Comments on: Reviewing the Review Process http://blog.fligtar.com/2006/11/21/reviewing-the-review-process/ a boombox is not a toy Thu, 11 Mar 2010 23:23:13 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: John http://blog.fligtar.com/2006/11/21/reviewing-the-review-process/#comment-2908 John Tue, 27 Mar 2007 20:43:23 +0000 http://blog.fligtar.com/2006/11/21/reviewing-the-review-process/#comment-2908 Thanks for the post, guys! perfect informations. John Thanks for the post, guys! perfect informations. John

]]> By: Daniel http://blog.fligtar.com/2006/11/21/reviewing-the-review-process/#comment-2866 Daniel Sun, 25 Mar 2007 21:08:43 +0000 http://blog.fligtar.com/2006/11/21/reviewing-the-review-process/#comment-2866 I've gotten into the sandbox, but I can't install anything. The install button is red instead of green, and addons don't install. I’ve gotten into the sandbox, but I can’t install anything. The install button is red instead of green, and addons don’t install.

]]> By: Jürgen http://blog.fligtar.com/2006/11/21/reviewing-the-review-process/#comment-2420 Jürgen Sat, 17 Mar 2007 16:53:53 +0000 http://blog.fligtar.com/2006/11/21/reviewing-the-review-process/#comment-2420 Hey all, great informations on this site. Jürgen from Germany :-) Hey all, great informations on this site. Jürgen from Germany :-)

]]> By: Pontus http://blog.fligtar.com/2006/11/21/reviewing-the-review-process/#comment-2395 Pontus Fri, 16 Mar 2007 23:54:52 +0000 http://blog.fligtar.com/2006/11/21/reviewing-the-review-process/#comment-2395 Ohh, I know, my English is sooo good. Well the point is, host those autogenerated toolbars etc but let the site link to 'em and dont list them. I would like to think that mozilla is a place for all kinds of addons... Ohh, I know, my English is sooo good. Well the point is, host those autogenerated toolbars etc but let the site link to ‘em and dont list them.

I would like to think that mozilla is a place for all kinds of addons…

]]> By: Pontus http://blog.fligtar.com/2006/11/21/reviewing-the-review-process/#comment-2394 Pontus Fri, 16 Mar 2007 23:48:06 +0000 http://blog.fligtar.com/2006/11/21/reviewing-the-review-process/#comment-2394 Hi I develop a Toolbar(spyware free ;) ) for an small audience. The extension is not "great" but I'ts far better then the first version I got accepted att addons.moz.(what were you thinking, it was 99% based on thinkgeek toolbar and had like 3 google buttons and a search field... *heh*). Well, I realy dont need to get my Extension _listed_ at AMO, I have a small Swedish-speaking audience, BUT du to all restriktions(installing from other sites then addons.moz. is a no-no, gives a warning and I like the update function/comment system). Wouldnät it be possible to to just host and not list smaller extension and "auto generated toolbars"? If a user at a site would like to install the spyware-free extension, why not host it? Even if its not interesting for some users, others may like those extension. I have no problem with autogenerated-extension etc. No matcher if its I would love to have my small, crappy extensions hosted for at AMO for _MY_ users, not to get downloads(or maby a little). How 'baut it? And what extension is trusted? Hi I develop a Toolbar(spyware free ;) ) for an small audience. The extension is not “great” but I’ts far better then the first version I got accepted att addons.moz.(what were you thinking, it was 99% based on thinkgeek toolbar and had like 3 google buttons and a search field… *heh*).

Well, I realy dont need to get my Extension _listed_ at AMO, I have a small Swedish-speaking audience, BUT du to all restriktions(installing from other sites then addons.moz. is a no-no, gives a warning and I like the update function/comment system). Wouldnät it be possible to to just host and not list smaller extension and “auto generated toolbars”? If a user at a site would like to install the spyware-free extension, why not host it? Even if its not interesting for some users, others may like those extension. I have no problem with autogenerated-extension etc. No matcher if its I would love to have my small, crappy extensions hosted for at AMO for _MY_ users, not to get downloads(or maby a little). How ‘baut it?

And what extension is trusted?

]]> By: max1million http://blog.fligtar.com/2006/11/21/reviewing-the-review-process/#comment-2307 max1million Wed, 14 Mar 2007 10:56:39 +0000 http://blog.fligtar.com/2006/11/21/reviewing-the-review-process/#comment-2307 I understand trying to improve the listings. But from what I've been reading, now instead of having perfectly good or new extensions at the end of the most popular list cause of fewer downloads and fewer updates to cause automatic downloads, they are hidden away in an if you find this section don't bother cause they haven't been tested or just aren't any good section. And developer should wait for "several" users (how many) to find, test, and rate it (if they are ambitious enough) before it goes to a normal reviewer for approval to be added to the regular site. It seems to me that your shoving the oldest most popular even farther ahead of the rest, instead of trying to even out the playing field, which I thought was one of the goals. I think actually having them reviewed and possibly adding Reviewer('s) comments to the addon's page, above "User Comments" (ratings), would be better. My recent addition (new) at just over 3000 downloads this week and over 6000 total on the old site, has but one User Comment (just added). Since it is Sandboxed (along with the older but current rest of mine) on new site, common user probaly won't even find it (them) after switch over. Of the 6 that I've uploaded my current total average rating is 4.14 with the worst being 2.75(fair or not). Should I even bother to update if they just get thrown in the junk bin anyway? I understand trying to improve the listings. But from what I’ve been reading, now instead of having perfectly good or new extensions at the end of the most popular list cause of fewer downloads and fewer updates to cause automatic downloads, they are hidden away in an if you find this section don’t bother cause they haven’t been tested or just aren’t any good section. And developer should wait for “several” users (how many) to find, test, and rate it (if they are ambitious enough) before it goes to a normal reviewer for approval to be added to the regular site. It seems to me that your shoving the oldest most popular even farther ahead of the rest, instead of trying to even out the playing field, which I thought was one of the goals.

I think actually having them reviewed and possibly adding Reviewer(’s) comments to the addon’s page, above “User Comments” (ratings), would be better. My recent addition (new) at just over 3000 downloads this week and over 6000 total on the old site, has but one User Comment (just added). Since it is Sandboxed (along with the older but current rest of mine) on new site, common user probaly won’t even find it (them) after switch over. Of the 6 that I’ve uploaded my current total average rating is 4.14 with the worst being 2.75(fair or not). Should I even bother to update if they just get thrown in the junk bin anyway?

]]> By: Martin http://blog.fligtar.com/2006/11/21/reviewing-the-review-process/#comment-2215 Martin Sun, 11 Mar 2007 22:07:23 +0000 http://blog.fligtar.com/2006/11/21/reviewing-the-review-process/#comment-2215 Thanks for the post! Martin Thanks for the post! Martin

]]> By: Seth Wagoner http://blog.fligtar.com/2006/11/21/reviewing-the-review-process/#comment-2042 Seth Wagoner Tue, 06 Mar 2007 21:52:23 +0000 http://blog.fligtar.com/2006/11/21/reviewing-the-review-process/#comment-2042 There are so many extensions in the sandbox area, people will have to go to a certain amount of effort to find the ones that might be worth trying out. It might in fact be necessary to allow the number off downloads to be used as a way to let the good stuff rise to the top and get recognition. I guess you could also use the average rating, or a weighted combination of both. It looks to me like the way the sandbox has been set up (hard to find!) and the fact that it's so very full, will mean that most of the marginal XPI's will now be hosted off people's own sites until they're ready for primetime. Which seems ok really. Setting the quality bar higher to get into the official addons list will inspire people to put a bit more effort into their extensions. (You should see ours! We've really done the hard yards, and are looking forward to seeing what people think of it) I think an improvement to the system as above might be that developers are only allowed to submit/nominate their plugins for review a limited number of times per month, or whatever, to stop the review queue from getting crowded. There are so many extensions in the sandbox area, people will have to go to a certain amount of effort to find the ones that might be worth trying out. It might in fact be necessary to allow the number off downloads to be used as a way to let the good stuff rise to the top and get recognition. I guess you could also use the average rating, or a weighted combination of both.

It looks to me like the way the sandbox has been set up (hard to find!) and the fact that it’s so very full, will mean that most of the marginal XPI’s will now be hosted off people’s own sites until they’re ready for primetime. Which seems ok really. Setting the quality bar higher to get into the official addons list will inspire people to put a bit more effort into their extensions. (You should see ours! We’ve really done the hard yards, and are looking forward to seeing what people think of it)

I think an improvement to the system as above might be that developers are only allowed to submit/nominate their plugins for review a limited number of times per month, or whatever, to stop the review queue from getting crowded.

]]> By: Doomedelite http://blog.fligtar.com/2006/11/21/reviewing-the-review-process/#comment-1360 Doomedelite Sat, 17 Feb 2007 20:52:34 +0000 http://blog.fligtar.com/2006/11/21/reviewing-the-review-process/#comment-1360 I would suggest that in the sandbox area, that you don't publicly show the number of downloads per add-on. This way, every plugin will get it's fair share of usage among users. I would suggest that in the sandbox area, that you don’t publicly show the number of downloads per add-on. This way, every plugin will get it’s fair share of usage among users.

]]> By: Seth Wagoner http://blog.fligtar.com/2006/11/21/reviewing-the-review-process/#comment-1322 Seth Wagoner Fri, 16 Feb 2007 07:28:47 +0000 http://blog.fligtar.com/2006/11/21/reviewing-the-review-process/#comment-1322 WRT Amanda's comments above, which are valid, I have three metamoderation tricks to suggest: 1) Take the "Was this comment helpful" link, make it bigger, and stick it at the top. :-) 2) Create a list of the "most helpful" reviews in the last 3 months, and link it from the menu. 3) Also Create a list of "best reviewers", and give the reviewers some form of ranking. Or, in other words, think like amazon :-) WRT Amanda’s comments above, which are valid,
I have three metamoderation tricks to suggest:

1) Take the “Was this comment helpful” link, make it bigger, and stick it at the top. :-)

2) Create a list of the “most helpful” reviews in the last 3 months, and link it from the menu.

3) Also Create a list of “best reviewers”, and give the reviewers some form of ranking.

Or, in other words, think like amazon :-)

]]>