Things were a lot more...simple then. The review program was no where near as complicated, points weren't given for reviews or forum participation. A lot of the competition aspects of the site weren't in place yet so there was less stepping on toes or trying to one up another. It's hard to explain but the entire feel of the community was different - upbeat, positive, fun... less

Things were a lot more...simple then. The review program was no where near as complicated, points weren't given for reviews or forum participation. A lot of the competition aspects of the site weren't in place yet so there was less stepping on toes or trying to one up another. It's hard to explain but the entire feel of the community was different - upbeat, positive, fun... less

Things were a lot more...simple then. The review program was no where near as complicated, points weren't given for reviews or forum participation. A lot of the competition aspects of the site weren't in place yet so there was less stepping on toes or trying to one up another. It's hard to explain but the entire feel of the community was different - upbeat, positive, fun... less

Things were a lot more...simple then. The review program was no where near as complicated, points weren't given for reviews or forum participation. A lot of the competition aspects of the site weren't in place yet so there was less stepping on toes or trying to one up another. It's hard to explain but the entire feel of the community was different - upbeat, positive, fun... less

I believe RAW is excluded, provided the reviews are in-line with the rest of the reviews you've published. Say someone turned out 20 reviews in that week and they weren't anything like the reviews they would normally write, then that would be a red flag. Does that make sense? less

I believe RAW is excluded, provided the reviews are in-line with the rest of the reviews you've published. Say someone turned out 20 reviews in that week and they weren't anything like the reviews they would normally write, then that would be a red flag. Does that make sense? less

So after reading these posts by Fred:

"I’ve seen a lot of constructive ideas so far.
Here are a few challenges you might help me with.

1. Reviews
Main problems:

1.1. Low Quality.
A well written, informative review is a rarity. Most of the publications are poor and some even leave a feel of a review written without actual product testing, or even blatant plagiarism.
I would agree with Alan & Michele who suggested going back to basics when we were sending a toy to selected contributors. There were no points back then too. I think, some modifications of the description review program would do this. I am also considering letting in reviews only for the products that the contributor actually purchased or received from the company.

1.2. Excessive number of reviews.
We have products being reviewed hundreds of times. It is excessive and a total waste of your time and visitor’s. Even if many of these reviews are quality ones, this is spam. This situation was obviously created because of the points. This needs to be fixed.

1.3. Review templates.
Reviews, good ones, are as big as stories. Many of them run over 1,000 words. Unfortunately, the efforts the contributor made to create the piece does not pay off because customer does not like being presented with such massive chunk of information. I think a new simplified template, that can be written faster and display better on mobile platforms, is the way to go.

1.4 Editing.
Editing reviews is necessary but cumbersome. Even though we have a system in place, it requires management, support, and programming. I am considering bringing this function in-house and having an editor on staff. Again, the way it was done when we first started the program.
"

and

"I am considering (no decision has been made yet) to restore points to the honest contributors. Would you say this is a fair deal or not?

You will be asked to submit a reconsideration request. It is optional. If you chose not to participate, your points will remain as they are now.
We review the submission manually and decide whether your points will be restored or completely erased.

All your points (or converted Gift Cards) will be cancelled and removed if company finds that you accumulated 500 points or more by intentionally abusing the system. Abuse will include but not be limited to the following actions:

- publishing a large number of reviews in a short period of time; unless clear proof of the product ownership by the author is established;

- publishing plagiarized reviews, nonsensical reviews (reviews on the products like Gift Cards, Eden Bags, batteries, and other promotional item), vandalized reviews, reviews without substance: this will be deemed point farming;

- reaching regularly daily limits on secondary activities like "liking", "commenting", "rating", etc...; this will be deemed point farming;

- starting and participating in nonsensical forum discussions like "Let's count up to 5,000", etc...; making posts reported as spam; this will be deemed point farming;

- opening multiple accounts;

- if your account has been suspended, terminated, or otherwise noted for the same or similar activities; "

I have come up with some easy changes that address these issues:

Change #1: Delete the "EdenGames" section of the forums and do not relocate or start new threads that fit that section.

Change #2: Lock the option (administrative decision) to add reviews for products that have an excess number of reviews or do not need reviews.

Change #3: Do not give points for the "sharing" section of Eden Points program. You can still have promotional offers and stuff, just no point payout for doing any of those things.

Change #4: Have all reviews edited/vetted before point payout. If the editing is still done by members, have an option for editor members to alert an administrator for a review they feel does not meet the standards of a quality review and have the administrator make the final decision. This will eliminate any issues of people feeling they are personally editing other community members reviews too harshly. Easier would be just to have a paid staffer of yours handle review editing. less

EF is a business and should only give points that help them directly increase sales.

There should be points for good reviews only. Reviews are what makes EF a great site to purchase from. That is the main reason why I stayed with the site. I learned so much about the products from the reviews. Giving points for rating reviews should continue. The comments however are not really useful in making a choice to purchase the product. So there should not be points for comments on reviews.

To get points for a review a person should have a certain number of reviews rated as extremely helpful or have been through the mentor program to be eligible. That way they have to prove themselves and show some commitment to the site before EF gives them points.

I like your suggestions. Since EF has laid off most of the staff the suggestion that a paid editor oversee the reviews is good but seems unrealistic. If it was presented as part of the job when editors were chosen, I think editors would not have a problem refusing reviews that look fake or are crappy. There are a bunch of fake and/or crappy reviews out there right now, but that is more the fault of the sudden increase in points and no oversight of the process. It is my understanding that editors simply correct grammatical errors. I know there are fake reviews. I have asked specific questions about the products of the reviewer when I saw a potentially fake review. Not once did I get a single response to those questions. So I can only assume that the person who wrote the review does not have the product or is not invested enough in the EF community to respond.

Removing the EF Games section is not something I agree with. Some people just like to participate in little mindless games like the next word that comes to mind, etc. I do not believe there should be any points for forum posts, especially games. The forum is in line with FB or other social networking sites. It is a nice added extra but points seems unnecessary. Perhaps giving points for forum posts during the trial period to get people to try the forum but after that the points should stop. I do not post here or vote in the forums because of the points. If you are spending time in the forums, you are not shopping therefore not spending money. less