Reviewing can be painful. Especially for the writers being reviewed. From the reviewing side, editing is tedious work and takes time. All that effort and you end up a "devil's advocate". Writers take the blow from the other side. It's painful to get a lot of criticism, maybe even overwhelming? There is a way to make reviewing less painful, for both the writer and the reviewer. I don't think writers always want in depth critique. Here's how I see it, Reads: Some writers just want reads and general feedback on their story. They aren't ready to handle detailed critiques. They don't want their story torn into piece. I know we're encouraged to give in depth critique, but it isn't helpful if the writer isn't ready for it. Technical: When anything is posted it is implied that the writer at least wants a grammatical review. I often see reviewers giving technical reviews. They are trying to make the story more understandable (trying to fix "mixed sentences") or editing the grammar mistake (usually punctuation). It would be a great deal of help to grammatical reviewers if writers realized when they needed to use correct punctuation. It takes some effort, but it's really helpful. The reviewer can focus more on the story and if everything makes sense. *One of the problems I see is run on sentences. Some of them are actually an entire, huge clause. While others are separate clauses. It's not that hard to figure out if you have a full clause plus extra. The clause is the basic sentence. Technical editing shouldn't be offensive. It may present the writer with a lot to fix. Content: Content kind of covers a broad range of things. I would say it's similar to a "Read". When I do content review I look into the story and what the story is about. Does everything happen in a sensible way, is it understood, is something missing, unbelievable? Content can include style, flow and tone reviewing. It works on the artistic aspects of writing and, as such, is largely opinion. If something is clear it doesn't necessarily need to be any more perfected. If a sentence is awkward or distracting, that's somewhat up to opinion. Since I see a lot of people giving grammatical reviews, I usually go for the content. (I end up doing both, because I'm a coma fanatic). In a content review, I mentioned that one of the sentences was distracting to a writer. The scene was a man approaching a young woman, with perverted intent. In the midst of this, the writer mentioned sympathy for the Main Character's animal. I told her I found that distracting. She thought it was important to the story and made the decision not to change it. It was a matter of preference and opinion. I said no more about it. If you want to make reviews less painful for yourself you should mention what kind of reviews you're looking for. Do you just want a read? Do you want your grammar reviewed or do you want content reviewed? If you say what you want in a review it will help reviewers know what to look for. If you get reviews that are off topic, you don't have to pay attention to them. Because of how forums format writing it would also help readers and reviewers to have a word count. In general, it's nice to give a word count. I can kind of estimate how much time it will take to read and review something if I have an idea about the length. Do you think we could make this less painful?