- Thread Author
- #1
The Role Of The Reviewer
OK, I was wondering about the role of reviewers lately, the very many different opinions they all possess.
Now I've had my board reviewed by at least 6 different Promotion/Advertising boards.
From the best to the worst in reviews, I've got them all..a very good balance.
My Question is..is there a standard template/rules/guidelines set for forum boards and reviewers alike?
Is there a certain way a board should be? if there is..who sets the rules as to what a board should be?
I've spent a lot of time on various boards reading the reviews that the reviewers did for others,
and on every occasion, pretty much 80% of the time..the reviewers personal choices and board preferences is thrown in!
Should they do reviews only based on a standard template of how successful boards should be or should there own personal opinions and preferences come to play?
I've also seen on 3 different occasions where the person who made a review has there own board!!
But in light of this all the critics and negativeness they gave certain boards they reviewed, i found those EXACT same flaws in there OWN boards!
Surely if they knew that much..their own boards will be the BOMB!!
Should there be a way where reviewers need to be people who have actually ran their own boards for at least a year with success and they've done all the hard work on their boards themselves??
Ok am asking many questions..am just baffled!!
Now.. How does this work??
Please debate and discuss without flaming or pointing fingers..i only want to discuss and understand further..
With discussion comes knowledge!
OK, I was wondering about the role of reviewers lately, the very many different opinions they all possess.
Now I've had my board reviewed by at least 6 different Promotion/Advertising boards.
From the best to the worst in reviews, I've got them all..a very good balance.
My Question is..is there a standard template/rules/guidelines set for forum boards and reviewers alike?
Is there a certain way a board should be? if there is..who sets the rules as to what a board should be?
I've spent a lot of time on various boards reading the reviews that the reviewers did for others,
and on every occasion, pretty much 80% of the time..the reviewers personal choices and board preferences is thrown in!
Should they do reviews only based on a standard template of how successful boards should be or should there own personal opinions and preferences come to play?
I've also seen on 3 different occasions where the person who made a review has there own board!!
But in light of this all the critics and negativeness they gave certain boards they reviewed, i found those EXACT same flaws in there OWN boards!
Surely if they knew that much..their own boards will be the BOMB!!
Should there be a way where reviewers need to be people who have actually ran their own boards for at least a year with success and they've done all the hard work on their boards themselves??
Ok am asking many questions..am just baffled!!
Now.. How does this work??
Please debate and discuss without flaming or pointing fingers..i only want to discuss and understand further..
With discussion comes knowledge!