OK, if anyone is interested in my research, I just checked the five most recent writing workshop threads, and there is only one yellow reviewer in three of the five, everyone else is just a good old regular Joe. Oh, and the one yellow reviewer is the same person in all three of those threads.
So far the Reviewer group has been experimental and run manually by Wrey. Considering that Wrey is a very active moderator in general I find it pretty obvious that he can't check that everyone meets the criteria at all times (so maybe another reviewer could moderate the reviewer group instead?). When I was a part of the reviewer group (which I had to leave because I didn't have the time) most reviewers kept to the quota and in case someone missed out a week they made up for it the next one, though now that things have settled down a little the reviewers might not be as active as they thought they would be... A new and, to some extent, automatic system for reviewers with things like priority queues (that prioritises Workshop posts with few reviews) is in the works and should make this "Reviewers doesn't review, but keeps their badges" problem go away since the system automatically sees that reviewer X doesn't meet the criteria to keep his status. So yes, the Reviewer Group might be a bit broken at the moment but changes are on the way and should hopefully put things to order. (Disclaimer: The reviewer system is not completely developed yet, so what I've said might come to change, though I do believe the final version will be similar to my short explanation, but more advanced.)
This would be quite handy, I suppose. Being in that user group allows access to the Reviewer Room, so if one ends up removed from the group due to lack of activity, they'd then have to have their status reinstated via a mod or Daniel. But I don't personally think this is necessary as I'm not bothered by Reviewers who are on a hiatus. Sure, it's nice if people remember to let others know if they haven't the time after all (I've noticed many have done so), so theoretically we could remove them from the user group, but sometimes it's difficult to say when you can commit yourself to something again in advance, so you wouldn't want to bounce people back and forth between user groups (not sure how realistic a scenario this would be). Also, there aren't any other perks provided by the forum except the access to the private sub-forum. And the badge, I guess... Not sure if there'd also be the possibility of awarding active reviewers the badge? Based on the amount of reviews in the workshop? I mean users like @jannert and @123456789 who crit a lot. If the user wants it, that is. As for people saying they don't review/crit because they can't. Everyone can say something about another writer's work. Often any and all feedback is welcome, so don't be shy, give it your best shot. I daresay, if you can write, you can assess other's writing too. I bet pretty much every aspiring writer does that whenever they read a book, so why not give their opinion to other newbies, too? That is, if they want to crit but feel like they can't. There is no obligation unless you are planning to post something of your own to the workshop. I wonder if people feel like the reason they aren't offering critiques is that they think a critique has to be super comprehensive? Sure, we have our Standards of Critique that are important for the two crits one has to do if they want to post their own work for critique, but common sense dictates that it's not the end of the world if the feedback is merely the first impression or if only a part of the excerpt is critiqued. If you're wearing the Reviewer badge, it's a bit different, I know, but for regular janes and joes. Just some thoughts.
Mea culpa. I signed up for the program with the best of intentions, but all too often, the things we have to do jump up and get in the way of the things we want to do. I still hope to participate when things settle down a little. In the meantime, I'll make every effort to slip in a critique or two.
@Selbbin - in the light of morning, I must admit that my most recent post in this thread is rather cringeworthy. The points could have been made sans nastiness. Please accept my apologies.
No worries Ed. We all do that from time to time, especially me. (edit: Is 'no worries' too much of an Australian slang thing to use here?)
I somehow missed the whole Reviewer banner/ "official" reviewer thing. I saw people had banners but have no idea what it meant. I don't know -- I think some sort of badge would be more useful if somehow a reviewer got points or feedback, not necessarily just from the authors but other people who thought that a reviewer's comments were particularly helpful/useful/instructive. Just doing a lot of reviews doesn't necessarily mean they are good reviews. I don't review here as much as I might, because I do so much reviewing elsewhere. I'm on another site that runs a short story contest, and when you enter, you are expected to review the other stories and then to vote on which stories you think were best. And I'm in a real life critique group and we've started reviewing each other's novels as well as short stories and excerpts, and have started meeting twice a month instead of once, so I'm often overwhelmed with other reviewing requirements, and don't really need more here -- or I know that I should be reviewing these other pieces that have an actual deadline. I usually review if something really strikes me, or I find myself with extra time. But if something needed a review because it was being ignored, I'd be happy to give it a look. I'd just need some kind of heads up that it existed and was in need of some attention.
I critique basically what I want or when I have the time and if someone asks for help in a pm I'm generally there to help out. Some recent stuff up for critique in the workshop I avoided because I clashed with the writer in a pm and thought if I critiqued his stuff, I'd just be opening a can of worms. I think sometimes for me is not knowing when something new is up - I mainly stay on the what's new thread and a lot of times stories can get bumped. If someone reviews one of my stories that's a year old it's on the thread but it's not new. I'd almost like to start a thread and keep it on the what's new page - entitled What's New in the Workshop allowing writers to 'upsell' their story for critique. That way we don't have to click on the individual workshop sections and it gives writers practice on succinctly writing a description of there work.
I'm also curious how it works to get credit for private reviews, conducted through private messages or emails. I've done that several times, but didn't need "credit" for it.
Just so everyone's on the same page, there is a reviewer accounting thread in the Reviewer subforum where everyone keeps track of his/her critiques. This includes critiques in the Workshop as well as critiques done via PMs, email, etc. We also try to let each other know if we're busy and have to take a few weeks off. Finally, several Reviewers have "working threads" where they work on their critiques bit by bit before posting the final critique in the appropriate thread. So the reason some Reviewers take longer to critique or don't critique as often is partly because they put a lot of thought and effort into their work.
I think I'll chime in here. I must own up to being a "Reviewer" who has, indeed, been slacking. I joined the Reviewers, in addition to pushing to get it started again, because I believe it is a valuable way to garner a little more activity in the Workshop. I still do and must apologize for not keeping my end of the bargain. I have to agree, or at least commiserate with the concerns that have been raised (granted, I haven't read many of the posts). If we are wearing the banner, it should signify our commitment because we're volunteering to be a part of that team, not just to do reviews. 1 - 2 per week per reviewer should me a good minimum, as it keeps the individual workload bearable and sets a clear understanding to Reviewing Team members. That said, I completely understand being busy and suddenly falling shot of the mark. We started the Reviewers in Summer, and I was out of school and only waiting for a job. My sister got hired recently, and I had to take on more responsibility with caring for my youngest sister, taking care of the house, and driving people around. Then I got hired, myself, and oddly, certain other responsibilities didn't go away. I guess that's a part of life. In all this turbulence I haven't had time to do any of the reading or writing I had planned let alone critique. As soon as I would start one, I'd get called away to do something. All in all, I think that those who wear the banner should be aware of their commitment. However, those who post work must understand that we are volunteers. There is talk of paid reviewing and beta reading services in development but we're still ironing that out. More importantly, there's talk of an automated system for upgrading and/or downgrading Reviewers as well as a way to notify reviewers of posts that need critiques. I can't say much more than that, but I know Daniel has been busier than a bee trying to get some new systems working to implement. As has been mentioned, the Reviewing Team is still in the experimental period. Apparently it had been tried before, but there was no one to maintain it. Now we are trying to build a solid foundation to make it something truly valuable and durable. Though I have not been as active, I've been keeping a distant eye on forum activity. I've noticed that Reviewer critiques seem o be a little down from the time we started. However, this is not something that concerns me yet because we are grinding things out behind the curtains. The biggest impediment is that reviewers are required to give crit. of a certain caliber, and it can take some people more time to get that out.
I also noticed a bit of discussion about possibly getting feedback or something from writers to help the reviewers get better. I believe this is a good idea and one that is in the works. It's been passed along to Daniel and the Development Team that you guys are having this discussion, so maybe we'll be able to bring you guys into the fold to a degree.
I haven't written a review yet, mostly because I'm a fairly new member. I do understand how important it is that writers receive criticism, and I do intend to deliver on my reviewer title. I just haven't really been near a keyboard much as of late
Currently, I have to believe I write terribly because in all of my threads there are a select few people giving critiques, not a whole lot of variety. Nonetheless, I don't think stripping reviewers of their badges would really be the best way to go about it. Perhaps a technique could be devised to draw attention toward threads that are being neglected--it doesn't have to be threads with a few reviews, but even threads with unsubstantial reviews (that in itself is subjective, but it's still something of a judgement call a reviewer can make).
I thought there was a system in place anyway, i know the 2:1 for every piece you submit is enforced at the start but couldn't this just be extended and be enforced constantly? I guess the problem would come up when the regulars stop submitting pieces in the workshop, but it would be easier to encourage people to submit and get creative via contests and such than to encourage them to write reviews.
Just gotta put it out there, that I think paying reviewers is a very bad idea. The whole point here is that reviewing is primarily for the benefit of the reviewer, although I fully acknowledge that getting a review is really cool, and it's terrible if you post your work and only hear crickets --- there's no way to tell if it's just been overlooked, or whether it was so awful people read the first few sentences and gave up, or whether someone wants to say something bad but isn't sure whether they should, etc. (Although you can see the number of views.) But really, reviewers should be paid via karma.
To my knowledge it is constant? I mean, for every piece you submit, you must have two constructive critiques in your account. That's the rule, I think.
@Charisma You have multiple recent entries. Which one would you most prefer to have critiqued right now?
Also, show of hands if you ever felt deterred from critiquing simply because the font/format wasn't pretty?
xD I do, don't I? My point wasn't to hanker for critiques; if you feel like critiquing, have your pick of the litter. If not, that's just as well I just noticed that I was getting reviews from a handful of people, which is not bad, but it's always good to have a pleasant variety. Sometimes I get really short reviews ("Your opening was bad, the climax was good. Rewrite it.") which aren't useless, of course, but of course as someone who tends to write long critiques, I expect a few in my credit as well.
