DOOYOO GUIDES

What do members feel would be a good way to appoint guides for the site ? Myself I believe that a healthy turnover of guides (changing after perhaps a six month or year timescale) gives all members a better chance of becoming one, and also keeps the guide area fresh and enthusiastic. What are your views ?

..

Thingywhatsit wrote:

What do members feel would be a good way to appoint guides for the site ? Myself I believe that a healthy turnover of guides (changing after perhaps a six month or year timescale) gives all members a better chance of becoming one, and also keeps the guide area fresh and enthusiastic. What are your views ?

well, this was proposed elsewhere, however I am not sure I agree.

I feel that maybe the posts should be reviewed in that timescale but not neccesarily rotated.

Maybe it is not guides who chose guides, but having a question in the forum asking if people would resign if someone was appointed to my mind is heavily giving the impression that dooyoo would not upset the applecart by appointing someone IF it meant they would lose another, so indeed guides do have a say in the appointment of guides, whether anyone wants to admit to that or not. Why else would dooyoo put a question like this in the pole. All they need to know is whether that member is capable of rating correctly, has a history on the site of responsible behaviour towards other members, and experience of review sites and what is required in reviews. It should never be a question of whether a particular guide would resign if another is appointed because if any person would resign due to the appointing of a new guide, it shows personal bias. Sorry but that's the way I feel about it.

Rotation was not my suggestion. My suggestion was that instead of letting the same guides be guides all the time and get stale in their attitude towards the site, changing them and giving other responsible writers/raters on the site a chance to give their time voluntarily would help the site to become a fairer place, and that the bigger the cross section of people are involved, then the lesser the chance of bias.

Quote :

Being a member of the guide group is NOT compulsory and by the looks of it there are people who are not even on the group but are guides - so why you'd take that as a threat I don't know

It's not a theat to me. It just seems very silly. If you get a job, in real life, you don't expect the manager to ask all the staff if they can work with you or would they resign. What you do get is offered a job, and then you work as part of a team with the same goals. If you don't have the same goals as the rest of the team, someone will put you in your place and one would expect that. It's normal, but that question of whether a member would resign if another person was appointed is appalling. What does it matter ? If another Guide cannot be neutral enough to work with other guides then they should not be a guide in the first place.

I don;t think personal relationships should come into it. When they do, the system fails. Each guide has their own area and work within dooyoo guidelines so if each acts in their own area in a responsible manner, what does it matter if they don't like each other. Being adult enough to realise that sometimes you have to work with people you don't like comes into play doesn't it ?

I'm not sure that there are enough people on the site who actually want to be guides to be able to support the regular rotation of guides and given the quality of some of the reviews on the site there is pobably not enough subject knowledge either therefore you would be drawing from a very small talent pool.

I can see where you are coming from and yes, there are some very obscure areas, although in the more popular areas, up and coming writers that specialise are not being given a fair chance to do their share of guiding. There are some great music and film reviewers for example that are first rate reviewers and I believe new blood is always good for a site.

soundsexciting wrote:

Quote :

Myself I believe that a healthy turnover of guides (changing after perhaps a six month or year timescale) gives all members a better chance of becoming one, and also keeps the guide area fresh and enthusiastic.

Its not about everyone being given an equal chance of becoming one
Why should dooyoo replace a guide who after 6-12 months of 'learning the ropes' has just begun to get into his/her role only to have it snatched away from them.

I agree that there needs to be a system that ensures that guides are not becoming too complacent in their roles but to change them after 6-12 months is not the answer.

Though I'm not sure what the answer is

Personally, I don't know what would be wrong in rotating guides every 6 months, and letting those who want to apply via a fair and transparent process. Otherwise it's like dead man's shoes..! It's hardly a career after all, it's only a bit of a hobby....I don't think it takes even six months to learn the ropes of guiding; knowing the rules of opinion site membership is not that taxing after all. It won't be snatched away if you know at the outset that you do it for 6 months. Twelve months is a long time in these sites.

I totally agree Helen. That way new blood keeps the site alive and people don't get stuck in their ways of doing things. Times change and change is always a healthy thing.

The only problem with Guide rotation as I see it is there simply are not enough candidates. If there were then so many categories would not be empty or being covered by a Guide already in the group. Several Guides have had to take on two or three categories simply because enough people do not want to be Guides.

dididave wrote:

The only problem with Guide rotation as I see it is there simply are not enough candidates. If there were then so many categories would not be empty or being covered by a Guide already in the group. Several Guides have had to take on two or three categories simply because enough people do not want to be Guides.

But that's because they don't know who to write to, or because of the current system, where the rules are unclear to non-guides. How do members, who are not active in Tooyoo and therefore in the dooyoo community, actually know if there are vacancies, and who do you tell? I wouldn't have a clue...!

There are no obvious links, which is easily resolvable. If the site only needs 15 or so guides, then surely there are enough members, to be able to find new guides now and again? I've been there 4.5 years and until recently, when they wrote to me, as they locked a review, I had NEVER had any contact with anyone in dooyoo. So in my view, it's not accurate that there are too few members to cover the guiding posts, not if the vast majority of members haven't been asked.

If there really were no volunteers, and the incumbent guide wanted to stay put, then at least that's fairer than the current process, whatever the process is.


(And no, I am not writing this as I want to be a guide, as I don't!)

There is a page on dooyoo accessed from the member area on the left hand side giving details of what you need to be considered as a guide. There is a link to email dooyoo, but my gripe is that when I did, I had no response. I even tried several times via a guide and still had no response.

Thingywhatsit wrote:

I totally agree Helen. That way new blood keeps the site alive and people don't get stuck in their ways of doing things. Times change and change is always a healthy thing.

Change is only healthy if it moves the site in a positive direction and I'm not entirely clear what actual benefit can be gained from rotating guides.

No one has really said what benefit either to Dooyoo or the members a rotation system would achieve. For Dooyoo guides exist as a free administrative resource and to provide a point of contact to members to handle questions. I'm not really clear on what else Dooyoo want from guides, if it about improving the quality of reviews then Dooyoo could drive this through other means however that is not a concern for them.

atticusuk wrote:

Thingywhatsit wrote:

I totally agree Helen. That way new blood keeps the site alive and people don't get stuck in their ways of doing things. Times change and change is always a healthy thing.

Change is only healthy if it moves the site in a positive direction and I'm not entirely clear what actual benefit can be gained from rotating guides.

No one has really said what benefit either to Dooyoo or the members a rotation system would achieve. For Dooyoo guides exist as a free administrative resource and to provide a point of contact to members to handle questions. I'm not really clear on what else Dooyoo want from guides, if it about improving the quality of reviews then Dooyoo could drive this through other means however that is not a concern for them.

No one has said it would get worse either, how about it being fairer so if people want to get more involved they can do. Why should it be the same people all the time? Otherwise it can feel like an elite clique, and that's definitely not good. Plus people's activity on review sites inevitably wanes at times, over long periods. I remember one time when most of the so called guides (might have been the other site) were not even active at all

So, in summary, I think having a transparent system that was more open and gave more members the opportunity has a benefit on member morale, if they want to aim for Guiding. This has to be more positive than when compared to the current system, which effectively operates by dead man's shoes, and frankly the threads of the last few days do not make great reading of the current system, especially for those of us who didn't even know such a group existed until recently, (and as a member I don't think I have ever had interaction with a guide, other than as a fellow member)

As for the strategic role of Guides on Dooyoo's business, I doubt there really is one. In theory, they might encourage writers to develop their reviewing skills, but ordinary members can do that anyway. In fact I would argue that some attempts by members to provide constructive criticism DETRACT from Dooyoo's business , as it is invariably member and not fully consumer focused.

(As a consumer, I actually find both sites very weak, simply because they do not have enough volume of opinions and rates by members to make a purchasing decision. This might be recency in my thinking, but dooyoo and ciao dont compare to Tripadvisor.com for volume of hotel reviews, and likewise having bought a new HDTV thingie, they're not great for a lot of that either.)

So as to what they are aiming for, I am not sure, and they don't have any kind of mission statement on their website. So how can Guides steer that direction? They are simply people to refer to, if you have a little query, which can easily be a shared out responsibility

Quote :

Why should it be the same people all the time?

I think a wider spread would benefit the site. Surely dooyoo can judge by your onsite activity if you are fit to be a guide.

Quote :

So, in summary, I think having a transparent system that was more open and gave more members the opportunity has a benefit on member morale, if they want to aim for Guiding. This has to be more positive than when compared to the current system, which effectively operates by dead man's shoes, and frankly the threads of the last few days do not make great reading of the current system, especially for those of us who didn't even know such a group existed until recently, (and as a member I don't think I have ever had interaction with a guide, other than as a fellow member)

Dead mans shoes don't work in business either because people become complacent. I too believe that the member morale would be higher and have had contact with guides but have had no replies from some of them when the questions I posed were pertinent to their section. I was told "contact another guide" but the point is that if the present one for the category which poses my question is not available, then how can people who do not know that category answer my questions ?

Having read the debate raging on another message site I could see a great case for scrapping the system or actually changing things every six months which is the opposite to my previous held view.

I give up just keep paying me my 3p Dooyoo.

If members rated sensibly, then there would be no need for guides, but it takes time to learn how to rate and guides in each section are useful. I honestly believe that a changeover regularly is valuable because in my own life, I find that changes in students for example gives new impetus, and enthusiasm, and as long as all guides worked to dooyoo instructions then I don't see the hardship of being able to guide correctly.

Thingywhatsit wrote:

If members rated sensibly, then there would be no need for guides, but it takes time to learn how to rate and guides in each section are useful. I honestly believe that a changeover regularly is valuable because in my own life, I find that changes in students for example gives new impetus, and enthusiasm, and as long as all guides worked to dooyoo instructions then I don't see the hardship of being able to guide correctly.

Guides are not really there to sort out rating or other peoples ideas of how to rate but more to help people with and queeries they may have andalso to ensure that the subject matter they have posted is in the right category and is factually correct to the best of their knowledge.

I am (alegedly) the motors guide although Dooyoo have yet to confirm this and I jst check that the info is correct as this is the most important factor in my opinion when offering advice on cars.

If guides are there to answer queries, then to a certain extent the present Guides do not always answer and new enthusiastic ones that would answer members queries would be really useful.

Angus wrote:

Thingywhatsit wrote:

If members rated sensibly, then there would be no need for guides, but it takes time to learn how to rate and guides in each section are useful. I honestly believe that a changeover regularly is valuable because in my own life, I find that changes in students for example gives new impetus, and enthusiasm, and as long as all guides worked to dooyoo instructions then I don't see the hardship of being able to guide correctly.

Guides are not really there to sort out rating or other peoples ideas of how to rate but more to help people with and queeries they may have andalso to ensure that the subject matter they have posted is in the right category and is factually correct to the best of their knowledge.

I am (alegedly) the motors guide although Dooyoo have yet to confirm this and I jst check that the info is correct as this is the most important factor in my opinion when offering advice on cars.

Hiya Angus, quick hint get in touch with dooyoo!

sirg0508 wrote:

The way guides are chosen is effective and only recently caused a few problems however Anne has said she'll explain her decision... it's not guides who choose guides - it's Dooyoo.

D

Just want to add my 2 pence worth here. The system of asking guides to vote on whether or not they wanted someone to become a guide is relatively new, and certainly wasn't in place when either I or Erika became guides. And speaking personally (which is all I can do) seeing the confusion and bad feeling that's been caused by this new system (we are talking about the first 2 times it was used), I can't say it's working particularly well.