
Originally Posted by
Jinn
Thank you all for the nice ideas. I think it's time for me to sum up all the suggestions.
1. Add reviews anonymously.
OR:
Allow only registered users to write reviews and vote, but anonymous users to vote only.
Although I was the one who pointed out the difficulties associated with the registration process, I must say that it did not occur to me that the registration process does have the beneficial effect of limiting each person to one review (which one can add to and revise as often as one wishes, as well as replying to others' reviews.) Human nature being what it is, I think some people would abuse that. How about this -- allow 'anonymous' reviews -- but only count the 'votes' of registered reviewers? That would prevent ballot-box stuffing, pro or con.
OR:
I can force (free) registration to read the stories. So everybody will be registered. I don't quite like that because I don't want to give readers an impression that this site is going to a pay-site direction.
I agree; achieving more and better reviews at the expense of over-all readership would be a self-defeating course.
2. Add FAQ.
It's a good idea to put some more FAQ entries to explain the anonymity of registration, how to write reviews, and how important it is to writers etc.
Couldn't hurt; although I'm not sure how many people read the FAQ. It might be good to couple that scheme with a one-line suggestion at the end of each chapter (or installment), similar to the one you already have, asking people to participate in the review process, adding that they can clink on a link (which takes them to the FAQ) which explains how easy (and anonymous) the process is.
3. Point system for review rewarding.
I am thinking that too. For every review, you get 1-5 point. For every, say, 50 points, you get 1 month free access. There is just one thing: what's the criteria for getting points? Is every review count as 1? Should a good / long review get more points than a short, one-word review?
Again, human nature being what it is, I think that would lead to a glut of not-very-well-thought-out reviews -- and, quite likely, a loss of revenue to the sight. And who is going to grade the reviews? How about a reviewer of the month? At the end of each month, you publish a "ballot" of the ten (twelve? fifteen?) reviewers with the most reviews for the preceding month, and give authors and reviewers say, three (five? seven?) days, to look over their reviews for the prior month and then vote for "reviewer of the month" (judging quantity as well as quality). The winner might get 30 days of free access to the pay areas as well as having his/her name displayed prominently on the Reviewers Page. This would take a little up-front programming (to set up the voting mechanism), but after that would be largely self-generating. You might even want to create a 'hall of fame' for past reviewers of the month, once you got this going, listing their 'names' somewhere on the reviewer page.
Sept 2004 Mr Z
Aug 2004 Ms Y
July 2004 Mr X
and so on. That would give the site a little history inasmuch as reviewers often have bursts of activity and periods where they are occupied with other things.
4. Associate each story to a thread in the forum.
So authors and readers would have a place to discuss a perticular story there.
With rare exceptions, I think the review page is adequate for that purpose; I don't think you'd want to dilute the comments on a story by having them in two places as a matter of course. (There's nothing wrong with starting a thread about a story if one is so inclined, of course).
What else did I miss?