Unpublished Reviews
TheeOSU
FUCK IT!
It seems apparent to me that either the ability for TUSCL members to approve or deny reviews before publishing is either not working as it should or is still a work in progress.
Case in point, this review..
https://www.tuscl.net/rev.php?id=329953&…
I voted against it being published and called it as a shill review yet it was still published.
Opinions?
Case in point, this review..
https://www.tuscl.net/rev.php?id=329953&…
I voted against it being published and called it as a shill review yet it was still published.
Opinions?
43 comments
You have 2 current reviews, it seems to me that you should have the ability. There's an unpublished review link at the top of the daily review link. Click on it and you should be there.
If one has VIP one gets to vote yes/no on the reviews - there is a "Unpublished Reviews" link under the "Daily Reviews" menu-option that is only visible if one has VIP.
The unpublished reviews *are* reviewing the reviews b/f they get published in the main-list that non-VIPs read - it also means if a review gets turned-down then the chump does not get free-VIP for just writing any ole shit - the voting on unpublished reviews is recent, a couple of weeks old- it was implemented b/c TUSCL is pretty-much a one-man operation and Founder (site-owner) could-not read all reviews, or even most of them - members got fed-up w/ all the terrible reviews written to just get free VIP and thus we have the system we have now - the voting/reviewing helps discourage the free-loaders that write shit-reviews to just get free-VIP; it's not perfect but at least there is more vetting going-on now.
What happens if a review does not get 5-votes; or any votes?
Should I change it to 4 out of 7?
As for not getting any votes, that really hasn't happened yet.
@founder why does the voting require a comment for an up vote, it makes sense for the down vote to have a short explanatio, but for an up vote commentary should be elective.
Not at all, just shill reviews.
It's obvious to me and should be to anyone else with experience and knowledge of the area and just the way the review is written that it's fake, written by a shill.
I'm saying shill reviews should not be approved as all they do is mislead. After all isn't the true purpose of having reviews here to help each other out with accurate information?
@shadowcat- I still saw short reviews under the old system. I think if a short review of less than a certain length gets published, the names of the evaluators and their comments should be published to monitor if certain VIP evaluators are being too flaky.
I make it a point to only upvote reviews that are AMAZE-BALLS. I have high standards.