1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

  2. RuneMate 2.0 Spectre

    Announcement
    RuneMate 2.0 Spectre Released
    Walkthrough
    How to Use Spectre
    Get Help
    Client & Site Support
Cookies RuneMate Spectre 2.0 Released

Rejected More strict requirements to leave bot reviews

Discussion in 'Client & Site Suggestions' started by Led, Jun 20, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Led

    Led

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2015
    Messages:
    449
    Likes Received:
    170
    As it is now people abuse the reviews section to either steam about a bot using up hours because it bugged or to report the bug itself which neither one of those are what reviews are supposed to be for.

    I suggest you should either have to be a supporter+, a member for 3 months or have 25 posts on the community before you're allowed to leave reviews for bots*.

    *Due to the nature of premium bots I think a review field should be left open for them if possible at all times, otherwise apply the stricter requirements to reviewing all bots.
    --- Double Post Merged, Jun 20, 2017, Original Post Date: Jun 20, 2017 ---
    @Party @Arbiter @Cloud
     
    #1 Led, Jun 20, 2017
    awesome123man and Serene like this.
  2. Wet Rag

    Wet Rag easily triggered ✌

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2015
    Messages:
    4,457
    Likes Received:
    1,695
    rarely do staff have to delete reviews..... not worth the time to implement

    Also please refrain from tagging staff in a suggestion post...........
     
    #2 Wet Rag, Jun 20, 2017
  3. Jux7apose

    Jux7apose

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    286
    Likes Received:
    58
    It was an edit, so i doubt they will get tagged

    Edit: Nvm, it was a double post...
     
    #3 Jux7apose, Jun 20, 2017
  4. Dark sage

    Dark sage Misfits

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2016
    Messages:
    1,333
    Likes Received:
    373
    no they are, but its frowned upon in suggestions
     
    #4 Dark sage, Jun 20, 2017
  5. Defeat3d

    Defeat3d Primate

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2014
    Messages:
    3,073
    Likes Received:
    1,895
    To be honest I do end up reporting quite a few reviews because they only consist of: "I got banned - 1 star", or "I got an error - 1 star". Something should be done about these kind of reports because they don't reflect on the product properly at all.

    Maybe some guidelines for leaving a review you have to agree to before placing one.
     
    #5 Defeat3d, Jun 20, 2017
  6. Party

    Party Client Developer

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2015
    Messages:
    3,708
    Likes Received:
    1,606
    We won't put a wall in front of users being able to review a bot. If you disagree with a user's report, either take it up with the user or justify your reasons for deletion of the review to a member of Staff.

    Technically not true. Especially during periods of outage.
     
    #6 Party, Jun 20, 2017
  7. Wet Rag

    Wet Rag easily triggered ✌

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2015
    Messages:
    4,457
    Likes Received:
    1,695
    wont do shit l0l

    might aswell make abnormal click agree before making another account lelelelele
    --- Double Post Merged, Jun 20, 2017, Original Post Date: Jun 20, 2017 ---
    which are uncommon
     
    #7 Wet Rag, Jun 20, 2017
    Qosmiof2 likes this.
  8. Zyzz

    Zyzz

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2017
    Messages:
    341
    Likes Received:
    85
    While we're at it, we should have requirements for bot descriptions. Stuff like, what does it do, where does it do it, what's the difference from trial version to premium version, etc. Currently it's one big fuck.
     
    #8 Zyzz, Jun 20, 2017
  9. EvilCabbage

    EvilCabbage

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    Messages:
    2,389
    Likes Received:
    849
    Report shit ones ill handle it
     
    #9 EvilCabbage, Jun 20, 2017
  10. Caffrey

    Caffrey

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2017
    Messages:
    42
    Likes Received:
    4
    Not sure if that should be a requirement, but that would be useful af.
     
    #10 Caffrey, Jun 20, 2017
  11. Zyzz

    Zyzz

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2017
    Messages:
    341
    Likes Received:
    85
    Well, it could be some mandatory boxes you had to check when submitting a bot, so everything was streamlined, and easier for the user to search as well. :p
     
    #11 Zyzz, Jun 20, 2017
  12. Defeat3d

    Defeat3d Primate

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2014
    Messages:
    3,073
    Likes Received:
    1,895
    I dont think this is how it works though
     
    #12 Defeat3d, Jun 20, 2017
  13. Chief Jaeger

    Chief Jaeger

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2017
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    5
    I don't think it's necessary, but yeah I don't think it should be put on the author to have to chase down users or make a point to disprove the review.

    My suggestion:
    User can only leave review after x-amount of hours of bot used. It would make it less likely for a user to leave a bullshit review because they've actually gotten a good amount of time with the bot to leave a valid review.
     
    #13 Chief Jaeger, Jun 20, 2017
    Geashaw and Savior like this.
  14. American Express

    American Express RuneMate Staff

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2015
    Messages:
    3,097
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    Not true, 8 out of the last 10 reports were reviews that needed to be actioned.
     
    #14 American Express, Jun 21, 2017
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Loading...