crowns

I said a review with ten not usefuls. That has no value.

Under the assumption that there are only ten rates on the review and they're all NU, I would have to assume that these reviews are either in breach of the T&Cs and will be removed (so no-one gets paid), contain content that Dooyoo don't want on their site (racism, sexism, bigotry etc.) and will be removed from the site (so no-one gets paid) or is posted in the wrong category as some people rate NU on off-topic reviews, but it should be moved to a proper category where it will get re-rated appropriately.

I'm not saying it's not possible for a review that covers the proper topic to get 100% NUs, but I don't think I've ever seen one on the site.

I don't think it's that big an issue, to be perfectly honest.

I think there's a risk of "review snobbery" whereby an expected standard becomes seen as the norm and anything that doesn't conform is seen as unwelcome.

Sometimes, I quite like to read a very short, sharp review on something. Sometimes a longer, more detailed review is interesting. I don't really see the problem with either. If I read something that is complete twaddle, I tend to assume that the guide will deal with its removal and it therefore doesn't concern me.

Or is this actually a veiled debate on the fact that people's reviews aren't staying in the "Newest Reviews" list as long as they'd like?

Of course you do get the same reviews which appear from Ciao and were originally put on elsewhere and thus previous members who have rated it VH previously then rated it lower when it appears on Dooyoo.

Plenty of reasons why that might be the case.

plipplop wrote:

Or is this actually a veiled debate on the fact that people's reviews aren't staying in the "Newest Reviews" list as long as they'd like?

This does really annoy me actually LOL. You spend ages on a review, post it and within a few minutes you're off the front page to be replaced by non-member reviews and so on!

The time you get on the front page does make a difference as a lot of readers start there regardless of the writer.

Thing is the more reviews Dooyoo get the better it is for them, I still find if you read and rate other reviews you will get a decent amount of reads even if your own review goes off the front page quite early. At the moment there is not as much activity as in the summer holidays you always get new members who just post and rarely read, it is just one of the things that happens this time of year, on the plus side with Ciao being so pants at the moment there are a few new good writers coming across to try Dooyoo out.

It was one paragraph of nonesense, the person just tapping out crap to fill the 85 word minimum. It got 30p. Why do you get 3p for a not useful? Are we encouriging it now to keep the site busy..

If it was nonsense and off-topic then it will get removed from the site. One of the Guides should have reported it.

Keep your knickers on.

WendyBull wrote:

plipplop wrote:

Or is this actually a veiled debate on the fact that people's reviews aren't staying in the "Newest Reviews" list as long as they'd like?

This does really annoy me actually LOL. You spend ages on a review, post it and within a few minutes you're off the front page to be replaced by non-member reviews and so on!

The time you get on the front page does make a difference as a lot of readers start there regardless of the writer.

I dont understand the issue here??

Ziggy! wrote:

It was one paragraph of nonesense, the person just tapping out crap to fill the 85 word minimum. It got 30p. Why do you get 3p for a not useful? Are we encouriging it now to keep the site busy..

We are not encouraging anything, this is a message board however Dooyoo like to have a wide range of reviews on a wide range of products that will get hits on search engines for the site.

Yes,I noticed my review on the film Zero Hour,about school hsootings, got a macabre crown on the day after the school shootings in Columbia. Are we really that cynical? I know I am.

Phil? Is that you again?

Hello!

Ziggy! wrote:

Hello!

Hello

Oh joy. Phil's back.

Ciao's Favourite Member wrote:

Oh joy. Phil's back.

Well seeing you don't venture into the Current Affairs section!

It seems I'm likely to get off fairly easily then, rather than those who do post in there

Good decision Aaron. Last time I answered in something he was taking part of, he said something along the lines of that I'm just like him.

Somehow you don't strike me as the white trash type, Bernard. I suppose you both have English as a second language. Don't ask me what Phil's first is, though.

Ciao's Favourite Member wrote:

Somehow you don't strike me as the white trash type, Bernard. I suppose you both have English as a second language. Don't ask me what Phil's first is, though.

Isn't that racist?

I'm not offended...

Right - we are going WAY off topic....

Lets not, eh?

If there was a complete overhaul of the system, it could risk messing up dooyoo completely and then no one can write, just because someone got 10 NUs. When members who write NU reviews or SU reviews realise that you'll get more money for doing better (you'll get crowns for the excellent reviews and more people will read if you do better, whereas if you don't then people won't bother to read as you aren't putting effort into it and you won't get crowns.) they'll try to improve.

Yeah but you get some consumers who arent hell bent on getting VH ratings everywhere, so what about them - what if they get SH ratings all the time with no actual desire to improve? They shouldnt be removed.