| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| lemmycaution |
Posted - 20/06/2017 : 10:39:21
Se�n Says: Welcome to Summer.
 Put any five reviews you like in your F.Y.C. list.
 Do not use reviews from the previous round - you must change them every round.
 Post here to declare that you've done it. Sooner is better than later.
 Provide a spoiler warning in your post when appropriate.
 You must read the F.Y.C.s of all participants.
 The next round starts on Monday at noon or later, FWFR time. |
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| SixFourian |
Posted - 01/07/2017 : 22:03:37
quote:
Originally posted by demonic
I doubt very much if I'm discouraging others
You don't enter based on others not entering. It's logical to assume that others don't enter based on you not entering, as [matt] has essentially confirmed. That's your choice, but when one makes a choice one should think about whether it would be good or bad if everybody made the same one. |
| [matt] |
Posted - 30/06/2017 : 16:58:46
Just had a look at the Latest Reviews section and there have been quite a few others submitting reviews recently. We should try to convince them all to get involved. |
| [matt] |
Posted - 30/06/2017 : 16:50:15
I'm in the same boat as you, demonic.
I've always been focused on vote average rather than number of reviews, so the gradually dwindling number of entrants has made me less and less excited about entering and writing new ones, as I know it won't be possible to get them up to my personal standards.
A while back I was aiming for 7 votes per review, and if it didn't reach that after an FCYTH with 8 or 9 entrants, I'd consider deleting it. Nowadays getting 7 votes on a new review seems nigh-on impossible!
We obviously need new blood around here since too many of the old guard have lost interest. And perhaps to get new blood involved, the site layout needs a little bit of work* to draw new visitors in better and make the fourum (and this thread in particular) much more visible.
*With all due respect to benj, of course. This site is genius and I probably couldn't write one line of all the code he's written.
.
|
| demonic |
Posted - 28/06/2017 : 15:22:15
quote:
Originally posted by Europian
Well, don't you think that's a bit arbitrary in all honesty? In the good old days I would have been horrified if any entry only got five votes; now that is a top week. Couldn't you just have three or however many as an ultimate goal for each review, rather than needing to get them from one airing here? And if you put reviews through again, that's fine. That's what I do when I have run out of recently approved ones. You should also bear in mind that if everyone applied your policy no one would enter. By not doing so, you're discouraging others.
That's just the way I approach it. After a decade of submitting reviews on this forum it doesn't feel arbitrary to me. I'm not expecting anyone else to change the way they enter - but I doubt very much if I'm discouraging others if I'm just waiting for three other people to enter. It's a pretty sorry state of affairs that it has got so stretched to that point.
quote:
Sorry, but I'll keep on lurking if necessary.
Thanks. In all sincerity, though, I would prefer entrants to votes. Entrants are what keep these threads alive. (Also, a pet hate of mine: Why do people here always call voting without entering lurking? Lurking is reading without posting. If you post, you aren't lurking.)
[/quote]
I guess to be precise it's a shortening of lurk voting - taking part without entering the round. You have some peculiar pet hates.
While we're chatting - anyone have any idea what happened to Larry? He seems to be the most recent regular entrant who has now dropped off the radar. |
| SixFourian |
Posted - 28/06/2017 : 13:54:19
quote:
Originally posted by demonic
Rockfsh's entry confuses things somewhat as he entered a round that had passed the deadline.
Yes, the entry days for this thread have really slid backwards to a bizarre degree. That's why I've started the next thread rather than wait for lemmy to this time.
quote:
The lowest aim for any review I submit is 3 votes - if it doesn't get that I'd consider deleting it. It's pointless to me putting reviews forward knowing that they can't even reach that lowest personal marker. I'll just end up putting them all through FYCTH again, or deleting them.
Well, don't you think that's a bit arbitrary in all honesty? In the good old days I would have been horrified if any entry only got five votes; now that is a top week. Couldn't you just have three or however many as an ultimate goal for each review, rather than needing to get them from one airing here? And if you put reviews through again, that's fine. That's what I do when I have run out of recently approved ones. You should also bear in mind that if everyone applied your policy no one would enter. By not doing so, you're discouraging others.
quote:
Sorry, but I'll keep on lurking if necessary.
Thanks. In all sincerity, though, I would prefer entrants to votes. Entrants are what keep these threads alive. (Also, a pet hate of mine: Why do people here always call voting without entering lurking? Lurking is reading without posting. If you post, you aren't lurking.) |
| demonic |
Posted - 28/06/2017 : 09:59:19
quote:
Originally posted by Europian
quote:
Originally posted by demonic
Did some lurk voting - I will pass on any round with less than three entrants.
Thanks (and to the other person who did the same), but please do consider entering regardless: we are fewer than three because you didn't enter.
You know what I mean though - three not including myself. Rockfsh's entry confuses things somewhat as he entered a round that had passed the deadline.
The lowest aim for any review I submit is 3 votes - if it doesn't get that I'd consider deleting it. It's pointless to me putting reviews forward knowing that they can't even reach that lowest personal marker. I'll just end up putting them all through FYCTH again, or deleting them. Sorry, but I'll keep on lurking if necessary. |
| rockfsh |
Posted - 28/06/2017 : 09:53:45
yup |
| SixFourian |
Posted - 28/06/2017 : 08:28:30
quote:
Originally posted by [matt]
Lurked.
Thanks. |
| [matt] |
Posted - 28/06/2017 : 05:18:12
Lurked. Sorry, I've just been too busy lately.
|
| SixFourian |
Posted - 27/06/2017 : 15:34:00
Some extra votes since there were only three of us. |
| rockfsh |
Posted - 27/06/2017 : 11:15:57
Shimmer Lake - Crime in a small town told backwards
HOLDEN - Holden has an affair with an actor on his Paris trip
THE HAND OF FRANKLIN - Climate change opens up the Northwest Passage
THE LAST LAUGH - Humor and the Holocaust |
| lemmycaution |
Posted - 26/06/2017 : 21:24:23
quote:
Originally posted by Europian
quote:
Originally posted by lemmycaution
Let's give it a couple more rounds to see if we can get back on track.
I'll carry on whatever, even if I am the only entrant, in the hope of lurker votes but mainly just to keep it going. The content of the F.Y.C.T.H. is the crux of the site and it would be very silly for F.W.T.O. to continue and this not.
Agreed. |
| SixFourian |
Posted - 26/06/2017 : 08:59:24
quote:
Originally posted by lemmycaution
Let's give it a couple more rounds to see if we can get back on track.
I'll carry on whatever, even if I am the only entrant, in the hope of lurker votes but mainly just to keep it going. The content of the F.Y.C.T.H. is the crux of the site and it would be very silly for F.W.T.O. to continue and this not. |
| SixFourian |
Posted - 26/06/2017 : 08:56:19
quote:
Originally posted by demonic
Did some lurk voting - I will pass on any round with less than three entrants.
Thanks (and to the other person who did the same), but please do consider entering regardless: we are fewer than three because you didn't enter. |
| lemmycaution |
Posted - 26/06/2017 : 08:03:55
quote:
Originally posted by demonic
Did some lurk voting - I will pass on any round with less than three entrants.
Thanks for the lurker votes but things are not looking good for FYCTH. Without our small group of regulars participating each week we are doomed.
Let's give it a couple more rounds to see if we can get back on track. |
