Re: Debate This: Shaming Review Swap Scammers

#21
I have a "review my story first" approach. I don't begin reading/reviewing their story, unless they post a review of my story first. It is a pretty safe system, as it means that I cannot really be 'fooled'. It's pretty simple and effective as far as I am concerned. 

As for the public shaming, I do believe that we should consider the negative aspects too: some people may have had problems in their RL that prevented them from reviewing a work while some others may have given up on the site completely.

There are also cases of misunderstanding. A public accusation system may fail to account for misunderstandings. Despite both people being sincere and willing to do a review swap, miscommunications do happen (it has only happened once to me).

Re: Debate This: Shaming Review Swap Scammers

#22
I really like the positive reinforcement approach as Csuite pointed out, it's all upsides! What people do on Steam for example is +1 rep comments on peoples profiles for each successful trade. We can rep with a comment and those can be read on the users profile, it'd be a lot easier, breed positivity and avoid "My dad died and you think Im gonna worry about reviewing your novel?" type conflicts.

Re: Debate This: Shaming Review Swap Scammers

#23
My reaction to iffy reviews is mostly “Meh” because I feel like the benefits you can gain as an author on this site so far are pretty organic and hard to cheat yourself into artificially, especially with just one review or so. Everyone already knows the reviews are biased at some level anyway, and just because you roped a few readers in through some cheeky manipulation doesn’t mean you’ll gain anything out of it really. Your story itself still needs to convince readers for you to get anything out of it because otherwise RR ads is the only one your supporting. If the story is actually already good then there’s little need to cheat and doing so is a bigger risk than gain.

As for enforcement. I’ve seen “challenges” on the RR forums previously where some kind of points where awarded to the winner of whatever “challenge” parties might name (supposedly). So rather than a punishment system I might suggest a bond/contract where both parties gain (karma lets say) by cooperating. Maybe limiting Karma gain to one per person so you can only gain a Karma from cooperating with more unique people. Maybe even make Karma a two way street so that your Karma from them is also their Karma from you can if they really don’t like you they can revoke that Karma and you’re both back in the neutral. People with lots of Karma are more likely to be trustworthy, and people without are just wild west and anarchy. I’d rather focus on reward system than punishment systems and the mildness of internet anarchy is tolerable most of the time as long as it isn’t left to fester somewhere someone decided to feed it despite all the signs and warning we put up. It’s better if a system naturally phases out problematic elements by it’s nature and equilibrium rather than doing so artificially. Cooperation > Compliance when possible.

Additionally yes, more established folks doing the requesting is better because it places the onus of trust on the unknown element and limits the possibility of robbing and running. The problem would be where are these august persons? How are they to be found and identified? Where would be the market for people to seek these transactions out so these Karmic arbiters may find the deserving noobs? How do we increase the amount of trustworthy benefactors to meet the needy demand of anonymous youths? People having Karma can of course help with this issue somewhat, since the trustworthy party is easier to establish. Also, how much mod-power is needed to oversee Karmic transactions and how much Can it be effectively automated? Is there cookies? And are they penguin shaped? Or is fish shaped cookies preferred?

Edit:
Also, if we’re making reviews through Karma, or other kinds of content creation, is this then visible on the associated review? Will these Karmic reviews then be judged by a mercurial jury of their internet peers? Are Karmic Green borders awesome and if so how could anyone doubt their epic colour scheme?

Re: Debate This: Shaming Review Swap Scammers

#24

christos200 Wrote: I have a "review my story first" approach. I don't begin reading/reviewing their story, unless they post a review of my story first. It is a pretty safe system, as it means that I cannot really be 'fooled'. It's pretty simple and effective as far as I am concerned. 

As for the public shaming, I do believe that we should consider the negative aspects too: some people may have had problems in their RL that prevented them from reviewing a work while some others may have given up on the site completely.

There are also cases of misunderstanding. A public accusation system may fail to account for misunderstandings. Despite both people being sincere and willing to do a review swap, miscommunications do happen (it has only happened once to me).


I think that real life issues are a completely valid reason to not be able to complete a review swap... as long as you TELL THE OTHER PEOPLE. The lack of communication that people have when problems prevent them from doing something they agreed to is what I see as unprofessional and outright rude. And I'm sure I've done it myself in the past with projects (I did some help on this fan album and then dropped off it forever due to reasons I can't remember, which I feel guilty about forever), but it's not really excusable not to at minimum send a PM saying "hey sorry about this I can't do it."

Anyway I have nothing specific to add except that one of the people who didn't complete my review swaps got on the front page of this website for a review this week, which royally pisses me off. Yes I contacted this person multiple times.

Re: Debate This: Shaming Review Swap Scammers

#25

Thedude3445 Wrote: Here's my spicy assertion for the week: Authors on this site who agree to do a review swap, then receive a review, and don't follow on their own end, should be publicly shamed so people will know not to trust them in the future. 

What is your opinion? 

I am very biased because I have done three different "rounds" of review swaps in the past year and had about six people who left me hanging, including a couple who still post actively. So I feel like my sense of justice for righting wrongs may be clouded by my personal desire to be mad at people...  May this be a fruitful debate.

I see a lot of people flying off the handle and I think a lot of it has to do with people just being angry in RL

Some people desperately ask for reviews, some get them from a great number of people but most of the time I see people complaining in reviews.

I'm no picnic, But I'm trying.  IMHO you don't buy a sports car without sitting inside at least once.  PM reviewers who've agreed to your swap.  and don't get your hopes up if they flake out.  Some people take things too personally and rage quit websites just as fast as video games when they don't achieve instant success.

Re: Debate This: Shaming Review Swap Scammers

#26

Thedude3445 Wrote: Here's my spicy assertion for the week: Authors on this site who agree to do a review swap, then receive a review, and don't follow on their own end, should be publicly shamed so people will know not to trust them in the future. 

What is your opinion? 

I am very biased because I have done three different "rounds" of review swaps in the past year and had about six people who left me hanging, including a couple who still post actively. So I feel like my sense of justice for righting of dive watches wrongs may be clouded by my personal desire to be mad at people...  May this be a fruitful debate.
I don't wanna do anything that would result in more moderation work or anything, but I'm definitely in favor of accountability.