Drop your new ideas into the Writing.Com Suggestion Box! |
Greets, Unfortunately, character length has no bearing on the quality of a review, as denoted by the number of ways people can say nothing in 250 characters, so true for 500, 1,000 or even 2,500 characters. Automation can only do so much. On the other hand, requiring longer review lengths is likely to eliminate potentially legitimate opinions from members who are readers more than writers and struggle to share their opinion... but at least you know someone likes or dislikes it. Past the automated character count, it is up to you as the author to review the individual reviews you receive and send a GP amount appropriate to how useful you found the review to be. The automated system can not judge a review, only you can. You may find better results offering a lower auto-reward amount and offer to send reviewers additional GPs based on the helpfulness of the review. But lowering the amount will lead to less reviews overall. So, keeping in mind that 2,000 GPs is equivalent to $0.20.... And, if you consider a professional editor gets say $30 to $40 per hour, you have to weigh and judge what you're willing to spend "per opinion". At $0.20 each, $30 to $40 gets you 150 to 200 opinions with auto-rewards on WDC. Some will be great, some good, some bad, some worthless. So, from there, you'll have to decide if enough are good enough to warrant the GP auto-reward you've set. The review that was all punctuation, however, is clearly in violation of our review policy. Review system cheating in that way is grounds for immediate account termination. We do rely on authors who receive these reviews to report them to us... you can use the harassment/review cheating submission form, or just forward me the review email. I skimmed your received reviews and couldn't find anything in there... it's possible he was already reported, then deleted and the review GPs already refunded to your account. (An email would have been sent by the system in that case and it would show in your GP logs.) Hope this helps, ~~SM
|
|||