Reviewing Reviewed

by michaelcahill

Review Reviewing Contest Winner

Reviewing is the key to all things Fanstory. Funds for posting are earned by reviewing. The impetus for posting is the anticipation of reviews. The unspoken agreement of reciprocal reviewing drives the machine that is our community. It seems simple enough, almost utopian in nature.

The framework is a ranking and rating system, "the game" as many of us like to call it. The writers are ranked in various categories, and the reviewers as well have a ranking based on the number of reviews written over a certain period. The writer's rankings begin anew the first of every year. The reviewing rankings are ongoing year after year.

Despite endless criticism, there's not a thing wrong with "the game" itself. It's a functional framework encouraging quantity and steady activity. There is NOTHING wrong with encouraging writers to write and reviewers to review ... is there?

The entire litany of problems stems from member abuse. There are members who resort to reviews offering nothing of value containing the minimum required words just to get credit for the review, collect the money, and advance in the rankings. Is that "the game's" fault? OR, is it the game player's? Shortchanging reviews to collect the reviewing stipend is rampant here. This is a fact.

So, in a mad quest to acquire funny money to post, reviewers short change the posts they review. THEN, they post their work. What do they expect in return I wonder? Yet, everyone is complaining and condemning the system.

                Six Stars (Exceptional: Simply Outstanding)
                Five Stars (Excellent: Enjoyable and no revisions needed)
                Four Stars (Good: Adjustments needed)
                Three Stars (Below average)
                Two Stars (Below Average: Needs lots of work)
                One Star (Poor: Major revision required)

The damn stars. Well ... nothing causes more grief and ill will here then these damn stars, true? Once upon a time, Fanstory was a fledgling site where authors congregated to critique each other's writing. It was a small site with mostly serious writers. They were very stingy with stars back then and very critical and helpful. It was the norm to receive an array of stars on a given piece, threes, fours ... maybe a five and RARELY a six. And it worked well as it was the norm, and everyone was treated the same and expectations were the same. Those days, however, are LONG GONE!

I can appreciate the desire of many to return to those days, and, frankly, I wouldn't mind operating under such a system myself. I DO appreciate helpful critique to improve my craft.

The reality is this, the site has expanded to include a vast diversity of both skill levels and seriousness.

With that in mind I offer this quote from a member who'll remain anonymous. I believe this is the conundrum concisely:

Everyone comes to the site with a whole different motivation, a whole different background, and a whole different set of reference points. A person steeped in hallmark card greetings is not going to be able to appreciate a poet steeped in Rimbaud. That would be like a kindergartener marking a PhD's work. It is not possible, and it is usually the kindergartener who rates down for ridiculous reasons.

Add to that the ambiguity of the instructions accompanying the stars, and you have a complex issue. Well, we've seen it in action daily. The biggest problem is the word "EXCELLENT"

There can be no larger deterrent to awarding five stars than the reluctance to bestow the rank of "Excellence" on work unworthy of being called excellent. Or, so might be the opinion of the reviewer.

But then the alternative is awarding four stars, very good, ADJUSTMENT NEEDED. Hmm ... but there is no adjustment needed, you, the reviewer, simply don't find the work to be EXCELLENT. But if it needs NO ADJUSTMENT, it is a five-star work. Yikes!

The CONSENSUS of the community, hundreds of us, is: works written to form without flaws or with only minor flaws are considered five-star pieces. Works needing major corrections are considered four-star pieces and in some cases three-star pieces. Those would be Sonnets with the wrong number of lines or out of meter, wrong syllable counts in pieces where such is a requirement, contest pieces not meeting contest parameters, etc. Some reviewers will revisit a piece if corrections are made, some will not ... a personal choice, not a requirement.

This is NOT, of course, a RULE. This is a consensus, a standard practice adopted by most of the membership. THUS, those who operate under a different method can EXPECT an appropriate reaction. When a four-star rating is a rarity for a work without flaws, it becomes a punitive rating with repercussions to the author greater than what they would be if a four-star were a common rating. A four-star rating will knock a piece off the front page, for instance, as it lowers the overall rating of the piece. Since NONE of the other pieces on the front page are likely to receive four-star ratings, one can see how one might be upsetting to be the UNLUCKY one.

That said, there ARE qualified reviewers who DO use the star system as originally intended and give FAIR and helpful reviews accordingly. I've received many a three and four-star review from THESE reviewers and, trust me, I was delighted to receive them. A review chock full of invaluable information and sage advice is priceless to a writer who is here to learn. That's different from a four-star review from an individual who "doesn't get it", or "doesn't like the horror genre", etc. ...

Arguments may commence HERE ... X

Some will say, "This isn't a nursery school. I'm not here to coddle people. I'm here to offer a fair opinion, and that's what I'm going to do." Fair enough, that is certainly anyone's right and not a violation of site policy in any way. However, not everyone is here to become a published writer. Not everyone here arrives with a full arsenal of skills. Some arrive as novices hoping to learn. Some are children. Some are mentally challenged. SOME are simply not talented but enjoy writing. Do you intend to rate THESE individuals with three and four-star reviews over and over and over and over again? You understand, of course, they will certainly leave the site discouraged and humiliated, probably to never write again. If such is your intent, you are entitled to it.

I truly don't understand why serious reviews cannot be reserved for serious authors and the rest can be left alone to their own devices. Must everyone meet YOUR criterion for membership?

Others will say, "Look, I'm just going to give everyone a five and a glowing review. I don't want the hassle of upsetting anyone." This is damn difficult to argue with to be candid. After all, this isn't life and death. We're here to ENJOY ourselves for the most part. Who wants to be attacked? I believe this is the general attitude here and it's brought about by those who try and force guidelines and criterion on everyone else. It's an understandable response. It's not a fair response though. It's cheating the authors out of a TRUE opinion, especially the authors who ARE seeking one. It's confusing to an author to be told over and over again how exceptional they are only to find out it was all BULLSHIT and they aren't exceptional after all. Most of us come here with SOME hope that we might have a special talent. To have that hope confirmed is NOT that easy for us to swallow. It wasn't for me.

It was not joyous to read my glowing review and then read the same glowing review given to an obviously sub-standard work by the very same person. AND then, read it again on several other ordinary pieces. This person who had me kind of believing I might be pretty good was telling EVERYBODY they were exceptional artists etc., etc., etc. They were not the only ones doing so. This is common practice here. It's a rotten thing to do.

I don't understand why a community of writers can't employ common sense and review accordingly.

Here are what I'd suggest for guidelines:

#1 Be consistent. Whatever you do, do so across the board. You have zero credibility and your reviews are worthless if you choose where to apply your principles.

#2 Skip work that you are unable to be objective about. Hey, if you LOVE "X" and the piece is bashing "X", perhaps you should skip. The reciprocal works as well. If you LOVE "Z" and the piece is extolling "Z", don't give glowing praise simply for that fact. There are endless reviews of terrible work simply because the reviewer LOVES the subject matter. It turns members AGAINST the subject matter and members leave the site because of this.

#3 There's NEVER a reason to be unkind or rude. It's interesting to note, the truly exceptional talents here happen to also be the most courteous and helpful members. Invariably, the nasty, rude, arrogant jackasses are ALSO untalented. (Yes, I did a scientific study)

#4 Give the writer what the writer wants, but don't lie. If the writer is serious and wants serious critique, by all means give it to them. If the writer is simply a hobbyist writing for fun and just wants to chat, either chat with them or walk on by. But there's no need to rip them to shreds, is there?

I believe if those four steps are followed, most of our problems would be solved. That covers copy and paste reviews, nothingness reviews, revenge reviews, vicious reviews, false reviews, and any other kind of false pretense reviews I can think of. Any of those would fall under one of those four categories I believe.

Here's reality. Lousy reviews are NOT against site policy. It is not against site policy to give a six to ANYTHING about a puppy. A reviewer can give you a three if they obviously don't like your CONTENT, if they don't say so. A reviewer can give you a one if they don't like YOU, if they don't say so. A reviewer can give you a lousy unfair review for no reason at all, it is NOT against site policy. There's nothing that can be done about any of it. These are things we have to live with. We can complain, but we can't do a thing about it except for trying to politely, within guidelines, police each other.

Reviewing is the most frustrating aspect of Fanstory. Yet, everything I know about writing, I learned here through reviews. Some of the best reviewers to be found anywhere are right here at Fanstory and their services are absolutely FREE.

Many of you don't truly know how to offer a good review. Reviewing can be learned. Seek out the Recognized Reviewers and the award-winning reviewers. These are among the few merit-based awards Fanstory offers. Read THEIR reviews and you'll discover what exceptional reviewing is all about.

This is a topic that consumes many of us in the day to day here. I'd like to offer something concise and to the point, but I'm not normally of that ilk to begin with. So, apologies for MEGA rambling.

I could go on ...

Write A Review