Credit System for Reviewing Shorter Works

Note: Reposted from Major Works discussion thread.

What I notice as a recent YC joiner is that shorter works sometimes never get a serious review at all. I wonder if some type of credit for reviewing others' shorter works might not be implemented so that one could, having accumulated sufficient credits, ask for one's own shorter piece to be reviewed by one of the Major Works reviewers - I mean a shorter piece of say at least 3 minutes that is fully finished and properly scored and not one of the "Hi, guys, here's something I spent 5 minutes writing, what do you think?" efforts. Such a credit system might lead to more good reviewing by the general membership. A simple way to award such credits would be that the composer of a shorter piece decides if a comment/review was useful or not - so short comments of the "I liked it" or "I hated it" variety don't earn credits.

Perhaps a 5-star rating system: 'was this review helpful' ...

but it wouldn't be necessary on all posts - perhaps it'd be added by a moderator to appropriate comments/reviews ..

?? I dunno...might be more trouble than it's worth, and could lead to abuse - people giving bad ratings to people they simply don't like, and such.

I believe this sort of thing has been siggested quite a few times has it not?

I believe this sort of thing has been siggested quite a few times has it not?

Likely...never seems to pan out though.

I believe in the past it's always been dismissed as being too difficult to manage and too easy to abuse.

I believe in the past it's always been dismissed as being too difficult to manage and too easy to abuse.

What type of abuse is (was) seen to be the problem?

A simple system with just one credit or not given by the composer to the commenter/reviewer was what I was suggesting.

The system already tracks certain files uploaded ( sib, nwc, mus, pdf) so the presence of one or more of these could be made mandatory for a piece to be considered for the credit system.

But perhaps it is too difficult to implement. I wasn't aware it had been considered.

I certainly recall past talk of a rating for the piece itself, but not of a rating for reviews.

This sounds like a neat idea to me. Abuse could likely be prevented if the staff were exposed to a record of ratings handed out. Instead of a five star scale, I'm envisaging a simple "Was this review helpful to you?", or similar. In a sense, it would be similar to the forum software's built-in reputation system.

I'll bring it up with the rest of the staff.

Just another idea that might help get pieces reviewed.

In another forum I belonged to, if you reviewed a person's work and you had uploaded a work in the last two weeks or so, it was necessary for the person you reviewed to review your work (or one of the works, if you had posted more than one).

Just an idea...

Interesting... So on receiving a worthy review of your work, you become indebted to the person who reviewed it? Enforcing this on a strict basis strikes me as overly rigid, but it's certainly another idea worthy of consideration.

Yeah, it wasn't strictly enforced, but you were very much frowned upon if you didn't and if you did it too much you were suspended.

I think it only worked because we were a pretty small forum though...