| | | |
| tch7 |
Original Post: Oct 05 '04, 6:03 pm |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 112 Member since: Jan 19 '03
 in Hotels & Travel |
|
Multiple reviews for one destination?
Perhaps it has existed ever since I joined, but I just noticed that you can only post one review per destination. When & why did that come into effect? Is it permanent?
I would point out that the site documentation (http://www.epinions.com/help/faq/show_~faq_writing#010) still says that multiple reviews are allowed for one destination, but we all know how up-to-date the site documentation is.
For something like a hotel, it's logical to only allow one review, but for entire states, provinces, or even countries, it makes no sense to limit it to just one review, where you can clearly cover a wide variety of things. Why not cap it at something a little more reasonable, like 4 reviews - because you don't want just one persons name to dominate an entire listing, but you don't want to cram everything into one review.
For instance, I reviewed a fairly small area of British Columbia a few months back, and now I'd like to review a part that is a few hundred kilometers away and bears absolutely no similarities to any of what I reviewed. If I were to compile them all into one review, I'd probably end up with a ~6000 word review, which we all know is unattractive. I could also do what Smithwoodside has done to the general itineraries section for Australia, only for Canada, which is an equally bad idea in my opinion.
Occasionally just creating a new listing would suffice, but not always. Anyways, does anybody know why it changed? |
| | | |
| icicleie |
Posted: Oct 06 '04, 3:09 am (Updated: Oct 06 '04, 3:20 am) |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 107 Member since: May 08 '04
|
|
RE: Multiple reviews for one destination?
Quote: tch7 Perhaps it has existed ever since I joined, but I just noticed that you can only post one review per destination. When & why did that come into effect? Is it permanent?
I don't know when it came into play, but I do know it is permanent...After it came into play, members were not required to remove all reviews except one (on a particular destination) - but I understand that if they try to update, then that review will disappear - the system will not allow them to republish. Perhaps a longer-term member might be able to give you more information on this...
I understand your situation, but I certainly believe three or four reviews per person per destination would be too many. Imagine if four Top Reviewers submitted four reviews each to a single destination - very likely for popular European / American / other destinations...The reviews of non-TR's would very rarely ever be seen by non-members...I don't think this is fair, even if I believe (which I absoutely do) that TR's deserve prime placement. Perhaps two reviews per destination, but if you pushed me, I would support the situation as it is now - one review only. If you want to talk of specific sights - museums, theme parks etc - in detail, then a separate listing would be more appropriate...Then, you could include a brief summary / link in the main destination review...
I can't really comment on site documentation...If I'm mistaken here, I hope somebody will correct me.
|
| | | |
| tch7 |
Posted: Oct 06 '04, 3:49 pm |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 112 Member since: Jan 19 '03
in Hotels & Travel |
|
RE: Multiple reviews for one destination?
I do see the potential problem of top reviewers taking over certain listings, but I also see a problem with creating a whole bunch of new listings. The more complex the database becomes, the harder it is to find exactly what you are looking for (case in point, the Books category). I suppose it'll have to do though. What bothers me the most though is that now that I know this, I'll probably have to go and clean up and delete/repost things in new categories, and it's all because of that damned site documentation. |
| | | |
| cr01 |
Posted: Oct 06 '04, 3:49 pm |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 440 Member since: Apr 13 '01
in Hotels & Travel |
|
RE: Multiple reviews for one destination?
Hi Kenn & Ru,
I'm not sure I can add very much.
I know that the single review on most destination categories ruling has been around for a long time.
While I like the idea of responsible reviewers writing full reviews on a number of attractions within a subject covered by a category, unfortunately, there will be those tempted to write lots of truncated reviews.
I assume that this was one of the reasons for removing the multiple access, together with the off putting sight of seeing a "popular" (or someone playing with rating circles) having a whole heap of reviews at the top of the tree.
I'm really pleased that we have Di and Kate creating appropriate categories for us in Travel, to post what would have formally been second reviews in a category.
I suppose it allows visitors to Eeps to search on specific places and find an appropriate category, even if older reviews are still posted in a different place.... this will improve with time.
For a list of CL's and internet forms for requesting new categories for reviews, then take a look at http://home.earthlink.net/~hghotlist/clsap.html
Thanks for raising this subject - its interesting stuff, although its another of those with no easy answers or a consensus of opinion!
Not sure what anyone else thinks
Chris |
| | | |
| scmrak |
Posted: Oct 19 '04, 7:01 am |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 1364 Member since: Sep 27 '00
|
|
RE: Multiple reviews for one destination?
Quote: tch7 The more complex the database becomes, the harder it is to find exactly what you are looking for (case in point, the Books category). Almost all books can be found by searching on their ISBN, Kenn (type the ten-digit number, without hyphens, in the search box and hit the "Search" button).
Would that travel destinations were equally simple...
-30-
rex
|
| | | |
| scmrak |
Posted: Oct 19 '04, 7:26 am (Updated: Oct 19 '04, 8:00 am) |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 1364 Member since: Sep 27 '00
|
|
RE: Multiple reviews for one destination?
Quote: icicleie I understand your situation, but I certainly believe three or four reviews per person per destination would be too many. Well, here's the problem - take Texas, for instance (take it, please!). Only a few destinations - museums, theme parks, and other tourist sites - are listed, and most of them are in the four or five largest cities. But if you want to write a piece on Cadillac Ranch, the Confederate Air Force Museum, the San Marcos Outlet Mall, tubing the Guadalupe River, or any of a host of other day trips and the like, your submission would have to be lumped under "Texas." Sure, you can ask either Kate or Di to add a new topic - I've done that - but it usually means that she has to pervert the database structure in some way.
Because the Epinions search engine sucks (to put it bluntly) most hits on those opinions come from outside the site anyway, where (I like to think) people are looking for a specific topic instead of the general "texas." In fact, I found an opinion or two on Cadillac Ranch under the topic "Texas Panhandle" over at Google, plus several on the San Marcos Outlets under "Texas Hill Country" (a bit of a stretch, that last).
BTW, there are 118 travel opinions on Texas, of which only three were written by TRs - one by me and two by mrkstvns. Mark lives there and so did I up until early this year.
In point of fact, just recently a member submitted a review of a fairly insignificant factory/museum under the topic "United States: General Itineraries" - presumably because s/he'd already writtern his/her one review on the specific state (one must wonder if his/her next effort will be submitted under "North America: general itineraries"). If EPs wants to encourage members old and new to write travel opinions, then either the database needs radical expansion or the members should be allowed multiple reviews on general destinations again.
-30-
rex
|
| | | |
| jps246 |
Posted: Oct 19 '04, 8:48 am |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 849 Member since: Jan 25 '01
in Outdoor Gear, Sporting Goods |
|
RE: Multiple reviews for one destination?
Quote: scmrak In point of fact, just recently a member submitted a review of a fairly insignificant factory/museum under the topic "United States: General Itineraries" - presumably because s/he'd already writtern his/her one review on the specific state (one must wonder if his/her next effort will be submitted under "North America: general itineraries"). If EPs wants to encourage members old and new to write travel opinions, then either the database needs radical expansion or the members should be allowed multiple reviews on general destinations again.
Being the one that is being referred to here, I felt an explanation of my thinking was in order. Like I said in response to Rex's comment on my review, I've asked Di plenty of times to add categories to the Eps database when it hasn't been there before (The Mount Washington Auto Road and the Cog Railway for instance).
I’d also seen plenty of reviews of specific places in the general itineraries section of Eps, which while it’s not perfect – it does seem make sense to me at least. The ‘general itineraries’ section, at least in my head, is the catch-all for travel content that might not quite fit anywhere else.
The review in question, of the Yankee Candle headquarters (a store, factory and museum) fit along those lines I thought. My thinking on not putting in a request to add the location were:
1) The Yankee Candle Store/Museum is a destination, but I wasn’t sure it is something that deserves its own topic. Plus it is slightly more commercial than a typical travel desination – another reason I thought it would go better here (and I had seen a review of Woodbury Commons, an outdoor outlet mall in the general itineraries section so thought it would be the perfect place for Yankee Candle).
2) I looked through the US: General Itineraries section before posting and found plenty of reviews of individual places by hatted and non-hatted members – so I figured that would be a fine place to post the review.
I though that the “general itineraries” section for each geographic region was a good place to put a review like this that wasn’t in the database. If it’s that big of a deal - I’ll go and request that the topic be added.
Jeff |
| | | |
| jps246 |
Posted: Oct 19 '04, 9:01 am |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 849 Member since: Jan 25 '01
in Outdoor Gear, Sporting Goods |
|
RE: Multiple reviews for one destination?
Quote: scmrak (one must wonder if his/her next effort will be submitted under "North America: general itineraries
Members are allowed to make multiple postings in the general itineraries topics - so I wouldn't have to keep moving up to larger and larger geographic areas.
Jeff |
| | | |
| scmrak |
Posted: Oct 19 '04, 9:20 am (Updated: Oct 19 '04, 9:21 am) |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 1364 Member since: Sep 27 '00
|
|
RE: Multiple reviews for one destination?
Quote: jps246 I’d also seen plenty of reviews of specific places in the general itineraries section of Eps, which while it’s not perfect – it does seem make sense to me at least. The ‘general itineraries’ section, at least in my head, is the catch-all for travel content that might not quite fit anywhere else. Your argument that "there are plenty of reviews of specific places" is analogous to Arlo Guthrie's rationalization of his mega-littering in the talking blues story "Alice's Restaurant" (from www.arlo.net):
"...and off the side of the side road there was another fifteen foot cliff and at the bottom of the cliff there was another pile of garbage. And we decided that one big pile is better than two little piles, and rather than bring that one up we decided to throw our's [sic] down."
The rest of them are off-topic, too.
Jeff, if you really recommend to a visitor from Europe or Asia that he plan his entire itinerary for the only North American vacation he'll ever take around a visit to the Yankee Candle Factory, then I guess this does belong under "United States: general itineraries." So, do you then advise him to skip Seattle, the Bay Area, Yosemite, Bryce Canyon, the Grand Canyon, Rocky Mountain National Park, Chicago, South Padre Island, Mammoth Cave, the Empire State Building, or the Corn Palace to fit in this visit? me, I'd advise a foreign visitor to, say, try U S Train travel, visit the National Parks, follow historic Route 66, or visit all those strange little roadside attractions with the red, brown, and yellow billboards - that's "general" in my book.
-30-
rex
ps - I'm curious about why you didn't just stick this in Massachusetts? you haven't used up your review lot there yet, have you? |
| | | |
| jps246 |
Posted: Oct 19 '04, 9:30 am (Updated: Oct 19 '04, 9:44 am) |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 849 Member since: Jan 25 '01
in Outdoor Gear, Sporting Goods |
|
RE: Multiple reviews for one destination?
Quote: scmrak ps - I'm curious about why you didn't just stick this in Massachusetts? you haven't used up your review lot there yet, have you?
I'd been planning on writing a general Massachusetts review, so I've been trying to save that space.
I understand your reasoning on the general itineraries theme, though I interpret it slightly different. Though, I just wanted to say in my defense (especially as someone who wouldn't be dumping more trash off a cliff), that if all the other “single-point” destination reviews in the topic are off-topic, I didn’t see a single “off-topic” rating on any of them beforehand and thus it was only just one of the reasons I decided to post my review where I thought it would fit the best - it wasn't the only reason I put the review where it is.
I think you misunderstood me on the requests. I never said that the leads weren't adding my requests. Quite the reverse, of all the many travel destination requests I've made, all were added except the Las Vegas Monorail and that was because the leads can't add subways/monorails/transportation things to the database.
I'll make a SAP request and see what happens.
Jeff |
| | | |
| scmrak |
Posted: Oct 19 '04, 11:53 am |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 1364 Member since: Sep 27 '00
|
|
RE: Multiple reviews for one destination?
Quote: jps246 I think you misunderstood me on the requests. I never said that the leads weren't adding my requests. I did misunderstand that, so I took out the reference to lead performance after re-reading.
Earlier in this thread someone (icicleie, perhaps) noted that existing reviews that violate the "one-post-per-topic" rule are grandfathered in but members can't update either of them (much to their surprise, I suspect). I'll bet that many of the single-point "itineraries" you see out there are reposts of second reviews someone tried to update. That they haven't been rated OT is a reflection not of their worthiness, but of the lack of concept clarity on the part of many raters.
My reasoning on the "OT" is pretty simple - a single destination does not an itinerary make.
-30-
rex
|
| | | |
| tch7 |
Posted: Oct 19 '04, 5:53 pm (Updated: Oct 19 '04, 5:54 pm) |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 112 Member since: Jan 19 '03
in Hotels & Travel |
|
RE: Multiple reviews for one destination?
I don't see much of a connection between a candle place and a general itinerary for the United States. To me, a general itinerary in the US would include visiting multiple states/places - as Rex demonstrated. I'd want something I could plan a trip around, and I don't think I'll be taking a vacation just for a candle museum, but I might want to include it.
However, when a truly better listing does not exist, I'm not going to give an OT. I'd highly suggest that they request a new listing when it's something so specific - just like when you see a person put a hotel review under a listing for a city.
|
| | | |
| cr01 |
Posted: Oct 20 '04, 12:13 am (Updated: Oct 20 '04, 12:16 am) |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 440 Member since: Apr 13 '01
in Hotels & Travel |
|
RE: Multiple reviews for one destination?
Quote: tch7 However, when a truly better listing does not exist, I'm not going to give an OT. I'd highly suggest that they request a new listing when it's something so specific - just like when you see a person put a hotel review under a listing for a city.
I agree, Kenn. I think the issue may have been caused because Epinions changed the specification of their program over time.
By removing the ability to placed second reviews on categories, and enabling the functionality of CL's to create new categories, Epinions (intentionally or not) are encouraging the growth of specific categories for travel reviews.
But... I can also appreciate that reviewers can be reticent about asking the CL's to add categories for absolutely everything they want to review. I have also added garbage to the general travel itineraries categories from time to time.
Perhaps specific clarification about the purpose of the general travel itineraries needs to be reiterated.
Chris
|
| | | |
| jps246 |
Posted: Oct 20 '04, 4:33 am |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 849 Member since: Jan 25 '01
in Outdoor Gear, Sporting Goods |
|
RE: Multiple reviews for one destination?
Quote: cr01 But... I can also appreciate that reviewers can be reticent about asking the CL's to add categories for absolutely everything they want to review. I have also added garbage to the general travel itineraries categories from time to time.
I bit the bullet and asked Di to add another spot for me - so the Yankee Candle factory review in question is now in an officially sanctioned topic just for the Yankee Candle factory and the original in the 'general itineraries' has been deleted.
I totally understand where people are coming from - but as Chris said - I'm feeling a little guilty about all the requests I've made for new destinations in the Eps database and that was probably the biggest reason I didn't originally request a new topic.
Jeff
(I'll request from now on, I promise!)
|
| | | |
| scmrak |
Posted: Oct 20 '04, 6:41 am |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 1364 Member since: Sep 27 '00
|
|
RE: Multiple reviews for one destination?
Quote: jps246 I'm feeling a little guilty about all the requests I've made for new destinations in the Eps database and that was probably the biggest reason I didn't originally request a new topic. Speaking from experience - I add almost all of the new requests in Cars and Motorsports - it's not a big deal to add new items to the dB if the members are cooperative and provide the necessary information. I have one TR that requests about forty or fifty new items per year.
I imagine that neither Di nor Kate finds it a hardship to add new topics, Jeff, as long as the requestor actually writes a review (asking for a new topic and then not writing anything is a bit irritating). Since Travel has that nice little request site, it's very easy for them. The only time I've had any problem is in adding an unusual destination, and Kate and I hashed that out in a single email exchange
Quote: Chris By removing the ability to placed second reviews on categories, and enabling the functionality of CL's to create new categories, Epinions (intentionally or not) are encouraging the growth of specific categories for travel reviews. EPs seems to be under the impression that visitors to the site can find things with that suck-o! search engine, hence they're (IMHO) heavily invested in the proliferation of specific topics as opposed to the general. If Jeff places his YCF review under US general itineraries, it'll get found by people using google or another websearch engine, ditto if it's in MA general. Using EPs search techniques in either of those two sites, it'd show up in the rankings wherever the overall ratings happen to slot it (regardless of whether the visitor cares for scented candles). But if it's in its own category, then (in theory) it'll be found by the EPs/Pricetool/Shopping.com search engine in a specific search.
In other words, I think EPs wants to have as many specific topics as possible. The old State and Regional categories were created so members could write general information - ideas for daytrips, discussion of local custonms, and the like - but members kept stuffing in specific topics that weren't in the database. That (in my opinion) is why they decided to limit people to one opinion even in the general travel topics.
-30-
rex
|
| | | |
| scarlett_damen |
Posted: Feb 17 '05, 3:24 pm |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 8 Member since: Jan 05 '01
|
|
How do you request a new travel destination
So how exactly does one request a new travel destination to be added to the list of destinations? |
| | | |
| tch7 |
Posted: Feb 17 '05, 5:31 pm |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 112 Member since: Jan 19 '03
in Hotels & Travel |
|
RE: How do you request a new travel destination
Contacting a category lead for the respective category you intend to write in can usually get the product added to the database, provided no new brands or anything need to be added.
Hotels and Travel has three category leads, and links to their forms can be found linked from here:
http://home.earthlink.net/~hghotlist/epsap.html
At this exact moment, lyagushka is out of town and unable to add things, so go through either SurgRN911 or cr01.
- Kenn |
| | | |
| popsrocks |
Posted: Mar 17 '05, 6:27 am |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 2183 Member since: Aug 25 '02
in Gourmet, Restaurants |
|
RE: Multiple reviews for one destination?
Quote: scmrak
...Since Travel has that nice little request site, it's very easy for them...
...In other words, I think EPs wants to have as many specific topics as possible. The old State and Regional categories were created so members could write general information - ideas for daytrips, discussion of local custonms, and the like - but members kept stuffing in specific topics that weren't in the database. That (in my opinion) is why they decided to limit people to one opinion even in the general travel topics.
-30-
rex
rex you are right on the money in reference to "...that nice little request site..." that the CLs in travel made available on their profile pages. It's very inviting and easy to use. I wish all the CLs who wished to be involved in taking SAPs made it so easy, not that a simple Email, that some accept with the proper information, is difficult.
I agree with you that "...EPs wants to have as many specific topics as possible...". It's my thinking that it makes the search for our readers much easier and organized. We all seem to agree that the EPs search engine isn't the best and to have to plow through a General Itinerary to find an obscure destination would be much too tedious. Each new destination also gives more space for advertisers and, I believe, that's what this site is all about as far as the profit margin.
In reference to your quote,"...That (in my opinion) is why they decided to limit people to one opinion even in the general travel topics..." I believe that is part of it. I also feel that seeing so many of the same name at the top of the list, mostly Advisors, may have made those open itinerary's too exclusive to particular writers. If the reviews are top notch then I understand them being front and center but at the same time many other writers get pushed back that much more. With more particular destinations there is a bit more equity in the placement. The CLs and Advisors still take most top positions but others are more noticed. That, I feel, is good for the site
Phil
|
|
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.