Do you think Speakers Corner reviews should be paid?

Sorry I disagree. I don't think any non-product review should be paid.

Regardless of whether you tighten controls over the topics added, you still get people out to make a fast buck by just writing easy, lazy top ten and other reviews.

If perhaps they could only be awarded for VH rates then I might change my mind - but only then because people would actually have to use their brains for once when submitting them!

kelr101 wrote:

Sorry I disagree. I don't think any non-product review should be paid.

Regardless of whether you tighten controls over the topics added, you still get people out to make a fast buck by just writing easy, lazy top ten and other reviews.

If perhaps they could only be awarded for VH rates then I might change my mind - but only then because people would actually have to use their brains for once when submitting them!

I see were you are coming from but people doing this will soon see that you cannot make a "fast buck" by doing this. Those who do this tend to have a low readership if any and some of the particularly poor reviews may even be deleted. They do not stay at the top of the searches fro long either so are unlikely to get much in the way of extra reads down the line and also will not get crowned.

kelr101 wrote:

If perhaps they could only be awarded for VH rates then I might change my mind - but only then because people would actually have to use their brains for once when submitting them!

One of the big problems with this is that some people will harass others into rating all their work VH and also end up with revenge rating

Would be nice if it did work though, but sadly human nature and all that...

Such a fuss over what appears to be a moot issue. If the opinion is written with a degree of quality and people enjoy reading it then who is to decide whether it should or shouldn't attract a payment? Members have the right whether they choose to read it or not. It's bit like buying The Times or The Sun - both have hugely different types of content and the purchaser makes the choice whether to buy one, the other or none at all.

An opinion about top 5 pets may contain more interesting content that a badly written, one-para job about the latest Superman movie. Ultimately, it's not the category but more the quality of the submission that's the issue IMHO.

p.s. maybe top 5 jokes is taking the p*ss, though...

We had the ultimate low point from one of the regular five line writers yesterday. The topic was top five animal and after 4 choices with a one line description the fifth selection was "can't think of a forth, so I will probably have a second dog" (dog had been choice no 1). Not really that interesting as a discussion point.

Bit of news people. There will be no more top ten style product suggestions being accepted by dooyoo. In fact there will be very little added to SC at all unless dooyoo deem it VERY worthy of addition.

thats a start, now if they thin out the silly subjects it will be getting back on track.

dididave wrote:

Bit of news people. There will be no more top ten style product suggestions being accepted by dooyoo. In fact there will be very little added to SC at all unless dooyoo deem it VERY worthy of addition.

THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!! I now bow in your presence

kelr101 wrote:

dididave wrote:

Bit of news people. There will be no more top ten style product suggestions being accepted by dooyoo. In fact there will be very little added to SC at all unless dooyoo deem it VERY worthy of addition.

THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!! I now bow in your presence

Nowt to do with me mate, I am just the messenger.

Well in this case the messenger can have a hug and not be shot :-))

The Royal Mail don't get those sort of perks!

Dave roolz, man