News and Reviews > Best Text Editor

EditPad Pro and Inaccuracies in Reviewing Generally

<< < (2/4) > >>

jgpaiva:
I agree with Darwin.
But i cut some slack for the users that keep calling to our attention the changes on the programs.
Maybe the best solution would be to call people's attention to the fact that some of the programs have already been updated, and for a more up-to-date/thorough evaluation of the programs, they should read this forum.
This way, these posts could actually be constructive and help review readers instead of bombarding mouser with work.


PS: i have no idea if there's such comment in the review already. If there is, please disregard this post.

tinjaw:
I think there is a happy middle. Have threads for the reviews where people can bring up the items that are wrong/out-of-date/inaccurate/etc. Those can then be, after a reasonable amount of time, verified and the review updated.

mouser:
let's not get into a discussion on how to fix the reviews again here, only because there is a plan in place for how to do reviews 2.0 and there will be a time and place to discuss this as it nears implementation.

srdiamond:
The EditPad Pro review was wrong when written. I purchased in February of 2005; it had the feature then, and there was no mention that version 5 (then current) had upgraded it. Most likely version 4 had it too, but definitely the current version did at the time.

I fear I created unnecessary confusion by amalgamating my complaint with some others. Perhaps those others amounted to complaints about a failure to update. My position was potentially confusing, because you have NO duty to keep your reviews current. You do have, on the other hand, a duty to avoid actual error. Why cut any slack for actual error, unless it reflected obscurity in the feature's implementation? Nothing keeps a reviewer using ordinary care from getting this right, particularly when you deem the feature critically important.

Darwin:
No worries, srdiamond. I was pointing out that a review being two years out of date is not a great reason to be complaining about them. I probably went overboard in doing so  :-[ and I apologize (I should have added your name to mitzevos in qualifying what I was saying, not doing so was an oversight). You're absolutely right that inaccuracies in a review should be addressed, irrespective of how old the review might be. Now, if a feature is added or corrected subsequent to the review being posted, that's a different matter. While I feel that it is desireable that reviews be updated to reflect these changes, I accept that this is not always feasible/practical.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page