| Author |
 Topic  |
|
BaftaBaby 
"Always entranced by cinema."
|
 Posted - 03/23/2008 : 12:17:21
|
First of all - thanks to whoever pushed my highest review over the 50 vote mark 
But it got me thinking. That review's been up for just 2 months short of my two years as a fwfrer. Fair enough.
MguyX's brilliantly witty and succint Kramer vs Kramer review is the highest single vote-getter at 238. I noticed he's been a fwfrer since 2002, so how long did it take to get that many votes [all well deserved, imho]?
The 2nd highest scorer - pudking's classic Icy Dead People - was penned in 2003.
I guess what I'm wondering is, were there more voting fwfrers back then, to accumulate so many votes for a review? Was there a different way of attracting votes, besides pimping them in the 4UM? Or has it taken years for those highest scoring reviews to get to the top?
Wotcha reckon, gang
|
|
|
randall
"I like to watch."
|
Posted - 03/23/2008 : 12:36:04
|
Getting a spot on the Top 100 list has definitely been a good career move for a review, b/c most newbies tend to click that button while they're exploring the site. The highest voted numbers probably reflect not only ardent users, but also one-day visitors.
[The list seems to be out of reach these days for the selfsame reason; it self-regenerates with each new newbie.] |
 |
|
|
ChocolateLady 
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 03/23/2008 : 13:24:20
|
Well, my highest voted review has 44 votes and was accepted on Feb 2, 2006 and I think it reached that sometime in late 2007. While it got me into the top 500 list, it took a good amount of pimping to get there (and I almost lost it after someone noticed it was the same as Tequila Mockingbird's review for Henry VIII And His Six Wives, but Tequila hasn't asked me to remove mine so I've left it up). I'd say pimping is the best way to get the numbers up, but I don't think we've had 44 really active members on the Fourum over the whole time I've been here, so I'm guessing it got many of those votes from casual visitors.
|
|
|
|
boydegg 
"Creator of Grammarman comic."
|
Posted - 03/23/2008 : 18:12:27
|
Brilliant, Chocolate Lady!
|
|
|
|
Yukon
"Co-editor of FWFR book"
|
Posted - 03/23/2008 : 22:55:38
|
I remember when I started 2 1/2 years ago, I'd usally get 20 votes for one or two of my reviews in the FYC. Today, a good review gets 13-14. In the last nine months, I think I've had one review get 20 votes in the FYC.
I also remember a FYC used to stretch over five to six pages, not two or three. There's simply fewer Fwiffer regulars. (My hunch is that it has to do with the slower approval process. A newbie might wait a day or a week to see if a review gets approved but likely gives up on the site after a month. Approval rates have gotten much better in the past few weeks so hopefully things will change.) |
|
|
|
w22dheartlivie
"Kitty Lover"
|
Posted - 03/24/2008 : 05:45:39
|
| At some point, I seem to recall reading on the fourum somewhere that back in the "olden" days, a person could vote on a given review as many times as desired, or something to that effect. If that is a correct memory, then if someone realllyyyy liked a review, the moon was the limit? Oh, and a HUGE HUGE HUGE thanks to everyone who actually did push my 2005 The Fog review on FYC this week up to the 20 vote mark. I was shocked, stunned and very pleased! |
|
|
|
Montgomery
"F**k!"
|
Posted - 03/24/2008 : 14:12:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by wildhartlivie
At some point, I seem to recall reading on the fourum somewhere that back in the "olden" days, a person could vote on a given review as many times as desired, or something to that effect. If that is a correct memory, then if someone realllyyyy liked a review, the moon was the limit? Oh, and a HUGE HUGE HUGE thanks to everyone who actually did push my 2005 The Fog review on FYC this week up to the 20 vote mark. I was shocked, stunned and very pleased!
I have been on fwfr for a long time. I think one year short of its inception. And I don't remember ever being able to vote more than once. Benj could say for sure.
When Benj was the only review approval person, you got his vote when he approved your review. Not always, but much more, sadly, than the MERPs seems to vote on a review when they approve it. 
I think the answer to more votes before is that there were less reviews on the site, therefore, less reviews to get the votes, therefore more votes per good review. Does that make sense? I realize that there are more fwfr-ers, so maybe you would argue that the percentage of votes (with the amount of voters) would go up, too. But, there are sooooooooooo many reviews now. I think even good reviews get less attention overall from the many fwfr-ers who are more busy adding to their lists of submissions than scouring the site to place votes.
And with so many new reviews, your reviews don't get prominently displayed on the top of the newly approved page. There are pages of them. So, a new review probably isn't even seen when it is first approved. Which, I think, was the best opportunity in the past for a review to gain votes and approval.
Just my opinion.
EM :)
|
Edited by - Montgomery on 03/24/2008 14:18:44 |
|
|
|
Montgomery
"F**k!"
|
Posted - 03/24/2008 : 14:22:56
|
By the way -- I have been reviewing since 2002 and my highest voted review has just 60 votes.
So, either I'm not a good reviewer or I'm just not as popular as some of the the other fwfr-ers who have more votes on their reviews.
And the first review I wrote -- in September of 2002, sits at 49 votes.
So, it has been up there forever for me, and still isn't over 50 votes.
Going off to feel sorry for myself now.
EM :) |
|
|
|
chazbo 
"Outta This Fuckin' Place"
|
Posted - 03/24/2008 : 15:18:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by Montgomery
By the way -- I have been reviewing since 2002 and my highest voted review has just 60 votes.
So, either I'm not a good reviewer or I'm just not as popular as some of the the other fwfr-ers who have more votes on their reviews.
Just 60! My top review doesn't come close. It has recently inched its way to the 40-vote plateau, but it seems content with a new vote every several months or so.
Surprisingly, Montgomery, it seems I had never really visited your top reviews page before. So I've contributed a few more votes to the cause. I've already voted on most on everyone else's top pages.
As for why there are fewer votes, I agree with what's been written: more reviews to look at, fewer FYCTH participants and votes. I'm thankful now if a new review on FYCTH gets 5 votes.
|
Edited by - chazbo on 03/24/2008 15:30:51 |
|
|
|
Montgomery
"F**k!"
|
Posted - 03/24/2008 : 15:46:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by chazbo
quote:
Originally posted by Montgomery
By the way -- I have been reviewing since 2002 and my highest voted review has just 60 votes.
So, either I'm not a good reviewer or I'm just not as popular as some of the the other fwfr-ers who have more votes on their reviews.
Just 60! My top review doesn't come close. It has recently inched its way to the 40-vote plateau, but it seems content with a new vote every several months or so.
Surprisingly, Montgomery, it seems I had never really visited your top reviews page before. So I've contributed a few more votes to the cause. I've already voted on most on everyone else's top pages.
As for why there are fewer votes, I agree with what's been written: more reviews to look at, fewer FYCTH participants and votes. I'm thankful now if a new review on FYCTH gets 5 votes.
You have been on fwfr for almost a year less time. Perhaps you will inch up to 60 votes for that review this year.
I will look at your top votes page, too.
Thanks for the votes.
EM :) |
|
|
|
aahaa, muahaha 
"Optimistic altruist, incurable romantic"
|
Posted - 03/24/2008 : 17:01:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by chazbo
quote:
Originally posted by Montgomery
By the way -- I have been reviewing since 2002 and my highest voted review has just 60 votes.
So, either I'm not a good reviewer or I'm just not as popular as some of the the other fwfr-ers who have more votes on their reviews.
Just 60! My top review doesn't come close. It has recently inched its way to the 40-vote plateau, but it seems content with a new vote every several months or so.
Surprisingly, Montgomery, it seems I had never really visited your top reviews page before. So I've contributed a few more votes to the cause. I've already voted on most on everyone else's top pages.
As for why there are fewer votes, I agree with what's been written: more reviews to look at, fewer FYCTH participants and votes. I'm thankful now if a new review on FYCTH gets 5 votes.
Ppl, please, I am developing a complex here. My top review does not even have 30 votes. |
|
|
|
chazbo
"Outta This Fuckin' Place"
|
Posted - 03/24/2008 : 17:53:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by aahaa, muahaha
Ppl, please, I am developing a complex here. My top review does not even have 30 votes.
Well, I couldn't help you with that top review, but I found a few others that I hadn't got before.
And thanks for the votes, too, EM. My top review now has 42 and counting...
|
|
|
|
thefoxboy
"Four your eyes only."
|
Posted - 03/24/2008 : 21:30:29
|
quote:
Originally posted by wildhartlivie
At some point, I seem to recall reading on the fourum somewhere that back in the "olden" days, a person could vote on a given review as many times as desired, or something to that effect. If that is a correct memory, then if someone realllyyyy liked a review, the moon was the limit?
As Monty as said, there has never been more than one vote per review from one user and you could only get one anonymous vote per review.
quote:
Originally posted by Yukon
I also remember a FYC used to stretch over five to six pages, not two or three. There's simply fewer Fwiffer regulars. (My hunch is that it has to do with the slower approval process. A newbie might wait a day or a week to see if a review gets approved but likely gives up on the site after a month. Approval rates have gotten much better in the past few weeks so hopefully things will change.)
Yes, there are less users in FYCTH theses days.
When I first started in early 2004, the waiting time for a review was around 4 months, so I don't know about the slower approval process theory. |
|
|
|
aahaa, muahaha
"Optimistic altruist, incurable romantic"
|
Posted - 03/25/2008 : 05:37:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by chazbo
quote:
Originally posted by aahaa, muahaha
Ppl, please, I am developing a complex here. My top review does not even have 30 votes.
Well, I couldn't help you with that top review, but I found a few others that I hadn't got before.
And thanks for the votes, too, EM. My top review now has 42 and counting...
Thanks a ton, Chazbo.
returned the favor to the best of my ability.... |
|
|
|
Montgomery
"F**k!"
|
Posted - 03/25/2008 : 13:44:50
|
aahaa, muahaha,
I voted on some of your top reviews, too. Every little bit helps.
But, you also have been on fwfr less time than I have been, so your totals aren't so bad, when you consider that.
EM :) |
|
|
|
ChocolateLady
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 03/25/2008 : 13:56:42
|
| Well, I don't know who did it, but someone just made sure that my top review stays in the top 500 list by giving it its 45 vote. Thanks, whoever you are and also a thanks to whoever voted on a bunch of my top reviews! |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Idle curiosity prompts question
