At 5/7/08 09:58 AM, kidray76 wrote:
Actually, that used to be the case before the redesign. There was a time limit between the times you could write reviews. So if u wrote a review now, you would have to wait a while to write your next one. That was very helpful because it cut down the spam dramatically, and forced people to put effort into each review considering they couldn't randomn jump to the next review without pause.
Yep. I believe the review delay was approximately 3.5 minutes, give or take 15 seconds.
Of course, so why not have time limits? If they really want to help the author, the break between reviews gives them time to write a review, edit it, proof read, add whatever they want. Some people quickly jump reviews and put hardly any effort. Not to say the break will force them to, but at least will definetly stop people from doing the following:
9:55
Review 1, Review 2, Review 3, Review4, Review 5, Review 6, Review 7
9:56
Review 8, Review 9, Review 10
9:57
Review 11, Review 12, Review 13, Review 14, Review 15
What if the person posting 15 reviews is 3 minutes actually spent 3 hours watching all 15 movies and typing up the reviews in notepad, and is just posting them all at once?
I've considered using that method before, though I never have. That is how I make multi-quote replies on the BBS, after all.
At 5/7/08 10:26 AM, NEVR wrote:
Actually, I remember that. If you tried to review too quickly after you'd just left one, a little window would pop up telling you to put more thought into your reviews. I'd forgotten about that until you just mentioned it, but I find it odd that the staff would lift that restriction. Seemed like a good idea to me.
Maybe it's on the 'pending' list of tasks that the programmers still have to complete?
Before the redesign the vote panel wouldn't come up without at least clicking to play a game or watch a flash movie. I think there was a time limit that started counting AFTER the pop-up loaded. Nowadays, there's still a timelimit, but it's only from when the moviepage first loads. Meaning now the vote panel loads after a time even if you haven't clicked watch/play yet.
I think that's a consequence of both the direct link and the pop-up link and the admins not knowing a javacript solution that would work on the vote panel in BOTH cases the same way.
There may be something similar at work with why the review limitation is gone now, too.
I didn't even know it was, BTW. My reviews usually take 15 minutes, minimum, between them, usually more like 20-30 minutes, so I wouldn't know. #;-}>
At 5/7/08 12:57 PM, AnalPenguinFarming wrote:
It should realistically be a 7-10 minute break in between reviews anyway. I find that when I'm writing reviews - even short ones - it will sometimes take me up to 20-25 minutes if I wanted to get two reviews in. Purely because you have to sit down, watch the entire movie (title screen to credits) and then write a sensible review on it. That's just my method.
What about movies that are literally 20-30 seconds?
And I'm not talking about shit spamflash. There are some good movies in NG history that are very brief on purpose.
We shouldn't be forced to wait 25 minutes to review those, so...
You see the problem with review timelimits. They have to be "one size fits all," and that's why 3.5 minutes was the limit pre-redesign. It was a good low amount that didn't impact most legit reviewers, and just stopped spammers and link spammers from doing their work with one account, made them create multiple accounts and go through a bit pain in the ass to do it.
Either way I figure if you're going to review, then you still have to watch an entire movie. The crappier the flash is, the more you have to say to the author.
I know that's how most people operate, but the crappier the flash is, the less likely I am to review it, and the better the flash is, the more *I* have to say to the author, actually.