| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Rovark 
"Luck-pushing, rule-bending, chance-taking reviewer"
|
 Posted - 02/14/2014 : 20:39:16
|
I was never a great participant, but the sheer frequency was an issue for me. Once a week was fine, twice a week was more than I was willing to commit to and if you're not willing to view everyone else's efforts, then you shouldn't submit your own.
The other problem with the frequency was that people were submitting reviews that didn't really warrant consideration, just to get them off being zeros. But if there were 5 of these, I still felt obliged to throw 1 or 2 votes their way. Not the point.
All this, together with being generally less active on the site and forgetting how to do the whole hyperlink-to-isolated-reviews thing, just meant I stopped and never returned.
Anyway, back in for #1000, thanks to Salopian for the reminder  |
 |
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 02/15/2014 : 00:44:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rovark
people were submitting reviews that didn't really warrant consideration, just to get them off being zeros. But if there were 5 of these, I still felt obliged to throw 1 or 2 votes their way. Not the point.
Yeah, I've been guilty of that in my time, although I do only submit reviews that I think at least have something. But I think if someone thinks a review's no good, they shouldn't vote for it. That said, in the recent sparse times I've voted for anything that I can justify to myself in any way (e.g. it has a nice sound, or ignoring the fact that I know the idea has already been used before). |
|
|
|
Beanmimo 
"August review site"
|
Posted - 02/17/2014 : 00:55:59
|
FWFR was and will always remain my first Internet family.
As others have said life (in my case redundancy and subsequent self employment) got in the way. The structure of a 9-6 job helped with my involvement with the forums.
Facebook & Twitter, Apps etc. have definitely a role to play in the decrease of forms (though I now have them to thank for a large chunk of my income).
I keep promising to visit here more regularly and then life distracts me from keeping that promise.
Solution?
I agree with Benj that using social media to our advantage could be one way of attracting new members.
I am interested to hear what Bafta has against twitter. I find it more useful for driving traffic to any site than Facebook. |
Edited by - Beanmimo on 02/17/2014 00:56:59 |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 02/17/2014 : 01:52:34
|
Although my main job is teaching now, I used to be an editor/proofreader/&c. and still do it on the side sometimes. Over the last couple of years, I've edited the case-study entries for a few marketing competitions. Right now (i.e. including up to a minute ago and in another one), I'm doing a batch for a social-media competition.
They do use Facebook a lot, but Twitter is indeed very important and in some ways easier to generate traffic from, perhaps because it is more pared down and also because it is more about being open to the whole world (i.e. following people, not just being connected to friends). So with the right know-how I'm sure it could be exploited very productively.
That said, I've personally tried to get into it in lieu of Facebook and just can't. |
|
|
|
[matt] 
"Cinemattic."
|
Posted - 02/18/2014 : 13:15:12
|
Hi, all.
My decrease in reviewing is mainly down to the dwindling number of other reviewers that have been around to vote on them. My aim has always been votes and keeping a high average, so I've been less inclined to write lots of new ones when they aren't getting so many votes.
I share the opinion of demonic, Koli and others that the well of creativity can never really run dry. Of course it's harder now that so many reviews have been written and all the classic films have been done to death, but there will always be new films.
Having said that, it's natural that some people will gradually lose interest/motivation to continue. That's where getting new users comes in.
benj, you're right that a good way to go about this would be spreading the reviews into social media more. I also think the homepage could be better in getting across the nature of the site, and there are some usability issues with the new site which aren't helping. I'll talk about one thing at a time...
SOCIAL MEDIA
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
Anyway, my thinking is that perhaps instead of announcing FYCs here, we could have fwfr post the FYCs to Facebook upon a user opting to be in FYCTH that week. The reviews would then be vote-on-able from within FB for anyone logged into FB. Of course, I need to look into how to do this- I'm presuming it's possible given FB's general developer friendliness however.
How does that sound? Not only would it expand the reach of FYCTH but also keep the FB page fresh with new content and provide more routes back to fwfr.
I work as a creative/copywriter in advertising and have done some successful social campaigns on both Facebook and Twitter (@akacreatives). To see some examples, have a look at 'Poetiquette' and 'The IOU Team' on my portfolio site.
I think Twitter would be a much better platform on which to share reviews and recruit new users. Pun-based 'hashtag games' � where people tweet their own funny puns with a particular hashtag � are constantly becoming trending topics (meaning the currently most-tweeted hashtags/words on Twitter).
For example, #slashedbudgetfilms recently became the top conversation on Twitter, with thousands of users joining in.
The fwfr Twitter feed could be used to find and attract new reviewers by creating our own hashtags in this style. e.g. #GravityFourWordFilmReviews � we tweet some existing reviews for Gravity and invite people to write their own.
We could also watch out for film-based hashtag games that get started on Twitter and tweet at participants, inviting them to the site. e.g. 'That's very punny. You'd be great at writing Four Word Film Reviews. Join in at fwfr.com'
benj, if you'd like, I'd be happy to lend a hand to running these on the Twitter account.
Facebook, on the other hand, isn't particularly great for creating conversations which anyone can join in with, as posts only get shared to your friends. And although Facebook has now introduced hashtags, they're yet to be used in the same way as they are on Twitter. It feels to me that while Facebook is a good way to share updates on the site to those who have liked the fwfr page (and perhaps remind them of FYCTH rounds), it has less potential as a vehicle for attracting new users.
HOMEPAGE
This is the only thing I disagree with demonic on:
quote:
Originally posted by demonic
One other thing - please *don't* highlight the top voted reviews (unless we are talking about "of the week" not "all time"). Frankly, those very old reviews don't need any more pimping.
Whenever I've introduced people to fwfr, I've found that showing them the all-time top reviews is by far the best way to make them understand what it's all about and see the level of wit and humour on the site. Highlighting the most recent reviews on the homepage means the reviews new visitors are greeted with are quite hit and miss. The homepage should serve as a showcase of the greatest reviews, to hook people in.
When you're logged into your account, the homepage should certainly display the most recent reviews in their place, but I think it's vital to make the most of the top reviews. You're right that they don't need any pimping when it comes to votes, but it's basically impossible to get into the top 100 now anyway.
In terms of driving new users to the Fourum (in particular the FYCTH), it's probably a case of just making it more visible. There's only the link in the top nav bar, no message telling people why they should go there. And if they do click it, the FYCTH is relatively buried. I found out about it because demonic messaged me, inviting me to join in.
Solutions could be having a short introduction below the reviews on the homepage which explains what 'For Your Consideration' is about and that the FYCTH is a way to share your reviews and get them voted on. And perhaps the sidebar (below where it lists the current box office top 10) could show the most recently active threads?
USABILITY
quote:
Originally posted by Sludge
It could be worth experimenting with getting rid of the requirement to mouse over titles to read the longer ones, and have the titles fully visible. The novelty wore off after the first hundred times I had to do this. It sometimes has the effect (affect?) of having to have a joke explained to you, and also distracts from the FWFR itself as you have to re-register those words in their newly revealed context after mousing over.
I'm with Sludge on this. I'm sorry to be blunt, benj, but it's frustrating having to hover over the film titles. So much so that I still use the old site. The original review format made more sense; having the film title at the top so you read it before the review.
Aside from this, it means the site isn't compatible with tablets or phones since it's not possible to hover on these devices.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not completely slating the new design � I like how the new look of the reviews is cleaner, and I think the addition of a rosette for 'top review for this film' is a great idea ��but I think it could be improved.
Rather than just telling you what I think is wrong, I've spent a bit of time over the last couple of days looking at the design of the reviews and thinking about how I would tweak it to address the issues. I'll send you what I've done via a message so you can see what you think and decide if you want to share it with everyone else � after all, the site is your baby, I simply want to help shape it into an even better baby that's loved by even more people.
Sorry about the ridiculously long post. If I'd had time, I would've made it shorter. 
|
|
|
|
BaftaBaby 
"Always entranced by cinema."
|
Posted - 02/18/2014 : 15:46:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beanmimo
I am interested to hear what Bafta has against twitter. I find it more useful for driving traffic to any site than Facebook.
Only that I'm not on it!   I can hardly spare time for FB - even fwfr, but, like you, fwfr's my 1st online fam and I'll never part from you guys. Uh-oh ...
PS to [matt]
This is one of the BEST posts I've read on the 4UM. Thank you for such care and consideration. PPS - am MIGHTILY impressed with your and Dave's achievements. Oh, yes!
 |
Edited by - BaftaBaby on 02/18/2014 15:57:43 |
|
|
|
benj clews 
"...."
|
Posted - 02/18/2014 : 17:26:24
|
Very interesting read and some really nice ideas there Matt.
I think it's safe to say that the site has grown into such a sizable beast (both in terms of content and features) that it's quite difficult (perhaps impossible) for just one person to constantly keep the whole enterprise up with the current trends. So, yes- I'm very open to any ideas you may have to improve the site especially so given your clear expertise in this area. In other words, yes- please send me whatever thoughts you've had so far.
I'm also beginning talks with a design colleague about the possibility of streamlining the site design, in turn making it better adapted to mobile devices, so whatever you can suggest at this (very) early stage would be highly appreciated.
Finally, one closing word of hope on the subject of the site's fall in numbers. For the first couple of years of fwfr, there was hardly anyone but myself and friends and family posting reviews. Then almost overnight things took off just from a favourable review from Yahoo. If that can happen when there was only a couple of hundred reviews on the site and no social media to speak of, just think what we can achieve with the thousands of incredible reviews we have now... |
|
|
|
[matt]
"Cinemattic."
|
Posted - 02/19/2014 : 00:58:20
|
Thanks very much, BB.
benj, that's great to hear. I'll send you over something tomorrow. And I'm with you on the optimism front. I think this site is a work of genius and is just waiting to be discovered by new audiences.
|
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 02/19/2014 : 01:12:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
Finally, one closing word of hope on the subject of the site's fall in numbers. For the first couple of years of fwfr, there was hardly anyone but myself and friends and family posting reviews. Then almost overnight things took off just from a favourable review from Yahoo. If that can happen when there was only a couple of hundred reviews on the site and no social media to speak of, just think what we can achieve with the thousands of incredible reviews we have now...
The case study I've just finished is about the Hard and Fast campaign (starring Vinnie Jones and reliant on social media) promoting hands-only C.P.R. It has saved at least 39 lives, so reanimating one website does indeed seem well within the realms of possibility.
P.S. [matt], I well remember when you got your first job (the same one?) and now you sound exactly like all those case studies. However, I think you'll find you forgot to say leverage user-generated contact to gain earned media. |
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 02/19/2014 : 03:32:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by [matt]
HOMEPAGE
This is the only thing I disagree with demonic on:
quote:
Originally posted by demonic
One other thing - please *don't* highlight the top voted reviews (unless we are talking about "of the week" not "all time"). Frankly, those very old reviews don't need any more pimping.
Whenever I've introduced people to fwfr, I've found that showing them the all-time top reviews is by far the best way to make them understand what it's all about and see the level of wit and humour on the site.
Agreed. I don't need to see the Top 100 again, but someone who's never seen the site should have them rammed down their throat before they leave. Perhaps a feature on the front page that pops up a few randomly taken from the Top 500 or 1000 or perhaps even 2000? You'll snare potential new wordsmiths by bragging about our cleverness, not by showing them the latest pedestrian reviews by those who are predominantly quantity-focused. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
FYC in peril.
