News and Reviews > Best Text Editor
EditPad Pro and Inaccuracies in Reviewing Generally
Carol Haynes:
Actually I don't think there is any compulsion to update reviews provided it is accurate at the time and clearly states when it was written and the version (or release date) of the software used in the test. Unless there is a review team ready to take on the onerous job of keeping things up to date (which also means obtaining new versions - which may not be practical - and new titles) it isn't realistic to constantly update old reviews other than responding to inaccuracies in the conclusions of the time.
Darwin:
Once again, Carol has managed to articulate my feelings far better than I was able to do so myself (over the course of two posts!). Thanks, Carol - that's exactly what I was trying to say :Thmbsup:
tinjaw:
Stop it. Stop it. Stop it. Don't make me whip out a can of whoopa$$ on all of you. :P These are not the bad reviews you are looking for. Nothing to see here. Move along.
Seriously, let's see what Mouser has planned and then we can critique it. I am sure he will ask for input before he implements anything, and then we can be constructive. Anything said now will pretty much be lost, or at least need to be reiterated.
mouser:
where there are errors in reviews brought to my attention, i will correct them.
the long term solution is what i've said already, a different kind of review system that makes it much easier to keep these things up to date and free of errors.
Ralf Maximus:
Reward people who correctly identify factual errors with donationcredits? Make it a kind of collaborative bounty hunter system. Award additional credits for an especially amusing take-down -- the "extra style" bonus. Conversely, deny the bonus if the correction is needlessly mean.
Perhaps it's time to start a review wiki? Then everyone can edit anything they think needs it, with complete accountability.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version