[led]

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.
 
@Party @Arbiter @Cloud

 

[wet rag]

rarely do staff have to delete reviews..... not worth the time to implement

Also please refrain from tagging staff in a suggestion post...........

 

[jux7apose]

rarely do staff have to delete reviews..... not worth the time to implement

Also please refrain from tagging staff in a suggestion post...........

It was an edit, so i doubt they will get tagged

Edit: Nvm, it was a double post...

 

[dark sage]

It was an edit, so i doubt they will get tagged

Edit: Nvm, it was a double post...

no they are, but its frowned upon in suggestions

 

[defeat3d]

rarely do staff have to delete reviews..... not worth the time to implement

Also please refrain from tagging staff in a suggestion post...........

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.

 

[party]

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.

rarely do staff have to delete reviews..... not worth the time to implement

Also please refrain from tagging staff in a suggestion post...........

Technically not true. Especially during periods of outage.

 

[wet rag]

Maybe some guidelines for leaving a review you have to agree to before placing one.

wont do shit l0l

might aswell make abnormal click agree before making another account lelelelele
 

Technically not true. Especially during periods of outage.

which are uncommon

 

[zyzz]

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.

 

[evilcabbage]

Report shit ones ill handle it

 

[caffrey]

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.

Not sure if that should be a requirement, but that would be useful af.

 

[zyzz]

Not sure if that should be a requirement, but that would be useful af.

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.

 

[defeat3d]

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.

I dont think this is how it works though

 

[chief jaeger]

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.

 

[american express]

rarely do staff have to delete reviews..... not worth the time to implement

Also please refrain from tagging staff in a suggestion post...........

Not true, 8 out of the last 10 reports were reviews that needed to be actioned.