Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 [2]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Link reviews seem overly critical  (Read 10748 times)
NJ2X
Member

Posts: 35


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #15 on: October 02, 2011, 06:25:02 PM »

Human nature is such that there will always be people that behave badly.  The current annonymous rating system enables bad behavior (like a thoughtless "1" rating) and a certain amount of mischief.  Amazon.com provides a useful model for how the current eham rating system could be enhanced.

1) Only registered users can make ratings.
2) The rating giver is identified for each rating.
3) The population of users can rate the rater (was this review helpful to you?).  This is very powerful and democratic since it allows the population to identify the half-baked ratings and raters and elevate the thoughful and accurate ratings.

Food for thought.  73

By the way, I welcome eham ratings of my site NJ2X.COM.

Michael
NJ2X
« Last Edit: October 04, 2011, 03:33:12 PM by NJ2X » Logged

73,

Michael
NJ2X
W8JI
Member

Posts: 9304


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #16 on: October 03, 2011, 09:15:08 AM »

I don't know why anyone takes any "review", either for websites or products, as even 51% useful, factual, or valid. This is true with or without the name or callsign being connected to the review.

It's all just mostly emotional speculation or feeling, with or without identification.

The Website review instructs readers to judge on construction and not content. When I look, I judge on content alone. Some well-constructed web sites are technically a mile off target, and grossly misleading technically. Who cares if it looks good and is well constructed when the information, which is the primary function, is wrong?

Internet will always be a mess because it is pretty much all just opinions. Why take any of it so serious? The USA  is now what, around 15th to 25th in education?  Should we really take general public opinion so serious? :-)
Logged
N4NYY
Member

Posts: 4742




Ignore
« Reply #17 on: October 03, 2011, 10:36:29 AM »

Quote
In general, I find the ham community to be supportive and encouraging. The eham.net link ratings seem to be an exception. There are far more 1 ratings than I can really understand. For example, AE7Q is incredible resources that I find myself coming to over and over again, but it has six 1 ratings. The site has tons of features, and it does a good job making them accessible.

I think they can be useful, but not in all cases. Reviews with a small numbers are utterly useless. Reviews with a couple hundred reviews can be useful. Even then, you have to read the review and use discretion.

For example, the Icom 746 and 746pro. If not for the reviews, I would have never known about IC-151 or the backlight issues. Those were useful. However, there are rah-rah reviews that seem no more than advertisements. Then there are reviews that are well written with detail about pros, cons, etc.

Worst is, I have seen reviews of products that people gave zeros for, and they did not even own or have in their possession, and even admitted so in their reviews. And then there are pissing contests within a reviews, which end up with followup reviews.

I have even learned and gotten better at writing and reading reviews. There is one major flaw. You cannot edit a review, or change your mind a year later. You have to enter a new review.

So, my advice, is like a nice HF rig. Handle with care, and try to read the detailed reviews.
Logged
N2MG
Administrator

Posts: 122



« Reply #18 on: October 06, 2011, 07:43:56 AM »

Always interesting to see a year-old thread get revitalized!

The Website review instructs readers to judge on construction and not content.

Where does it say this Tom?

From the ratings page for a link ( of the form eham.net/links/rating/#### )
is the text: "Rate the site only for its content, navigation, ease-of-use, professionalism..."
Logged
W8JI
Member

Posts: 9304


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #19 on: October 06, 2011, 10:27:10 AM »

Always interesting to see a year-old thread get revitalized!

The Website review instructs readers to judge on construction and not content.

Where does it say this Tom?

From the ratings page for a link ( of the form eham.net/links/rating/#### )
is the text: "Rate the site only for its content, navigation, ease-of-use, professionalism..."

Ohh, so it is content. :-) I thought it excluded content.
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 [2]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!