It looks like in the last few months, the mod review that comes with a BST approval has changed. It used to have the mod's personal opinion about the service, a thing that I value a lot more than the copyscape score alone (for example). I get (or at least I think I get) why it was changed. But something I never understood is why the product itself wasn't posted as part of the review. If it's an article, why not post it (out of the assumption that it's not being used either way)?
I understand that it can't always be revealed (pbn links are a good example), but for the times it can, it offers a lot of value to potential buyers that want to see an actual product that was delivered rather than ask the seller for samples than they can cherry-pick.
Personal opinions in BST is something that was actually changed a couple of years ago to further streamline the review process when everyone was complaining about the reviews taking too long during the height of the pandemic.
Have you ever seen the iron triangle of customer service? Speed, cost, and quality; you pick two. Members have demonstrated that they want the review process fast and they want the listing price to remain cheap. We didn't sacrifice any quality during the actual review process, but the more detailed approval notices are time-consuming, so what everyone got is the streamlined ones instead.
Therefore, the change won't be reverted for logistical reasons.
On the other hand, adding the article received into content review copies is something that was humoured in the past. This resulted in content writers complaining about how this "ruins their sales because now they can't send out samples". There is value for customers to see the mod review copy, and things do change, so perhaps we can look into trying this again.
I have requested article samples from some sellers and there's no way on earth they can be what was submitted for approval, as the quality was garbage.
As for Copyscape ( Crappyscape ) it's as outdated as PR is to links IMO. I got an article recently, Crappyscape showed it 0% copied, Quetext flagged it at 21%.
Many sellers are buying from other sellers to pass the mod approval then provide lower quality
Asking for sample from the seller is better since it will always bump the thread rather than put it there on public for everyone
These are good examples of why I'm for adding the mod review article into the approval notice. What we receive is what you should receive or better.
Let us report these wankers dears. Name and shame.
@OP, I would like for the mod reviews to be more personal as well. Nothing against
@iModBot but it’s not fair that he gets to review all the threads. I would like mods to post reviews from their own accounts. But I doubt this would be possible now as the entire marketplace system has changed.
It has its ups and downs but more personal reviews would defo add a personal touch and be reminiscent of the old BHW.
PS. First backhand to the chap that points out my account age.
@iModBot is not a person hogging the reviews, it's a shared account used by the marketplace staff. It's multiple people reviewing the BSTs (almost always in a joint effort), not just one person.
Reviews from personal mods will not be coming back. The amount of personal abuse many of the marketplace staff members received during the old days was absolutely disgusting, and the imodbot account eliminated that issue (among many other issues I'm not going to get into because they're no longer relevant).
Anyway, definitely report any content BST trying to pull a fast one, but link to the article you receive from them. This will allow us to compare what you received versus what we received, meaning we can take action on them much faster.
Or you can ask for a review copy, then paste it in your review of the service as a real review, I´ve done that a couple of times. Shows the real thing that way, and everybody can read/see what to expect.
This is definitely allowed. You get a review copy, you can post an honest review. Good on you for doing that,
@RoiBox.
I would agree with you for me Crappyscape being terrible for around 4 years it's so easy to beat the code part of why I ditched the software for something else copyscrape way to workout if something copied or not does not well or even close such I was testing it all I did was add in more letters to a few of my words on the article then it give me 100% score.
I'm not going to name the tools we use, but Copyscape isn't the only tool we use. There are a few different ones (one of which was suggested by a member here a couple of years ago), but I won't name the tools to prevent others from trying to game the review. As such, the approval notices generically say that it was plagiarism checked.
It is a team that does the reviews which is why you do not see me posting an approval.
I'm still involved but the process is done by committee and other staff members and I do communicate as to approvals, rejections and such.
Yeah, I used to add in my thoughts but those are really not appropriate as I shared my personal views and that is not fair to all sellers as the approval should be based on what the seller is offering per their original post and not what I, or any other staff member, thinks is good, bad or ugly.
Granted I've been around the block once or twice but the current process takes the subjective out of the system and puts on the objective system.
I am very much involved in the approva/rejectionl process, and chances are that if you are not approved or approved, I may have had a hand in it but the other team members and I all work in unison.
There are 6 of us that are a part of the process and even a minor question as to should something gets approved is a discussion point inside our chats.
BTB is not the brightest bulb on the planet so his opinion as to a service is his opinion and not the best way to ensure you are getting what you paid for, or are looking to pay for, as the current system in place makes me look like someone promoting and that is not in the best interest of the members here on the forum.
Still though, the opinions from the members here is well past welcome as to an adjustment in how we approve or reject a service.
Do you remember when we provided those personal reviews and both sellers and buyers would start questioning our qualifications to review specific services, and then harass the reviewing moderator over a one-sided conversation?
Personally, I would've really liked to see the marketplace filled with those premium reviews I was trying out a while back, but this is something that can be revisited after marketplace 2.0 comes out. After all, protecting staff members, sellers, and buyers whilst keeping all of them happy is not an easy balancing act.
Question Answered, Thread Closed
