Actions
Forum Thread Details
  • Replies 10 replies
  • Subscribers 2564 subscribers
  • Views 795 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Related

Interesting way to ask for "reviewers"  while ensuring readers are really part of the comunity

kas.lewis

I was looking over LMR (Let's Make Robots) today and saw something that to me is new, a call for reviewers. The non interesting part is that it is very similar to E14 road test reviews, where you get to keep the product in exchange for a decent review. The interesting part is the rest of the conditions:

 

If you want to get a chance just tell in a comment:

 

  1. That you are a member for at least 1 month, with at least 1 publications of enough quality (it is at the discretion of LMR to decide that quality, but they are fair, just try your best!).
  2. What would you like to do with this OWI-535 Robotic Arm Edge.
  3. It´s not compulsory, but at least that you will consider the “Tips on writing reviews at Let’s Make Robots”,specially videos with LMR intro and end.

 

or

 

If you want to get a chance just tell in a comment:

 

  1. That you are a member for more than 3 months, with at least 2 publications of enough quality (it is at the discretion of LMR to decide that quality, but they are fair, just try your best!).
  2. What would you like to do with one of these Leap Motion Sensors.
  3. It´s not compulsory, but at least that you will consider the “Tips on writing reviews at Let’s Make Robots”,specially videos with LMR intro and end.

 

Its interesting that rather than just give stuff away to the person that sounds the best on "paper" they want the person to be part of the site for some time (1 or 3 months) and to show that they are really part of the community (write a real blog entry and not some 3 line question 5 years ago). I wonder how some of the members here feel about these requirements and if it would go to solving the long debated question of level 0 or 1 members receiving top road tests or even mediocre road test but then not writing a review.

 

Look forward to everyone's comments

Kas

Parents

  • The participation issue comes up at least once a year.

     

    I think the donators understand that a percentage of the devices will just be taken and no review provided.

     

    It is just part of business.

     

    I have been more than pleased with the efforts that the Element 14 staff have done to ensure that good devices go to people who have demonstrated the ability to conduct and provide good reviews.

     

    In an open forum like this, I do not see anyway to "enforce" compliance, but I have suggested the possibility of adding additional "prizes" for people who provide the best review of the product.

     

    That way you entice compliance rather than try to enforce compliance.

     

    Just a thought,

    DAB

  • in reply to DAB

    DAB, pro & cons ...

     

    If it was needed one year to participate, now I had not reviewed yet the panasonic tag (not the better I expected to do), nor I was not reviewing the BBC micro:bit (as it will be shipped), nor the TI Educations Launchpad MKII and I had not participated to the last challenge.

     

    Obviously the problem exists; Multiple reviews are really useful because represent more than a single point of view and on this point I agree perfectly with you. So, what is the solution ? Frankly I have no idea, but maybe that you are right, not always the rues are perfect but may save a lot of unwanted situations.

    It's days that I am thinking if does it exists a way to grant the reviews avoiding restrictive rules based on time or activity. There are cases that to be "invested" as reviews may move ahead some users that for any reasons was not yet participating ...

     

    Enrico

Reply
  • in reply to DAB

    DAB, pro & cons ...

     

    If it was needed one year to participate, now I had not reviewed yet the panasonic tag (not the better I expected to do), nor I was not reviewing the BBC micro:bit (as it will be shipped), nor the TI Educations Launchpad MKII and I had not participated to the last challenge.

     

    Obviously the problem exists; Multiple reviews are really useful because represent more than a single point of view and on this point I agree perfectly with you. So, what is the solution ? Frankly I have no idea, but maybe that you are right, not always the rues are perfect but may save a lot of unwanted situations.

    It's days that I am thinking if does it exists a way to grant the reviews avoiding restrictive rules based on time or activity. There are cases that to be "invested" as reviews may move ahead some users that for any reasons was not yet participating ...

     

    Enrico

Children
No Data