Set review etiquette

[Nannan]

Should there be a set review etiquette?

If yes, all who write set reviews will follow a specific format which includes various info that the person must fill out about the set (to be determined by "set review" board's mod, sz).

If no, you can write set reviews any way you like to.

Of course you could always not have an opinion and choose "I don't care"

[Sz_2cool4u2b]

Hmm...I'm sort of in the middle. It would be very nice, and organized, and prevent people from giving a "bad" review. But also, some people might stree over it, and stuff like that.

So, I'll let everyone else decide. If yes is chosen most, I will make a nicely organized, but not too stressful format.

- Evan "Sz_2cool4u2b" S.

[J1A3L5]

When I said "etiquette" I wasn't referring to a specific format for filling in each aspect of a set in a specific order or anything. I personally wouldn't like that so much. You seemed concerned about how my numbers messed up the format of all the other titles: Which is what I was suggesting. Give some guidelines as to how it should be titled and such. For example, I started out all mine with the main statistics for the set I was reviewing. I used the exact same format for all the sets, because I wanted them all to be easy to use. In the future I might add LUGNET and Brickset links, seeing as TheQ seemed quite intent on adding them in the threads anyway.

However, I would not want to be told exactly what to write for a review. At least in my case, a review tends to flow from topic to topic, so too many rules limits that. Plus, sets vary on intent - What good is giving a playability on a UCS set?

-John "J1A3L5" Langrish.

[TheQ]

I added the links to LUGNET because I know that people want to know what is the set that you are talking about. I don't know the set number (I don't remember those) or the set name (The name is usually different than that is used at here in cold north) but if I see the set, I sure know some specs about it.

Anyway, I don't like following direct way in writing but usual "shape" is good to know. Like special bricks and minifigs are in different places.

-Q

[CrustaceanFreak]

I said yes, bu by etiquette, I meant a format. Like, how many points out of five is each aspct of the set, and what order the parts of the review should be in.

[TheQ]

I think that this "5 stars" technique is too "limited". Perhaps we could use %'s to sya how much we like different aspects of the set?

[Jamit]

Well there should be some rules but not to many.

I think people should link to an image plus give a rating.

-Jamit