All of the links posted show a much more well-written and objective review than mine. I'll leave the review as if for a few days, then update it.

Given the debate over what a objective review should look like, I like the examples both of specific wording and the links.

One thing seems clear to me - in a "Descriptive" review, you are writing about the product and the Experience section is generally irrelevant, and probably best excluded. Thoughts here?

It also seems that I could have just as easily written a accurate and "objective" review without ever having used it.

"It also seems that I could have just as easily written a accurate and "objective" review without ever having used it."

That's a good point. I agree with the others that if we are supposed to be entirely objective, then they should not be called "reviews" and should not include star ratings. However, as I understand the description program rules, we CAN be subjective as long as we state that something is personal preference.

Well, all of the things that I would have commented on have been commented on already and all the points I would have made about the Description Review program in general have been made (and well!). I have no wish to be redundant, so I'll just sit back and bask in the glow of how awesome this entire thread is. I like the overall constructive energy of this thread. I really appreciate how DBD has stepped forward to find out, first-hand, what it's like try to write a descriptive review even though she personally chose not to apply to be part of it. It shows that she is trying to understand things from different perspectives, which is really great.

I'm so happy with all the positive energy we've shown in this thread--it sure beats drama! We're all learning and discussing and playing well together. This is the EF community that I love :]

Wow! I'm flattered that one of my reviews was suggested as a good example of objectiveness! I have doubted myself on them and the reassurance is wonderful!

Also, this is a great thread to help with the description review writing! Hopefully some questions can be answered here for everyone!

I personally tend to omit the "experience" section from my description reviews simply because I would not be very objective on them. I really don't see how my personal experience would be objective but, then on the other hand, I'm not sure why I should feel obligated to omit it because it is an included option for the description reviews so, why can't we give our personal experience. I'm just too torn on that one to be able to include anything there.....

As far as the star rating goes, I don't rate my description reviews on personal preference or on how well the toy worked "personally" for me. I do the rating on the quality of the toy and how well it performed as opposed to what it was advertised as doing per the packaging/manual.

I write my review body just as we have been told to write it, as if it were a tour of the toy. I try to be descriptive about the toy, it's functions, it's material and things such as that for description reviews. I focus more on those things rather than pointing out things that may be subjective such as color or size.

If I run into a problem or want to say something about its horrible color, it's really a matter of how it's written. If you hate the color, rather than saying, "The color sucks." You can say, "It is possible that some may not prefer the pea green color." Or if the vibrations are weak, instead of saying, "It's so weak that I couldn't get off." You could say, "The motor on this toy does not produce an intense vibration and might not be a good choice for those who require a stronger vibration." It's really just all about how it's written.

I hope this helps some! Once again, this is a great thread with some great pointers for everyone! =)

I was thinking about this thread when I woke up this morning. We came up with a version of "objective" that seems to be clinically dry and boring. All of the four links posted were descriptive reviews that I, personally, was not the least bit interested in reading. I really want some of the reviewers personality to show in the review.

In the Night Moves review, I at least smiled because Oggis said, "Hey. At least it floats."

Is this actually what Eden really wants?

This may be an extension of Adriana's point that Oggin's description review, while extremely well written is not a review.

The purpose of descriptive reviews, as I understand it, is purely to convey information. As Carrie Ann said, that's the whole point. So, no, descriptive reviews might not be as juicy as one could make a normal verified review, but neither was the old product description tab (which is what a description review replaces). They might be "clinical" or "dry", but they're not there to entertain you. They're there to provide basic information about a toy.

As a million people have noted here and on other threads, this whole thing might be easier if we stopped considering/calling them reviews.

I just wanted to add my opinion. I'm not insulted at all and yes, I guess my description reviews can be considered "dry" to some and that's okay with me because everyone has their own style. My style is rather limited with the description reviews though. It's just a description. Maybe I drag them out too much too but, I just pretend that I am introducing someone who has never seen or used a toy before to this toy that I'm describing. What if that is the first toy they have ever looked at and have no idea what it does or anything? At least I try to cover all the bases in that respect. I guess they could be considered as "dry" to read as say......how a particular type of shingles will work for your home, I dunno.....

I am also in agreement that calling them "reviews" is a bit wonky since it isn't essentially a review. It is a description....period.