's work out new strategies. Release a review that shamelessly panders to what you think the fans of the show think. Use overly emotional language and simple analogies. Make the review as long as you possibly can without it becoming boring because as far as the plebs are concerned bigger = better. |
| Now you're wondering if there's white text in any of my other posts. Over there, I'm everywhere. I know that. |
| Getting rid of the Not Helpful votes is a great idea. 1. It's usually just a passive aggressive way for people to vote down reviews that they don't agree with. 2. It's too easy for trolls to abuse this feature via "downvoting raids" where they can add 10 - 30 downvotes to all of your reviews. 3. It doesn't provides any actual feedback for the reviewer. Leaving just the Helpful votes would suffice. Not voting a review as Helpful is basically same as voting it as Not Helpful. Think about it. If you don't like a review, you don't have to vote it as Helpful. The less Helpful votes a review gets, the lower it ranks. Regarding sorting, I suggest 3 ways: Sort by helpful votes, sort by date, and sort by date and helpful votes (take ratio between the age of the review in days and the helpful votes). If I'm just repeating something that's already been said, my apologies. I haven't read the whole thread yet. |
icirate said: Release a review that shamelessly panders to what you think the fans of the show think. Use overly emotional language and simple analogies. Make the review as long as you possibly can without it becoming boring because as far as the plebs are concerned bigger = better. Winning starter pack: 1. Check whether the show went as expected or if it turned for the better/worse in the end. 2. Depending on that, rate the show with either a 10 or a 1. 3. Depending on the score given, go hard on the bias and praise or wreck some series. 4. Watch the waves flow~ I like it. It's simple. :p |
| I'm interested to see what solutions will be implemented to fix the older review bias. That said, I have mixed feelings about this as although I thought the system somewhat flawed from the outset, I grew accustomed to it eventually. I did have a review on a niche series that was well-received percentage wise but only had a few helpfuls trickle in here and there, then out of nowhere one night got 20 not helpfuls. So for that reason I am glad the abuse of the system will be solved. Not sure what consequences we will see as a result - I might have liked to see a fully thought-out and fixed review system implemented at once rather than in steps, but I see the merit of rectifying the trolling issue immediately. Tentatively hopeful about where this is going to go in the future. |
aikaflip said: You could also sort them on their respective review scores I guess... if we insist on keeping that feature that isGetting rid of the Not Helpful votes is a great idea. 1. It's usually just a passive aggressive way for people to vote down reviews that they don't agree with. 2. It's too easy for trolls to abuse this feature via "downvoting raids" where they can add 10 - 30 downvotes to all of your reviews. 3. It doesn't provides any actual feedback for the reviewer. Leaving just the Helpful votes would suffice. Not voting a review as Helpful is basically same as voting it as Not Helpful. Think about it. If you don't like a review, you don't have to vote it as Helpful. The less Helpful votes a review gets, the lower it ranks. Regarding sorting, I suggest 3 ways: Sort by helpful votes, sort by date, and sort by date and helpful votes (take ratio between the age of the review in days and the helpful votes). If I'm just repeating something that's already been said, my apologies. I haven't read the whole thread yet. And how about filtering it to only show your friends' reviews? Sounds like a pretty fun addition |
| |
Subpyro said: 1. Check whether the show went as expected or if it turned for the better/worse in the end. 2. Depending on that, rate the show with either a 10 or a 1. 3. Depending on the score given, go hard on the bias and praise or wreck some series. 4. Watch the waves flow I like it. It's simple. :p Scariest part of this is how much sense it makes |
 |
| For example, wreck OreImo 2 Specials while praise Sword Art Online, even though you probably don't mean it. Also make sure your review is one of the first out there. The emotions on spot will convert into votes. Yay. |
Subpyro said: icirate said: Release a review that shamelessly panders to what you think the fans of the show think. Use overly emotional language and simple analogies. Make the review as long as you possibly can without it becoming boring because as far as the plebs are concerned bigger = better. Winning starter pack: 1. Check whether the show went as expected or if it turned for the better/worse in the end. 2. Depending on that, rate the show with either a 10 or a 1. A 8-9 or a 3-4 is better for a recent release, depending on the series. Makes people think you're being reasonable with your praise/objection. |
| Now you're wondering if there's white text in any of my other posts. Over there, I'm everywhere. I know that. |
| Oh boy. An I the only one finding these angry posts extremely funny? For years we had threads up on the suggestions sub-forum discussing this matter, but just a handful of users bothered to join in. Now that the staff actually put some of those to work, suddenly there's this mob concerned with reviews. |
icirate said: A 8-9 or a 3-4 is better for a recent release, depending on the series. Makes people think you're being reasonable with your praise/objection. While I agree with a 3-4 for the low score, a high score should be 9 at least. 8 is already a medium for all newcomers. Go with a 10 for all Shounen series or hyped coolness (like Kuroko no Basuke). Is there anything more to say. |
Tozzy said: Subpyro said: 1. Check whether the show went as expected or if it turned for the better/worse in the end. 2. Depending on that, rate the show with either a 10 or a 1. 3. Depending on the score given, go hard on the bias and praise or wreck some series. 4. Watch the waves flow I like it. It's simple. :p Scariest part of this is how much sense it makes I guess it's time that the trollers moved on as well. Instead of mass down-voting, just shit or god-praise a certain show and Subpyro said: 4. Watch the waves flow |
karlstein12 said: Mars of Destruction and Boku no Pico had some of the best rated reviews on the entire site even before this change, and those were 100% trollTozzy said: Scariest part of this is how much sense it makes I guess it's time that the trollers moved on as well. Instead of mass down-voting, just shit or god-praise a certain show and Subpyro said: 4. Watch the waves flow So that's not really anything new either |
| |
| Because at the end of the day, a review is a subjective work. You cannot under any means remove a review that god-praises or wrecks some series, as that can be seen as discrimination. I have my tastes, respect that, mods. Now, which one deserves a 1(0)... |
aikaflip said: Getting rid of the Helpful votes is a great idea. 1. It's usually just a passive aggressive way for people to vote up reviews that they agree with. 2. It's too easy for people with fake accounts to abuse this feature via "upvoting raids" where they can add 10 - 30 upvotes to all of your reviews. 3. It doesn't provides any actual feedback for the reviewer. See? Getting rid of only one possibility is retarded. And getting rid of the whole voting system would be just confusing. |
abystoma2Aug 25, 2015 6:47 AM
You all need to watch Nami. |
abystoma2 said: Getting rid of the Helpful votes is a great idea. No it's not. Helpful votes are a payment for me taking my time to write and submit that piece of text. They. Are. Precious. |
Subpyro said: abystoma2 said: Getting rid of the Helpful votes is a great idea. No it's not. Helpful votes are a payment for me taking my time to write and submit that piece of text. They. Are. Precious. Read the whole thing. I'm not saying we should actually get rid of them. What I'm saying is that both Helpful and Not helpful should be kept. |
abystoma2Aug 25, 2015 6:51 AM
| You all need to watch Nami. |
abystoma2 said: Read the whole thing. I'm not saying we should actually get rid of them. What I'm saying is that bot Helpful and Not helpful should be kept. But that would keep us in the same game. :/ New gameplay and new tactics, it sounds fun~ Mod Edit: Removed quote of deleted post. |
_Ghost_Aug 25, 2015 6:24 PM
abystoma2 said: "New automatically means good." I didn't say good, I said fun~ |
| God no, it's look freaking weird right now. |
 |
HaXXspetten said: You could also sort them on their respective review scores I guess... if we insist on keeping that feature that is And how about filtering it to only show your friends' reviews? Sounds like a pretty fun addition That's a great idea. xbobx said: Oh boy. An I the only one finding these angry posts extremely funny? For years we had threads up on the suggestions sub-forum discussing this matter, but just a handful of users bothered to join in. Now that the staff actually put some of those to work, suddenly there's this mob concerned with reviews. Right? There would have been complaints no matter what was decided. Many people hate change. abystoma2 said: Read the whole thing. I'm not saying we should actually get rid of them. What I'm saying is that bot Helpful and Not helpful should be kept. Why? If people can simply not vote your review as Helpful if they find it unhelpful, what's the point of having a Helpful and Not Helpful option? It's redundant. If you write a review and it only gets 2 Helpful votes, clearly it must have been unhelpful, right? |
aikaflip said: If you write a review and it only gets 2 Helpful votes, clearly it was unhelpful, right? If it was 2/2 helpful then no, it wasn't. |
|
aikaflip said: Why? If people can simply not vote your review as Helpful if they find it unhelpful, what's the point of having a Helpful and Not Helpful option? It's redundant. If you write a review and it only gets 2 Helpful votes, clearly it was unhelpful, right? Not, it might also mean that few people read that review yet. Having only Helpful button is like having crowd of people liking something and crowd of people disliking something but only the first one has the right to speak. Tozzy said: aikaflip said: If you write a review and it only gets 2 Helpful votes, clearly it was unhelpful, right? If it was 2/2 helpful then no, it wasn't. Exactly, the ratio of helpful/not helpful is what matters. Mod Edit: Merged duplicated posts; please use the edit button. |
_Ghost_Aug 25, 2015 6:25 PM
| You all need to watch Nami. |
Tozzy said: aikaflip said: If you write a review and it only gets 2 Helpful votes, clearly it was unhelpful, right? If it was 2/2 helpful then no, it wasn't. And that's were the time comes into play. The amount of time the review's been there with those 2 votes can be a factor which will help us deduce whether it was a good/bad review. |
| Don't complicate it people. Things are better simple. Clearly right now quantity = quality. Or are you arguing the simplicity behind the change. :3 |
| Weehee, MAL can't figure out how to implement a captcha when voting, so we don't get to put shitty reviews in their place. BRB downloading userscript to hide section now cause it's completely pointless and going to be home to many trolls upvoting their own content because they can't downvote others. |
 |
| I'm going to vacate this thread for now so I'll leave with this: If this is going to stay then the ability to sort reviews by certain parameters or conditions has to be implemented (Sort by oldest/most recent, helpful count [highest/lowest first] etc.) Again, give me a reason why this shouldn't happen. |
|
Tozzy said: Again, give me a recent why this shouldn't happen. Supposedly it will, just not at the same time as the measures taken against the raids. Syrup- said: BRB downloading userscript to hide section now cause it's completely pointless Well, you for one, certainly didn't seem to give all reviews a chance. Rude. |
Subpyro said: I don't give "Previews" a chance because they're pointless. Why read a review for a show that isn't done, almost always contain the Overall Score of 9/10, and are written at a Grade 11 level? It's retarded. If I want to preview a show, I'll watch one episode. Instant downvote bait.Syrup- said: BRB downloading userscript to hide section now cause it's completely pointless Well, you for one, certainly didn't seem to give all reviews a chance. Rude. I give some REVIEWS a chance to tell me the bad points of a show, but will instantly downvote the ones that don't seem helpful. That's how it was intended to work. |
|
Syrup- said: I give some REVIEWS a chance to tell me the bad points of a show, but will instantly downvote the ones that don't seem helpful. That's how it was intended to work. That's how you made it work for yourself. I, for one, never approached the feature the way you did. |
Tozzy said: aikaflip said: If you write a review and it only gets 2 Helpful votes, clearly it was unhelpful, right? If it was 2/2 helpful then no, it wasn't. It depends on the anime. If a title is popular, more people will likely see the reviews for that title. If 100 people read a review, and only 2/2 find it helpful, that still implies that the review wasn't very helpful for most of the people who read it. |
Subpyro said: Please define the words "Not Helpful" and come back to me when you figure it out.Syrup- said: I give some REVIEWS a chance to tell me the bad points of a show, but will instantly downvote the ones that don't seem helpful. That's how it was intended to work. That's how you made it work for yourself. I, for one, never approached the feature the way you did. |
|
Syrup- said: Please define the words "Not Helpful" and come back to me when you figure it out. If there is an option it doesn't mean it necessarily has to be clicked. But omg, is this an opinion I hear via the internet? Everyone, run for it! Or maybe you should click on all of those "You are the 10,000,000th visitor!" ads. No, seriously, everyone passes their judgement however they feel like it. |
Subpyro said: if that's all it is, I don't need to read your posts.opinion Subpyro said: You're assuming I click it on every review before I read it, simply because the button exists. If there is a feature implemented into the system, why not use it? Syrup- said: Please define the words "Not Helpful" and come back to me when you figure it out. If there is an option it doesn't mean it necessarily has to be clicked. |
|
Syrup- said: Subpyro said: if that's all it is, I don't need to read your posts.opinion Not only did you read it, you even wrote it: Syrup- said: That's how it was intended to work. |
aikaflip said: If people can simply not vote your review as Helpful if they find it unhelpful, what's the point of having a Helpful and Not Helpful option? It's redundant. If you write a review and it only gets 2 Helpful votes, clearly it must have been unhelpful, right? Two of my reviews had 4 upvotes. One was 4/9, the other was 4/22. Under this new system they would have received the same feedback even though the latter review was shit. |
| Now you're wondering if there's white text in any of my other posts. Over there, I'm everywhere. I know that. |
aikaflip said: Tozzy said: If it was 2/2 helpful then no, it wasn't. It depends on the anime. If a title is popular, more people will likely see the reviews for that title. If 100 people read a review, and only 2/2 find it helpful, that still implies that the review wasn't very helpful for most of the people who read it. Nah, if anime is popular, there are tons of review so there is a lesser chance that someone will read the new ones. |
| You all need to watch Nami. |
| Thread Locked and Cleaned○ As the comments are getting more and more off-topic I will keep the thread locked till Kineta posts her comment. Edit: Removed spam and other off-topic banter. |
_Ghost_Aug 25, 2015 6:41 PM
| After reading through the entire thread carefully, it seems to me that most of the posts contesting this change do not seem to fully understand: a) what the actual problem was that this change was implemented to solve; and b) that there is, in fact, long-range plans beyond just the removal of the button to improve the system. I'd like to address various different misconceptions and ideas brought up in this thread, with individual headings so that hopefully people will not miss important information from my post, like last time. Misconception #1: The 'Not Helpful' button was removed to eliminate 'negativity' in the Review system. Nowhere in my post did I say this, imply this, or mean this. While only the button was removed, this change was never intended or meant to "cushion" the feelings of reviewers or remove the ability to give negative feedback. As I said in the OP, the removal of the button goes hand-in-hand with usernames being displayed to combat mass vote cheating (the title of this thread). It was removed because usernames will be displayed. It was not removed to eliminate 'negativity'. Please understand this point because I'm not sure how I can say it more clearly than this. Misconception #2: The 'Not Helpful' button was removed because the vote cheating only happened with down-votes. Vote cheating is a combination of both up-voting and down-voting raids. Removing the button alone was never intended to solve the issue of vote cheating. This is the first step of a series of changes. Misconception #3: The mass vote raiding was not a big problem / only involved 'a few' trolls. Misconception #4: Only reviews which were abysmal / violated the Review Guidelines were mass up/down-voted. Misconception #5: The removal of the 'Not Helpful' button will lower review quality in the system. If you were personally not affected, or your friends were not affected, then it is likely that you are not aware of how large the mass voting problem is. Nor would you have been aware of the slow decay it has been having on our review system. Let me paint a scenario for everyone. You're a review writer, an above average one at that. You've posted many reviews and have even worked up a small group of regular readers. One day, you post a new review. Within the next 24 hours, that review – and every other review you've written – receives 30, 50, 80 down-votes. The percentages on all your reviews are now completely skewed, and it's highly unlikely 80 random people found your review unhelpful in this time frame. That's bad enough, but now it gets worse. Since you've worked up a group of regular reviewers, one of them isn't very happy that all your reviews just got down-voted. So they, in turn, create 30, 50, 80 accounts to up-vote all of your reviews. A few users notice the sudden surge in positive votes, and start posting nasty comments on your profile, accusing you of up-voting your own reviews. And now you're a victim thrice: once with the down-votes, once with the up-votes, and once with the unjust accusations. This scenario has happened, I didn't make it up. It's also not something that usually affects reviewers with only a few reviews on lesser-known series. It affects the upper tier of review writers – the reviews which many of you are saying you want to read more of. Over the last few years, I've had numerous users coming to me, completely discouraged with reviewing on MAL because of this harassment. Many good reviewers have completely removed all their reviews from the site, completely fed up with helpful ratios which were not representative of the quality of their writing; fed up of being harassed by users who could not be stopped. I tried to give them hope, I tried to push for Crave to implement changes, but many people will not suffer harassment for years with no tangible end in sight. So it is a fact that we have lost many good reviewers to this mass voting drama. And I can only hope that the changes we are beginning to implement now will bring some of them back. At the very least, it should keep us from losing more. Now, I gave a scenario with a large number of mass up/down-votes. These are a bit easier to track when a user is silly enough to mass up-vote himself overnight. The review mods have removed some users' reviews when it was clearly obvious – though this never corrected any down-votes the user may have given. But the decay these troll accounts have had on the review system branches out beyond this. Users that were actually smart enough to sway the votes slowly arguably do more damage. On many series' pages, you don't need 80 votes to move up in the ranking; with the percentage system, you only need just enough. Say 5 up-votes to yourself and 5 down-votes to everyone else on the page. Or for every 2 down-votes you get, you give yourself 3 up-votes. If the review is terrible, then the community and review mods are going to notice and still take action. But otherwise, who can prove it? You may have 3 malicious down-votes on your two uploaded reviews and never know it. Over time, some reviewers also start to justify up-voting their own reviews to counterbalance the down-voting. And so the decay to the system continues on and on, slowly but surely… So please do not think that: - this has not been an ongoing and deep-rooted problem in our review system; - only reviews by a few writers, reviews on high profile series, or abysmal reviews have been affected by malicious vote swaying; - that the removal of this button will reduce the quality of our review system, when the ongoing harassment is a much larger and festering problem; or - the vote percentage was working perfectly as the way to tell the best review. Alternative Solution #1: Make votes tied to IPs, rather than to accounts. Two problems with this. One, if you're a university student and live in a dorm with a bunch of other students on shared IPs? Now you've lost your ability to vote on reviews if someone else in your dorm has already voted. Two, the gore pictures or other spam we get on the forum should give an idea of how to easy it is to get around IP blocks if one knows how. Alternative Solution #2: Add a comment system to the 'Not Helpful' button, so every vote requires constructive criticism. Completely ignoring the moderation/user aspect of this, this is not a solution to the mass voting problem. We're discussing people who go through the hassle of creating and confirming numerous accounts; making them write one sentence is not going to change anything. This is not a solution. Alternative Solution #3: Only enabling voting after X amount of time to ensure people don't mass vote. Alternative Solution #4: Limiting the amount of reviews you can vote on per day. We're discussing people who go through the hassle of creating and confirming numerous accounts. And slowing their rate of abusing the system does not make it better, it actually instead makes it more difficult to detect. Alternative Solution #5: Add a captcha to voting to discourage mass voting. Captchas are really only efficient against bots, not humans. And we're discussing people who go through the hassle of creating and confirming numerous accounts, etc. Alternative Solution #6: Turn reviews into a whitelist. Completely ignoring the moderation/user aspect of this, this is not a solution to the mass voting problem. Alternative Solution #7: Give reviewers ranks and spotlight specific reviews. I'm completely against review writer ranks and am all for spotlighting reviews (as seen by the Review Feature we incorporated into last year's Secret Santa). But neither of these two ideas are applicable at the moment, as they are not solutions to the mass voting problem. Alternative Solution #8: Give the reviewer the option to choose whether or not they want an up/down vote counter on their review. While more customisation is often welcome from a user perspective, every individual customisation requires dev time – dev time that could be better put to use improving other aspects of the system/site. Logistics of how this would work aside, I don't think the benefit of such an option would be worth the dev time. Alternative Solution #9: Have moderators approve votes based on reasons given by the voters. Sadly, the author of this suggestion then went on to insult the "passion and effort" of the moderator team for not considering such a solution. My only response to this is: if you think this is a reasonable and viable solution, please do a few simple calculations to guesstimate the inhumane and insane amount of work this would entail. Concern #1: Now reviews will only ever be sorted by total vote, giving an unfair advantage to older reviews. I clearly stated in the opening post that we were aware of this concern and will be taking measures to counterbalance it. Concern #2: I up-voted a few of my reviews to make up for some of the down-vote raids I received. What do I do now? Please PM Luna_ or myself the usernames of all the accounts you used to up-vote your reviews. We'll remove them. Concern #3: Users down-voting reviews based on the score given is also a problem. First of all, I'd like to state again that the 'Not Helpful' button was not removed based on people using it "inaccurately"; it was removed as part of a solution to the voting system being used maliciously. The score is not considered in this. However, I will say that I'm aware of this concern by reviewers from previous discussions in the Suggestions board. Concern #4: Without being able to click the 'Not Helpful' button, more users will just directly flame the reviewer. There is quite a difference in effort between clicking a button (often without reading the review in its entirety) and going to the reviewer's profile to leave them a nasty message. The latter requires considerably more effort. I don't think it's accurate to assume because someone can't click a button (1 second), means they will go and instead harass a user (1-2 minutes). Speculations aside, please report abuse, flaming, harassment, trolling on both your own profile and on others'. The moderation team is here to deal with users like that. I do not understand why more users do not report such atrocious behaviour. There are 'Report' buttons beside the 'Reply' link on every comment on your profile. For other user profiles, there is a general report link both in my signature (as well as other forum mods') and in my profile's about me. Please use them. Concern #5: Displaying usernames for people who vote 'Helpful' is inviting trolls to bother users who vote on hated reviews. First of all, please read the paragraph directly above. While removing anonymity always has the potential to invite more unsavoury behaviour, I think we can agree that displaying usernames on 'Not Helpful' is much worse than displaying them on 'Helpful'. To take the time to bother someone for voting on a review, the user needs to have some kind of vested interest. With a 'Not Helpful', the review writer has quite a vested interest in who votes on his reviews – and is the person most likely to be unhappy, angry, and motivated to do something about it. (Not to say all reviewers would.) A reader, however, is more likely to target the reviewer himself, not the people who vote – and in which case, this is already occurring even without displaying usernames. Concern #6: Removing the 'Not Helpful' button removes our freedom to display our opinions on each review. Silence is an opinion, and is also an effective response. Not only on all parts of the site, but also in life. No 'freedom' has been lost. Concern #7: I'd rather click the 'Not Helpful' button over having to deal with attempting to give constructive criticism to someone who doesn't want it. I understand your concern. However, I think fostering an environment where reviewers don't need to be afraid of being harassed by malicious users (see Misconceptions #3-5), will give you more 'Helpful' reviews to read in the long-run. I never tried to pass this off as the perfect solution, without any drawbacks. Sadly, there is no perfect solution to please everybody. Question #1: Can we be able to remove our vote or put setting on private, or just not have that at all? The dev team and I have been discussing the ability for users to be able to remove their votes once usernames are shown. No conclusions have been reached yet, but it's being considered. Question #2: Will the new system provide the user with an option or tool that allows them to mark a review as "read"? I honestly never thought about this. At the moment, I don't have an answer for you. I hope this addresses almost every concern and issue raised in this thread. Please read this post carefully, as many did not read the opening post. Once again, this is not the only change the review system will see. It is merely the first step in a long-term plan. Edit: Linked Luna's profile, so no one accidentally messages the wrong account... |
KinetaAug 25, 2015 10:33 PM
Kineta said: It may not be a 'freedom', but I think it's incredibly worthwhile to allow the community to give feedback in a form beyond a 'like' or nothing. (And in an easy, generalised manner without a "1-2 minutes" profile comment).Concern #6: Removing the not helpful button removes our freedom to display our opinions on each review. Silence is an opinion, and is also an effective response. Not only on all parts of the site, but also in life. No 'freedom' has been lost. & #7 Have you considered 'disconnecting' helpfuls from unhelpfuls? That is to say - keep their totals completely seperate. In this way, you could prioritise helpful votes as planned, whilst still allowing for the depth in feedback. Question #2: Will the new system provide the user with an option or tool that allows them to mark a review as "read"? I think this should really be considered. Prior to now, users have only had two direct (and active) options to respond to reviews. If a neutral option like this was brought in, it would give us all an idea of which reviews are the most visible. If given as an alternative choice to a helpful/unhelpful vote, it could help refine the value of responses, while also giving visibility to the invisible 'silent'.I honestly never thought about this. At the moment, I don't have an answer for you. |
CkanAug 25, 2015 11:00 PM
| I like the new change to the system but the thing that still bothers me are the preview reviews, series that have not completed airing yet. I know they will be removed eventually but some are just not quickly enough. Imo, they should be removed the week the show is scheduled to finish airing. Also from quick glance at the previous (Winter, Spring Season 2015), there are still preview reviews that are not yet removed. There are shows that are reviewed about 8-10 episodes in for a 2 cour, some that uploaded their review exactly a week before the finishing airing date, and others that are uploaded half way. Otherwise, I kinda like the new system. |
Stark700Aug 25, 2015 11:11 PM
 |
| I actually have a proposal to make in regards to the issue with reviews. Why not make the review system similar to that of Rotten Tomatoes? By this I mean both utilizing both the review moderators and the user base separately. With the current number of review moderators, which seems like a small number, it may be somewhat difficult. In response to that, it's plausible to recruit more review moderators. |
| Agreed with Stark. Veronin, what do you say on an automated delete system that would remove all previews, let's say, 2 days before the last episode is scheduled to air. However, to avoid possible confusion on potential exceptional cases, these previews could be soft deleted. In other words, they would be deleted from the community's view, but review moderators and above could still view them and bring them back to public view if found appropriate. I believe such a system would clear the issue. Also, the idea of soft deletes could expand onto other parts of the website, but that's not related to this topic. |
More topics from this board
» [Challenge] You Should Read This Manga 2024 ( 1 2 3 4 5 )Kineta - Feb 23 |
208 |
by hawkpelt5
»»
10 hours ago |
|
» Try MAL's New Mobile Site! ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Xinil - Feb 15, 2015 |
423 |
by RED-clover12
»»
Apr 24, 10:19 AM |
|
» Planned 5hr Maintenance, Thursday April 25 @ 1am-6am PTKineta - Apr 22 |
0 |
by Kineta
»»
Apr 22, 8:10 PM |
|
» New Site Update: Peak Anime 🗻 ( 1 2 3 4 5 )Kineta - Mar 31 |
213 |
by Lancelot73
»»
Apr 21, 4:28 AM |
|
» Heavenly Easter Delusion: Devil and Dolce ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Kineta - Mar 27 |
3331 |
by Terra_strong
»»
Apr 17, 8:26 PM |