Please reduce the required character amount of reviews

[wmtech]

Currently you force reviewers in XenForo's ressource manager to input at least 150 characters in a review.

We saw a massive drop in reviews since this is enforced. Also many reviewers actually use the missing characters to complain about the necessary length of the review(!). Some also simply add dashes (-----------------------------------) to fill the required space.

I myself wanted to review an add-on we bought a few days ago. I just wanted to rate 5 stars and say "Perfect add-on, well coded! Thank you!". Due to the error, I ended up not to write a review and also couldn't rate.

Please reduce the required characters for reviews to 50 characters or less. This would also help to see the real value of add-ons, because a lot more reviews would be written.

If you want to stay with 150 characters, please allow to rate an add-on even without a review.

Thank you for considering.

 

[Paul B]

It has already been reduced from 250 to 200 and now 150.

It won't be reduced further.

Any reviews which attempt to bypass the minimum character count will be removed.

 

[Jaxel]

I question this requirement as well.

Longer reviews tend to be more negative, because people with complaints have more to say. People who are happy have less to say. By requiring people to say at least 150 characters, you are restricting positive reviews and promoting a more negative slant on addons. A lot of positive reviews can be handled in less than 20 characters, and then they have to BS to rest; most people wont even bother with that.

I feel it also gives an unfair advantage to older addons which got the majority of their reviews before the 150 character requirement. Using your own Featured Threads addon as an example, you probably have a large number of sub-100 character reviews. Myself, who released a competing addon earlier in the month can never catch up to that because of the artificial restriction which makes it harder to post positive reviews.

 

[Jeremy]

The requirement was discussed long before it was implemented.

 

[Slavik]

The majority of the <150 letter reviews were of little to no use to anyone looking to use the addon. 10 people saying "good addon" is less useful than one person providing something more quality.

 

[Paul B]

Using your own Featured Threads addon as an example, you probably have a large number of sub-100 character reviews.

The same applies to your other add-ons which were released long before the minimum character count was introduced.

 

[Amaury]

It was already reduced twice, and people still aren't happy with it. Doesn't surprise me.

 

[Jaxel]

The same applies to your other add-ons which were released long before the minimum character count was introduced.

Yes, I agree. There are alternatives to my calendar system, and they should be rated higher than mine.

It was already reduced twice, and people still aren't happy with it. Doesn't surprise me.

Because its a bad requirement. Lowering it doesnt make it any less bad.

 

[Amaury]

Because its a bad requirement. Lowering it doesnt make it any less bad.

It weeds out spammy or short reviews that add nothing constructive. How is just saying "thanks!" saying anything about the add-on?

Besides, 250 characters wasn't that hard, 200 characters wasn't hard, so 150 characters is ridiculously and laughably easy.

 

[Mouth]

Reviews let others know that the add-on is well respected or useful. You don't need 150 characters to portray that, and often - to me - it's more about who's giving the review than the length or actual content. Content should be as long as it takes to convey the message, and support or review of add-ons can be done effectively in a lot less than 150 characters.

 

[whynot]

review of add-ons can be done effectively in a lot less than 150 characters.

Great addon, works flawlessly.
This addon is quite buggy, should repair it before releasing it to the public.

Less than 100 characters.

 

[TPerry]

Because its a bad requirement. Lowering it doesnt make it any less bad.

I think the entire point of the 150 character is so that if you think the add-on is "GREAT" or "FAR OUT'.. give a REASON why you think so.
Like "Great add-on. Author has gone beyond what most would with support for minor customizations and takes feedback into consideration for design changes. Well worth the money to purchase".
THAT gets a point across better to a prospective downloader better than
"This add-on is the ****z" or "Best one yet".

The whole point, IMHO, of a review is to REVIEW it - tell why you think it is or isn't good.

 

[TPerry]

Great addon, works flawlessly.
This addon is quite buggy, should repair it before releasing it to the public.

Less than 100 characters.

But if you are going to state it's buggy, why not give a short description of WHAT is buggy about it. What may be a bug for you, say an interaction with a particular add-on, may not be for another.

 

[whynot]

But if you are going to state it's buggy, why not give a short description of WHAT is buggy about it.

I might include it, there isn't a too low Max. character limit.

 

[Mouth]

But if you are going to state it's buggy, why not give a short description of WHAT is buggy about it. What may be a bug for you, say an interaction with a particular add-on, may not be for another.

Why not give a full description in the add-on discussion, so that it can be discussed and replied, confirmed, etc. Bug reports don't belong in reviews. Many add-on authors don't even want them in XF add-on discussion.

 

[FredC]

Ehh I only rate the really bad ones or the really good ones anymore everything in between just gets ignored. I have better things to do than spending a half an hour figuring out how to productively slam somebodies product in 150 characters or more. Same can be said about positive reviews. Trying to come up with a bunch of fluff nonsense filler words is kind of ridiculous IMO. But whatever like I said because of the change I now only rate those that really deserve good or bad ratings and truthfully I can barely be bothered to do that anymore.

 

[Mr. Goodie2Shoes]

Besides, 250 characters wasn't that hard, 200 characters wasn't hard, so 150 characters is ridiculously and laughably easy.

Easier said than done.

But if you are going to state it's buggy, why not give a short description of WHAT is buggy about it. What may be a bug for you, say an interaction with a particular add-on, may not be for another.

What if there's no bug, what if there's nothing to add for simple add-ons? I would rather discuss about the bug in the support forum/thread than rant about it in the reviews section.

Trying to come up with a bunch of fluff nonsense filler words is kind of ridiculous IMO.

This.

 

[Mike Edge]

I think 50 characters or more would be ideal. It would still stop the 10 "Great Add-on!" type comments, yet still not require a lot of fluff to review an add-on that's something simple.

 

[Allan]

Why impose 150 while less sufficient. The most annoying is the restriction, so it requires members to say more than they want or need.

 

[Amaury]

Why impose 150 while less sufficient. The most annoying is the restriction, so it requires members to say more than they want or need.

As stated, it weeds out spammy reviews or short "Thanks!" reviews that add nothing constructive of the sort.