I'm not sure which of the following are actual issues, or expected changes, but I just wrote a review, and here is what I noted:

a) The review, which was a buyout assignment, did not auto-publish, despite my rank of 6.1. After reading the new guidelines, I thought it would. If this is inaccurate, or the change hasn't happened yet, please disregard.

b) I do not have access to edit my review, which is currently in the pre-published limbo phase. Previously, I could.

c) The system didn't give me any points for the review. Now, if the points are going to show up after the review is published, then this is a fantastic change that I applaud, as it will cut down on spammy point-farming reviews. However, if something's broken, well, it's broken, so someone should probably look into it.

Thanks again for this new program, I look forward to editing reviews. less

This is my concern too, though a bit of a different one. Some of the reviews may not include everything that an editor feels it should have, but are correct as far as grammar and spelling go. These reviews might not necessarily be something that would be highly voted on, so I wonder if this will lead to down votes for editors. less

In the Edenlinks guidelines it said something like you should transfer to administrator if you feel it needs a lot of work. Not sure if there is going to be a line between needing work and the editor's opinion, but maybe there will be a way to communicate with the writer of the review and express what you feel they might need to add. less

In the Edenlinks guidelines it said something like you should transfer to administrator if you feel it needs a lot of work. Not sure if there is going to be a line between needing work and the editor's opinion, but maybe there will be a way to communicate with the writer of the review and express what you feel they might need to add. less

That is strange, I am not having these issues. I just published my Coquette Review without any issues, and have been working on multiple reviews all day. Hmmm. Maybe it is just a bug that will need to be worked out over time? less

I'm so excited by this especially as it was exactly what I was looking for when I made a post regarding mentors & proofreading - You guys really rock!

However since the new ability to vote on the editors performance I've noticed a few reviews are showing up as being rated useful (at the top of the page with the summary) despite all, or close to all votes on the review being extremely useful.

I was going to start a thread to ask if others had noticed this but as it may be related to the new changes. has anyone else seen this? less

I'm so excited by this especially as it was exactly what I was looking for when I made a post regarding mentors & proofreading - You guys really rock!

However since the new ability to vote on the editors performance I've noticed a few reviews are showing up as being rated useful (at the top of the page with the summary) despite all, or close to all votes on the review being extremely useful.

I was going to start a thread to ask if others had noticed this but as it may be related to the new changes. has anyone else seen this? less

This is my concern too, though a bit of a different one. Some of the reviews may not include everything that an editor feels it should have, but are correct as far as grammar and spelling go. These reviews might not necessarily be something that would be highly voted on, so I wonder if this will lead to down votes for editors. less

Could you provide some clarification regarding the editor ratings that are now on mentor approved reviews? Are we to rate them just for the editing, or as mentors of the review? My concern is that if the rating is truly just for the editing of the review, mentors may be unfairly downrated based on a readers opinion f the review itself. The rating currently appears on every mentor approved review, even ones posted prior to this program.

Are the editor ratings permanent or to temporary to test out the first group of editors?

Thanks. less

When I was in the mentor program, I never had my reviews edited by my mentors (i.e., there were never any suggestions for changing grammar, punctuation, nor spelling on any of the reviews that I submitted). However, those reviews are now showing up with an editor's rating box.

How are people to know whether the review was even edited for grammar or spelling if they did not see the before and after versions of your review? It is like voting blind. On one review, I only added one additional piece of information after submitting to my mentors, but it had absolutely nothing to do with grammar, punctuation, or spelling. My mentors suggested also listing oil-based lube as a glass-compatible lubricant (I had only mentioned that glass was safe with both silicone and water-based lube). On the second review, I deleted a couple of sentences at the suggestion of my mentors in an effort to try to make the review just a bit shorter after asking for suggestions on what to cut. On the third review, no changes whatsoever were made to my review and my mentors chose to publish it as it was.

At any rate, the suggestions and help that I received was within the scope of mentoring, not editing. An editor and a mentor are two entirely different things.

So is the editing vote for both mentoring and editing? Again, even it was, how in the world would one determine a fair vote unless one reads both the before and after versions? Additionally, I think it would be helpful not to confuse mentoring with editing because not all editors are mentors and it wouldn't be fair to rate the editor with a low score just because the review was not as thorough as the voter would have liked. Besides, we aren't supposed to be voting on mentoring anyway, right?

I had suggested in the earlier thread to include a brief description in the editor rating box explaining exactly what it is that the voter is rating. Also, it would be nice if the editor rating boxes were taken off the old reviews which were published prior to this new program. less

Q: What is Eden Tasks?

A: Eden Tasks is a new ‘Market Place’ that allows contributors to earn points through performing various tasks posted by EF.

***

Q: What is the ‘Review Proofreading’ task?

A: The ‘Review Proofreading’ task is the first of hopefully many exciting Eden Tasks. ‘Review Proofreading’ will allow contributors to edit and publish the reviews that until now, only the Review Team have been able to edit and publish.

The ‘Review Proofreading’ task is a privilege that will be available to the more experienced reviewers (for obvious reasons). We will start out with a small test group initially to see how the program works. We will then add people as needed to balance out the flow or reviews.

An exciting side effect of the ‘Review Proofreading’ task is now mentors will have more control over the reviews of their students. (to highlight, correct, or make notes)

***

Here is some additional info:
- requests will generally be approved within 48 hours, M-F
- not all requests will be approved, some will be declined. Every request is approved or declined by a real person on The Review Team.
- factors for approval include rank, writing ability, community participation, and so on. Editors must be well-rounded
- any editor found to be overzealous in their corrections will be removed from the program

I hope this answers all of your initial questions, and I hope you all enjoy Eden Tasks (we have worked very hard on this for a while now). We look forward to working more closely with the community, as well as giving the community more control over the content and rewards for their activity. less

This is my problem now as a mentor. I do not have great grammar skills, if not for spell check with the grammar checking ability's, I would be lost. That is the main reason I did not sign up for the editor program.

I became a mentor to help students get the information required for good reviews and to help them learn to get round and find stuff on the site. But if I am being judged on my editing, I probably will stop being a mentor. I do not feel it would be fair to the student if my rating as a editor lowers the overall rating of their review.

I know there are bugs to work out so I am just voicing my concerns. less

There is. If you look in the proofreading program instructions (although I'm not sure if everyone can see them?) there are options to approve & publish, transfer to administrator, and for revision required:

"When the review requires extensive corrections and you have provided directions for the reviewer in the comments section, you may click “Revision required” and the review will be returned back to the submitting reviewer for changes. No points will be added at this time. Points will be added once the review is published. " less

As I've often told folks in the fanfiction realm, the easiest way to overcome grammar issues is to make a list of your most common failings, and then refer back to it when you edit your work. The guidelines for the program already have such a checklist, so you can probably participate just fine if you print that out, and highlight whichever mistakes you personally miss most often.

Since your reviews are quite readable, you obviously have a method in place already, and I'm sure this new system will not exclude you from the mentor program in the long run. less