Crappy responses to reviews

[Niven42]

...I think maybe people want to see a little more supporting evidence for the highest possible grade. (A lot of frequent DGCR users think 5-star ratings are handed out far too easily.)...

Ahh, that is a good point. I'll certainly look at that a little more objectively. From what I have seen so far, I can't think of any real glaring reason why I wouldn't give a certain, high-calibre, well-maintained course high marks, but I understand now how some people would like rating to reflect things like challenge, and replay value, and why "5 stars" is not taken lightly.

Thanks for your insights!

 

[WillA]

A couple of thoughts here. Someone said to ignore amenities. But I care whether there are a lot of ticks and mosquitos, whether a course is a swamp after it rains and whether it's extremely windy. I care whether the course is well signed and easy to follow. I don't want to play a course that's a bug infested swamp with no signs and I don't care how cool the layout is I would consider such a course lousy in the extreme.

Others would disagree. But you mention those things because some people care.

 

[solomon.trenton]

Niven42, if I had to guess why you've gotten thumbs-down votes on your Lemon Lake review, it might be that you've given the course 5 stars but haven't really said why; what makes it better than 99% of other courses? You said that it's an "awesome course" and it's "well-maintained," but I think maybe people want to see a little more supporting evidence for the highest possible grade. (A lot of frequent DGCR users think 5-star ratings are handed out far too easily.)


By the way, about feedback: there is now a link that you can click to send a PM when you give a thumbs-down ("To send any notes/comments to the reviewer, click here"). I think that's a relatively new feature.

i havent given a 5 star rating to any course yet. Maple Hill will recieve one when i play it again and the debris is all cleared.

 

[craigg]

Just wanted to say: if someone takes the time to review a course, and has something helpful or insightful to share with the community, then you do everyone a disservice when you click the "no" on the "was this review helpful to you?" box. Lately, it seems that there are people who are just clicking that "no" out of spite, or just plain hate. Don't be a hater - you end up driving people away from what is possibly the coolest sport in the world.

If you have to be that critical, then stick to clubs and balls, and go play on a course where you have to wear a shirt with a collar.

-Just my 2 cents.

I got some unhelpful responses to my review of the Woodshed in Paw Paw when I first wrote it. And while I was enthusiastic about my love of the place, when I looked back at it, I realized I had really not justified what makes the course deserving of a 5 star rating. So I went back and changed it. It has not gotten another unhelpful since.

If you really find Lemon Lake to be one of the best of the best, help those of us who haven't had the pleasure to understand why you feel that way. The other courses you have reviewed (while also not lengthy) at some point give a suggestion of why you rated them as you did. Editing a review is always an option for the reviewer - unhelpful responses to a review should be a red flag for you to reconsider the information you have provided. Doesn't necessarily mean someone is reacting to your review out of spite. My $.02

 

[Mando]

not at all dude...not every course is a 5 star course...in fact, very, very few courses are 5 star courses...if someone does a great job on a review, and gives it a 5 star with some very legitimate reasons demonstrated in that review, i would find that helpful, although i might not agree that it's a 5 star course...where as, if someone rates a course as 5 star, even if it's Flip City or Renny or De La, and they give a 2 line reason for why it's 5 stars, i find that to be not helpful and i click thusly...basically, you can't have 10 courses under your belt and declare 3, 4, 5 of them to be 5 star...it's impossible...

But would you thusly click this as helpful or would the 5 stars prevent you from doing so ?
I'll bet that 90% of the trusted reviewers clicks on 5 star courses are unhelpful. I also think these unhelpful clicks are generated more by the rating, than the review.

 

[huskie2husker]

Don't lose sight of the intended purpose of the helpful/unhelpful votes. They are not there to punish reviewers, or even to pat them on the back. They weren't intended to figure out who the best reviewer on the site is. They are there to determine which reviews are the most helpful.

If I'm going to play a new course that has 10 reviews, I probably don't want to read all 10. But if 5 are only a couple lines long, 3 are longer but poorly written, 1 has inaccurate information, and just 1 is well written and paints a great picture of what I can expect, that is the one I want to read (if I am only going to take the time to read one). In theory, that one will have a lot of helpful votes, with few if any unhelpful, while the rest will have lower ratios of votes. That is why you can sort by helpful ratings, and I am pretty sure that is why Tim and sites like Amazon include that feature.

Just because a review is rated unhelpful doesn't make the review disappear, and it doesn't mean that that score will be dropped from the course average. I'm not saying that some people don't abuse the vote system, but keep in mind that most people who are voting probably aren't making personal attacks, they are just trying to assure that the cream rises to the top for the next person that looks at that course. As other people have said, take negative reviews as constructive criticism and see what you can improve in your reviews. Remember, the goal is to create something can be a valuable resource to other users of this site.

 

[Mando]

Don't lose sight of the intended purpose of the helpful/unhelpful votes. They are not there to punish reviewers, or even to pat them on the back. They weren't intended to figure out who the best reviewer on the site is. They are there to determine which reviews are the most helpful.

If I'm going to play a new course that has 10 reviews, I probably don't want to read all 10. But if 5 are only a couple lines long, 3 are longer but poorly written, 1 has inaccurate information, and just 1 is well written and paints a great picture of what I can expect, that is the one I want to read (if I am only going to take the time to read one). In theory, that one will have a lot of helpful votes, with few if any unhelpful, while the rest will have lower ratios of votes. That is why you can sort by helpful ratings, and I am pretty sure that is why Tim and sites like Amazon include that feature.

Just because a review is rated unhelpful doesn't make the review disappear, and it doesn't mean that that score will be dropped from the course average. I'm not saying that some people don't abuse the vote system, but keep in mind that most people who are voting probably aren't making personal attacks, they are just trying to assure that the cream rises to the top for the next person that looks at that course. As other people have said, take negative reviews as constructive criticism and see what you can improve in your reviews. Remember, the goal is to create something can be a valuable resource to other users of this site.

Good post, but unfortunately most people are not reviewing courses just to be helpful. Otherwise, there would not be 22 pages of courses with no reviews. The most helpful reviews are arguably the single reviews which regardless of their quality, are infinitely better than nothing.

 

[Adam Schneider]

Good post, but unfortunately most people are not reviewing courses just to be helpful.

If they're not doing it to be helpful, then I wish they would just stop posting altogether!

 

[magictenor1]

I agree too.

I usually just skip the vote when I don't think the review is helpful. Only when it is decidedly unhelpful, like they didn't even try, do I go ahead with the thumbs down. There has been a lot of talk about the real short reviews, but sometimes (not often, but sometimes) there will be a kernel of info in those 4 sentences that no one else had thought to mention. I'll give that person a thumbs up.

What gets me is when the reviewer has played a course once, about five years ago, and they give a blah review. I have to wonder if they even remember the course. This site didn't exist 5 years ago so they couldn't review it right away, but maybe that means they should let it go. The course could have changed dramatically in that time.

That's why I have played 40 and only reviewed 14. I don't feel I should review off of old impressions that might be no longer accurate. As I play courses I am reviewing them.

 

[A.Mutt]

I can understand the frustration. For one of my home courses I took the time to take all the current pictures as there were none and write a thought out review and all I have for it is an unhelpful. I wish they would have at least let me know why they voted that way.

 

[magictenor1]

I can understand the frustration. For one of my home courses I took the time to take all the current pictures as there were none and write a thought out review and all I have for it is an unhelpful. I wish they would have at least let me know why they voted that way.

I have some of those issues also. Many of my reviews have few or no votes and some have quite a few unhelpfuls. without feedback you can't know why. I still believe that many unhelpful votes are because the reader does not agree with your rating of comments. In another thread someone said that if the review does not reflect the quality of the course then it is not helpful.

 

[pokamitch]

I suspect that a high % of "not helpfuls" are coming from trusted reviewers...

I suspect that is the most ignorant statement on this subject

 

[pokamitch]

That's why I have played 40 and only reviewed 14. I don't feel I should review off of old impressions that might be no longer accurate. As I play courses I am reviewing them.

Great point. I made the mistake of reviewing a course I had played 2 yrs earlier. When I played it again, my reveiw was very poor. I didn't get any feedback before I cleaned it up. Now I only review or edit my review within a day of playing the course.

 

[Three Putt]

A couple of thoughts here. Someone said to ignore amenities. But I care whether there are a lot of ticks and mosquitos, whether a course is a swamp after it rains and whether it's extremely windy. I care whether the course is well signed and easy to follow. I don't want to play a course that's a bug infested swamp with no signs and I don't care how cool the layout is I would consider such a course lousy in the extreme.

Others would disagree. But you mention those things because some people care.

I try to break it down this way: could the course designer do anything about it or not. If the park is basically a swamp but that was the land he was offered, you can't really do anything about that. If the fairways criss-cross, he COULD have done something about that, so it's a clear cut Pro/Con.

But I look a second time at the things that I felt were out of his control and think "does this diminish my enjoyment of this course?" If the factor is something like there was no parking lot or rest rooms, I don't consider it a Pro/Con and put it in the Other Comments box. It's worth mentioning but it does not affect my rating. If the factor was that the course was in a swamp and my feet are soaked and I'm covered in mosquito bites, that diminishes my enjoyment of the course. Even though there isn't anything anyone can do about it, it is a Pro/Con and it effects my rating of the course.

Everyones threshold of what diminishes their enjoyment is different, so it remains subjective. If I had a weak bladder, rest rooms or lack thereof would be a Pro/Con. If I drove a restored '70 Chevelle SS 454 to the course, lack of parking lot would be a Pro/Con. So it's not perfect, but that is how I try to look at it.

 

[Three Putt]

That's why I have played 40 and only reviewed 14. I don't feel I should review off of old impressions that might be no longer accurate. As I play courses I am reviewing them.

Same here. When the site first went up I did a few reviews off memory. Then I realized my memory stinks.

Also, there are things like restrooms that I never look for. There are things like how easy is it to find the 1st tee that you forget if you have played the course 100 times. I find I do a better job if I go to the course and examine the course with writing a review in mind. If I just play the course and later try to write a review, it ends up being "it was a fun course" and that's about it.

 

[Mando]

Great point. I made the mistake of reviewing a course I had played 2 yrs earlier. When I played it again, my reveiw was very poor. I didn't get any feedback before I cleaned it up. Now I only review or edit my review within a day of playing the course.

Hey, take it easy on yourself. I can still remember past yesterday, but I'm prone to making ignorant statements. Bash me if you want, but cut yourself some slack.

 

[Adam Schneider]

I can understand the frustration. For one of my home courses I took the time to take all the current pictures as there were none and write a thought out review and all I have for it is an unhelpful. I wish they would have at least let me know why they voted that way.

It sure as hell looks like a helpful review to me; all of yours are.

 

[jaymon1]

A few thoughts -

I'll vote a review not helpful if it's really short and doesn't add anything beyond the "this course is awesome" or "this course stinks" sentiment. The less reviews like this the rest of us have to wade through the better. I've also voted not helpful on just a couple reviews of courses I know well that I think are way off base. And not that the ratings were too low, but rather too high. I'll just not vote if the review is anything more than short and pointless (in my view), and I'm quick to vote helpful if I think the review is good, whether it's a course I've played, or a course I'm hoping to play. I don't generally vote at all on the rare occassion I read a review that doesn't fall into one of these two categories.

While I personally am a fan of longer reviews, I try to keep mine from being too long simply because I want more people to read them. I fear that the longer the review the less people are going to work through the whole thing. Being succinct is a real skill in writing, though, and reviews that are both short and helpful are out there, but rare, IMHO. The balance of thorough, adding some information of value that isn't already out there, and still being succinct, that's a tough thing to achieve.

I'm alway a bit surprised and amused by how seriously some people take the thumbs down. This is all subjective and all opinion - even the best reviews are going to provoke disagreement from somewhere. Thumbs down are unavoidable and hey, at least people are reading.

People are quick to attribute thumbs down to "haters" or HBB, but hey, some reviews aren't so good too.

 

[BrotherDave]

A few thoughts -

I'll vote a review not helpful if it's really short and doesn't add anything beyond the "this course is awesome" or "this course stinks" sentiment. The less reviews like this the rest of us have to wade through the better. I've also voted not helpful on just a couple reviews of courses I know well that I think are way off base. And not that the ratings were too low, but rather too high. I'll just not vote if the review is anything more than short and pointless (in my view), and I'm quick to vote helpful if I think the review is good, whether it's a course I've played, or a course I'm hoping to play. I don't generally vote at all on the rare occassion I read a review that doesn't fall into one of these two categories.

While I personally am a fan of longer reviews, I try to keep mine from being too long simply because I want more people to read them. I fear that the longer the review the less people are going to work through the whole thing. Being succinct is a real skill in writing, though, and reviews that are both short and helpful are out there, but rare, IMHO. The balance of thorough, adding some information of value that isn't already out there, and still being succinct, that's a tough thing to achieve.

I'm alway a bit surprised and amused by how seriously some people take the thumbs down. This is all subjective and all opinion - even the best reviews are going to provoke disagreement from somewhere. Thumbs down are unavoidable and hey, at least people are reading.

People are quick to attribute thumbs down to "haters" or HBB, but hey, some reviews aren't so good too.

My sentiments as well. Only thing I can add is, how do you know if a review was helpful before you play the course? I don't like to vote on the helpful/unhelpful issue until I've played the course.

 

[A.Mutt]

It sure as hell looks like a helpful review to me; all of yours are.

thanks man I do appreciate it.