What's your preference? One (quite) long review publication, or a shorter one along with some discussions here?

As long as we get good information about your testing, I really have no preference.

I've also got to go with the multiple, shorter posts.  All of them should point back to the first post which should contain a Table of Contents running blog list (with links).
My attention span just isn't what it used to be.  I would rather follow the breadcrumb trail than try to eat the whole loaf in one sitting.

Hi  obones ,

Well, much like what you and others have written, I also prefer a series of shorter, interconnected blog posts.

I think it also depends on the complexity of the project.
For instance, whether you're dealing with a measuring instrument, a computer, or "smaller" devices—the description and explanation will vary accordingly.
Another thing I do is read the reviews by other participants - after all, we’re a team; that’s exactly how I view it - and that helps me decide where to focus my own review.
Because you don't have to copy everything exactly; you can supplement or expand on others with your own contribution.

For example, I'm now allowed to participate in the road test of the Arduino Ventuno Q. Thank you very much Owain and Christopher for that opportunity!

Well, I usually write everything in German first, then translate it into English.
On top of that, as an electronics specialist, I face the challenge of mastering the software as quickly as possible.
I’m learning and doing everything through self-study, building things up in my own lab.
So, in a way, it’s like learning a third language.
-> I’m very familiar with standard Arduinos (and the Raspberry Pi) - the smaller controllers - but the Ventuno Q is a whole different ball game for me.
That naturally shapes the way I write my review.
So, how much should I actually write?!?!?! 

In the past, I used to write entire user manuals and technical descriptions—documents the size of brochures.
...Oops... as you can see from all the words above... "once I get started, where does it end...?" 

So, I prefer keeping it shorter—highlighting the key aspects of my project—and that works well.

I wish you, and all the other road testers, all the best for your review.

Best Regards
Gerald

---

I originally wrote long multiblog reviews, often with tutorials. My first RoadTest review was 194 pages in word (but let's be honest, Cloud setup tutorial had lot of images) and spanned across 18 blog posts among the main roadtest page. It included even superdetailed things like review how easy is to program MCU firmware in assembler with tutorial  But result was that almost nobody read these blogs.

Over time, I was simplifing my reviews. In my last review, I reached a state, when people not only read my review, but also comment about some parts of it.

Over time I learnt that RoadTest reviews likely should not duplicate datasheet much. I try to focus on sharing experience with device/chip/tool/etc rather than duplicating official documentation. Nowadays, I would consider such long review only in case when manufacturer docs are horrible, but I would not join such roadtest in the first place these days.

Hey obones,

Thank you for posting this question for discussion in the RoadTest forum.

The short answer is that you can structure your review as you see fit.

If you find it easier and that you're able to give a more in-depth and clear evaluation of your time reviewing the STEMLab 125-14 Pro using multiple review blogs, with the final review summarising and final opinipon report, I would take this approach.

If you're better able to write the review as a single longer report, then I would suggest that instead.

You may find it helpful to use review blogs even with a longer final report.

I hope this helps you with your writing.

Owain

Thank you for the clarity. I don't wish to distract for O's question and responses.

Now I need to apologize to members if they start getting multiple messages. I moved my RoadTest content to the blog area from the Review forum.

I gots to get me a better RoadMap for RoadTest to avoid getting Roadweary. 

Roadtests generally require some amount of software and hardware development in order to do the evaluation, so I find it helpful to document that as separate blogs posts.  I find those posts extremely useful in generating a more concise summary for the review itself.  If I tried to do it as one long review document, I would have difficulty editing it.

I was just thinking about this more.. technically it's harder to write concisely and strip off unnecessary content, so that's another reason, why shorter posts are more appealing.

I don't like it when there are excessive dumps of output that might better as a zip attachment (or a repo somewhere), because I feel the reviewer ought to look through the results and provide their analysis for the readers benefit.

Also, for some reason, I've never really liked that collection of photo feature (which slides images past). I think it's far easier to scan through a blog when it has normal image attachments than figuring out how to quickly click or slide through to the images of interest. But I know people use that feature so maybe I'm just not operating it correctly.

fully agree, blog posts and a RoadTest review to summarise.

Great point about getting reader feedbacks