Rapid Crownage

darkspidey wrote:

Its a good read to be fair but Im just pointing out we should have a period of time a review is live for it to be crowned to make it 100% fair .

Explain how this would work and how exactly it makes things "fair"?

darkspidey wrote:

A list of crown noms under reviews would work much better.

Again, explain how this would "work much better".

As far as I an see, you just go to more extreme lengths to try and justify your years-old campaign against the guides, Phil, when any normal person really doesn't see any problem. In fact, it only seems to be you that thinks the guides are unfairly rewarded for good reviews... yet most of the time you acknowledge that the guides do write good reviews. Go figure!

I do feel they are bang to rights this time and a little embarassed. Aagain its NEVER about the work quality but a possible bias. We will see what happens next week.

Any crowns posted up on tuesday would be eligable for crowns the following week in my system, a whole week of noms and rates for dooyoo to judge them from. Seems fair to me. 4 minutes is silly though. I dont think anyone read either of those reviews when they were crowned to be honest.

I actually am swaying towards DS's argument a little. I do think to crown something almost instantly is a little daft, good enough or not. After all, shouldn't we as members have a chance to read it first? Tuesday to Tuesday makes sense to me with a cut off on Monday or something but I don't care that much one way or another.

I agree that a review shouldn't be crowned within 5 minutes without a member read... if this is true, I hope a guide takes this forward to Dooyoo. However, I don't see how a period of time makes any difference - even if there's only one rate on a review and the rater has nommed the review, that makes it eligible for Dooyoo to have a look at it IMO. This period of time malarkey making things "fairer" just smacks of sour grapes to me.

I also don't see how a list of Crown noms on a review makes anything better. It's just asking for trouble IMO as the Crown nom would then become the new VU and we'd be like Ciao were members have pages of reviews that are all rated as Exceptional overall.

the review itself lists the time it was rated and the crown list, lists the time it was crowned. Dooyoo applied those lists to make the site clearer. I suspect there are certain members they dont need to read to crown, and they are getting lazy again. Its just disspointing to see we are going backwards again. Crowns are harder to get now so you need to know you standa chance on Yuesday. Im still confused why ahyone has a problem that a crown should be on site fora certain time to be judged by the community to crown. There is clealry an issue pointed out by Tom1Clare here.

I don't see the time of crowning on the crown list.

Go to newest crowmn list babe.

I have been there. It does not state the time it was crowned, the only time I can see, is the time the review was posted.

Newest crown list on the community page.

if you look at the last three tuesdays a guid has crowned between 9:30 and 10am, the peak crowing hour.

This one?

http://members.dooyoo.co.uk/community/inside/5/0/0/0/

The time shown, is the time the review was posted.

Now I know why Phil's been lurking on my account. That and the nasty smell of sulphur in the air.

The time listed on the newest crowns list is when the review was posted NOT when it was crowned. Phil - you are willfully misinterpreting information to build up your silly conspiracies and to perpetuate your own prejudices and neither I nor the other person you are bitching about has done anything wrong. All we did was post reviews. We posted them stupidly on a tuesday which apparently in your book is some kind of crime. Maybe we should just ask Dooyoo to not allow anyone to post anything on a Tuesday morning. Would that satisfy you?

My review and the other 'Tuesday morning' crown were both posted at similar times - and the times on the list of new crowns show that - 10.42 and 10.43 (not sure if that's English or German time because I'm not as obsessed with the mechanics of the site as some people).

The first rating was placed 6 minutes later - not by a guide or anyone who'd meet your silly criteria of 'influence'. It was absolutely NOT crowned within 5 minutes - you are completely making that up. But then you have never allowed the truth to get in the way of a good story. Must be the journalism background.

The first guide to rate it was not until more than half an hour after it was posted. The second guide and the first comment was 75mins after posting. The actual crown didn't arrive until sometime during my lunch break by which time it had been on for at least two hours.

So please, do us all a favour and get your facts right and stop persecuting people who have done absolutely nothing wrong.

You can build a mountain of conspiracies out of an anthill of information but nothing covers up the truth. You don't get crowned because you write sloppy and often offensive reviews and you piss people off.

I've had enough of it so I've asked Cat to cancel my account here - my life is too short to waste any time on someone as stupid and paranoid as you.
Bye

At no point did I say it was a bad review and not worth a crown. AT no point did I say it was crowned due to fellow guide nominations. It was the speed of the crown thats the issue here not the status of the member, why Tom Clare listed the thread here. But at the end of the dooyoo day it was on site for a very short time and so not fairly judged by the sites community. The fact you suggested it was 'German Time' hinted you were alittle uncomfortable with the haste of it. If dooyoo want to crown prefered writers then thats their choice. And I saw the remark to the member on your comments list, ironic really as we have been talking about that issue here too and you have been equally bombastic on it.

We will check the next weeks crowns and look for a pattern and decide if theres an issue with solid evidence. Thats the fair way

The fair way? Do you even know what 'fair' means? Or 'evidence'?

In your head, dooyoo and the guides huddle round a computer every Tuesday cackling gleefully about all the crowns they'll give to people who aren't you.

You will ignore any evidence that doesn't support that theory. All you'll offer is a load of noise in which you pretend people agree with you when they don't (a classic example being your 'German time' remark above).

how many times do I have to tell you guys this is not about the guides! By the guides deflectnig from the real argument we never get anywhere. Your like a bunch of MPs denying theres no argument to be had over expenses!

You have been making this a guide thing all the way through the thread! Then when somebody points out they got a crown without being a guide, you accuse them of cosying up to guides...

darkspidey wrote:

how many times do I have to tell you guys this is not about the guides! By the guides deflectnig from the real argument we never get anywhere. Your like a bunch of MPs denying theres no argument to be had over expenses!

You're the one who makes it about guides - who mentions guides at every opportunity. Stop trying to pretend otherwise.

darkspidey wrote:

how many times do I have to tell you guys this is not about the guides! By the guides deflectnig from the real argument we never get anywhere. Your like a bunch of MPs denying theres no argument to be had over expenses!

You're just trying to cause trouble, Phil. We all know fine rightly that you have it in for the guides.

Let's have a look at your posts from earlier in this thread, shall we?

darkspidey wrote:

One chap got a crown for a review being live for about 30 seconds. I suppose they have some left over and you got lucky. If you are a guide I suppose it helped.

darkspidey wrote:

SO why do we need guides on site?

darkspidey wrote:

So its down to the guides personal taste..

darkspidey wrote:

No guides posted their reviews up today beetwen midnight and 10:30pm. Interesting. May be something in that Tom. If there is legs in it then the lady gide M*** will crown.

darkspidey wrote:

A guide did in fact crown with exactly zero reads today, almost as if dooyoo were tapping their fingers waiting for him / her to post up. I think thats all the proof you need that the crown system is somewhat flawed. Its hard to argue against that today. But Im sure you will try.

Yes. Nothing about the guides.

Nothing to see here, move along.

Kosh *tried* to imply some sort of cartel where guides vote for guides on crowns day. Absolute nonesense. Getting you lot to even admit anything is even slightly bias towards guides and favoured members from dooyoo is like trying to keep Vanessa Feltz away from the sweet trolley.lol

You know, DS, you are making yourself look ridiculous with this incessant focus on crowns, at every opportunity, on every forum, with half the reviews you write. Give it up and write about something meaningful instead!! THis has been a farce, of your making, for years, but you cannot just keep coming onto forums and stirring up trouble, and offending other members, as much as you like doing so.

ANother one chipping in to obsficate the point of the thread. Again, this is not my thread. I had an opinion on it.

tom1clare wrote:

Just wondering if anyone can shed any light on the process Dooyoo go through to decide Crowns. Is there is a set number awarded for each category during a time period, does the number of nominations actually have any baring, and does anyone feel it's easier to attain them in certain categories where there are less reviews written?

The reason I ask is I got a crown this morning for a review I only put up at about 1:30 in the morning, which seems a bit rapid even by Dooyoo's standards. Not that I'm complaining, just thought it was odd as sometimes they take several days.

this was the OP.

I think it has been answered....

Its been answered. Apparently I was wrong again. Im 100% wrong. Guides, 100% right.

two guides have commented on all five pages of this thread. Me and one other. So guides and 'other posters who are none guides and outnumber the guides' must therefore be 100% right not just 'guides' 100% right...

I was wrong about that too.