|
Movies Books Music Food Tv Shows Technology Politics Video Games Parenting Fashion Green Living more >

Lunch » Tags » Social Media » Reviews » Reviews in Communities on Lunch » User review

Reviews in Communities on Lunch

A written critical evaluation and retrospective view in Communities on Lunch.

< read all 4 reviews

REVIEWS Are About Its Writers and Founders Should be About Their Members !

  • Apr 13, 2010
Rating:
+4

Around February this year, I was invited to begin a new Lunch.com feature called “Communities”. While I wasn’t exactly sure what to make out of it at first, I gave it a shot. Then on launch day, the "To Believe Or Not to Believe The Hype” was launched along with several other communities. “Hype” is a community that mostly dealt with movies and it had a good list of members since most of them were made up of my existing online friends; most of whom I‘ve known between 2006-2007. Other communities were leaving the Hype community in the dust though, when it came to member counts; and this was fine. My little group was happy to have a spot where we can just discuss movies. I liked the feature so much that I began a 2nd community called AsianFlixFix.
 
Well, that was months ago and now Lunch.com has a flurry of communities that most of the time I was just amazed how many invites must be going in and out of Lunch’s internet highway. Now a few weeks ago, I had my first issue in running my community; this issue was that there was someone among the Hype membership who was trying to convince some newer hype members that they should move their reviews to their new community since they deal with this so-called genre. I have since already confronted this member (who I shall not name, but the Hype members know because they were approached with similar requests) and while he denied it, this was NOT the only incident since another founder have experienced the same thing and another member have verified this member’s actions. A can of worms has been opened.
 
Here is the lies the problem in the communities--some are taking it as competition. The idea of communities was to have a nurturing community to have members around those with similar interests. While I think this should not be a problem, but the issue of cross-posting reviews have been brought up by other founders. This would be a great idea but it also opens up a can of worms. 

                          
 
Problems with Cross-posting or linking reviews up can arise. A community loses its uniqueness. Who would like to see the same review over and over again? I go out of my way to find the most obscure title for things to make the community I am reviewing for unique. If this happens, then another founder can just either link the review to his community. Therefore the writer can lose his ‘exclusive’ community choice and the founder can become another ‘ghost’ community under a much stronger community.
 
Solution: The writer should have the choice whether or not he wants to cross-post his review or whether he wants to link the topic to another. It is the writer’s hard work and no one else’s.

Founders can also be called “Community Buddies” so that the founders can allow collaboration. Let’s say in HYPE, a review can link up to my friend Frank’s “Maniacs” community while being in “Hype” and vice versa. Now how do we solve the problem of losing “unique-ness” (there a word?); having the reviewer break up the review in two chapters; one part can discuss the publicity while another its ’scare factor’. Once you click on the Topic, both reviews will be visible for the reader, thus only one set of votes. Also, I am all for collaborative reviews and I think this can be real fun. Of course this would involve major maneuvering between two founders.
 
But let’s be honest, this wouldn’t always work for all communities. Movies, yes. Food, yes. But things like political topics may be a little hard. 

                      
 
Founder Etiquette/Ethics- Now all these wouldn’t be an issue if the founders had guidelines right? Well, I go by some rules I have set for myself. A) I will not ask any member for any reviews to be moved to my community. If a member decides to help out a small community so be it, but as a founder I cannot undermine a fellow founder. B) I want my members to feel at home, I want them to interact with each other. C) Promote my friends’ communities within my own. D) I respect my fellow founders and  contribute to their communities whenever I can.
 
I see communities as NOT my own but founded by a  whole bunch of people. My members make my community--they have the ability to post whatever they want as long as it fits under the communities established tone and goal. The idea is to co-exist and support each other. Founders should have the same set of personal rules. This is supposed to be fun, but when fellow founders start stabbing each other in the back, then it becomes work and I do this to get away from my full time job.
 
Do not Overreach- Actually, I shouldn’t say anything about this, since my “To Believe Or Not to Believe The Hype” community is pretty broad and quite frankly a little unfocused. Well, if you’re not a member, then you may not understand. Members should know that I founded this community to reach out to movie lovers; if the ‘Hype” community had a goal it was to promote people, cinema and interactions. The HYPE community was about people’s tastes. Movie HYPE was about its members.
 
                   
 
But back to the topic. When I was invited, I thought founders were supposed to be as focused as possible. Communities should be aimed at a single thing or person. Example: James Bond movies, Tolkien or Star Trek. I’ve seen broader SCI-FI or Comic Book communities. Now we have a problem; if I review a cartoon called “Clone Wars” which can fit under animation, sci-fi or “Star Wars” if there was a community. I review a video game for the PS3, should it go to the “Gaming Hub” or under “PS3 Games’? This is where the problems begin.
 
I have expressed my reservations about making communities “open season”. Lunch made the right decision since they don’t want to alienate anybody; but it can get chaotic and stressful for members. Now the site has to deal with different personalities and possible clashes. I don’t believe the site has the manpower to monitor the approvals of each community, to avoid possible ‘alike’ communities. But I do also believe that no one should be held back and everyone should be able to do what they want as long as they don't conflict Lunch's mission statement.

                        
 
Solution: Self discipline and respect should be practiced among founders and members. Failing this, (I know human nature won’t allow self discipline) the site may have to make ‘COMMUNITY FOUNDER GUIDELINES’. Guidelines such as simple founder rules; do's and don'ts. I was told, don’t worry about members that come and go (this is true) but it is more about etiquette. Wow. I assume that most members aren’t getting paid to do this community thing, but imagine the things that would open up if they were getting paid? If a founder doesn’t follow those guidelines, then the community can be deleted (like maybe if he doesn't log in for months?). I know this is sad for an unpaid person to be alienated, but as human beings, we do need rules. 

Also, this is also where 'collaborative communities' can work to everyone's advantage. No one will feel left out and everyone will have a chance to be heard. I still believe that communities can co-exist, and even similar communities can help each other rather than competing against one another. Founders should know NOT to compete and put members on the spot.
 
Honestly, I find the communities to be fun and yet a little taxing at times. In the end, I think it is how you treat your members and how you listen to what they have to say that would make a community successful. Founders should also learn to co-exist and I do linger around a very huge field for a community; there are a lot of other founders who wants to do movie communities it seems.
 
Reviews in Communities are about the members who write them.

Note: Please excuse if I got a little off topic and if I made some errors, I got a lot of phone calls while writing this.
REVIEWS Are About Its Writers!

What did you think of this review?

Helpful
27
Thought-Provoking
27
Fun to Read
27
Well-Organized
27
Post a Comment
April 16, 2010
William, you have an uncanny knack for articulating the thoughts we all share but dare not even attempt to put into words. Great points, fantastic visual aids, and a welcomed message for the community at large. Kudos my friend.
April 16, 2010
Thanks buddy.
 
April 14, 2010
Nice. I see you paraphrased my bit about the nurturing and support needed to make communities thrive.
April 14, 2010
But of course, we need a lot of nurturing, varlet!
April 15, 2010
Watch who you're calling a varlet, you wannabe Asgardian! LOL!
April 15, 2010
wwhhooossshhhh!! (throws hammer at Orlok) Braka-WHAMMMMM!!! Orlok goes through a wall!
April 15, 2010
Wha-wha! I walk through walls anyway. ; )
April 15, 2010
whirls hammer and absorbs Orlok's atoms and mixes them with waffles... ;-)
April 15, 2010
Okay, now that's just being silly. Mutant vampire-waffle hybrid. Sounds like a bad Eggo commercial.
 
April 14, 2010
Thanks woo.
 
April 14, 2010
Excellent write up WP, like I asked MM why would someone post the same thing twice in different communities? Oh well any way I have something I will be dropping in yours later, great work WP.
 
April 13, 2010
hey William. thanks for sharing these thoughts. i'm really glad we set this place up to allow people to share their thoughts/insights. it's really pretty cool huh?

Etiquette I hear you on that... it's annoying if someone comes and wants to lure one of your members and their reviews into their community. I think we need to determine what the proper etiquette is for that situation and i think that will define itself over time. i'm not sure it's fair to call that founder unethical when it might be that they doing in a way that isn't, say, the most polite manner. Since this is brand new... literally less than a month old... it will take a little time to figure out the proper etiquette. But we'll figure it out.

Cross posting reviews into different communities. This is something that we have spent A LOT of time thinking about and i'll just share some of my perspective for what ever it is worth. I want to give the community founders all the tools they need to build strong communities with great content.  I believe the best content is created within a community format where people are comfortable to get creative and contribute because they are surrounded by others who they trust and they share their interests.  This is what i'm always talking about when i say "context".  The best reviews have a certain context whethere you even realize it or not.  If i'm reviewing a steakhouse in a Vegan community that is a differnt content than if i'm reviewing it BBQ community.  Each one of those contexts helps to shape the reviews and ultimately result in better contributions.  This is why we built communities and this is why we are spending a lot of time and energy to help them flourish.  Context is king.

Cross posting reviews has become a very hot topic so let me break it down pros and cons quickly as i see it.

pros: 
1.  it allows the author (contributor) to get more exposure their reviews and this is very exciting for the contributor
2.  It reduces competition between the communities, because it will be easy for each community to have very similar, if not identical reviews in it.
3. It's hugely beneficial to a new community founder because it allows new community founders to jump start their community by internally marketing to existing contributors and asking them to cross post  their reviews.
4.  It allows the contributor to much wider exposure by allowing them to cross post reviews into any community that will have their reviews.
5.  New community founders can create a community without doing any external marketing to attract new contributors from outside Lunch.

Cons:
1.  Communities will lose context.  If a review can live in mulitple communites then we will end up with zero context in those communities.  If we lose context then we lose the BEST contributions. 
2.  Uniqueness of communities.  If communities all have the same reviews without any context, then all the communites look the same and we'll be in a situation where we have to ask ourselves do we really even need communities.
3.  Hurts older founders.  Let's put this in perspective.  We have a few hundred or so communities right now.  I see a day in the not so distant future when we will have a few hundred thousand communities.  If we make is simple to cross post your review into muliple communities, then it will encourage new founders to solicit that from contributors.  That will result in spam.
4.  Creates spam for contributors.  Every new founder setting up a community on Lunch will just start spamming every contributor to join and move their reviews into this new community.  That could result in massive amounts of spam. Sure people are being asked now to move their reviews when it's not even encouraged... could you imagine what it would be like with thousands of new communities being formed with each founder hitting up every contributor who has written a review they want?  Ugh.
5.  Discourages outward marketing and promotion of communities.  Again some perspective.  Right now our total membership is in the tens of thousands.  We have the potential to be in the tens of millions.  Some of the most successful founders in the future will create vibrant communities because they will be good at attracting people from outside of Lunch to join their community.  This type of behavior should be encouraged and rewarded.  Recruiting people from outside of Lunch takes more work than finding someone who is already on the site and that person's work should be rewarded.  If he/she spends the energy to attract new people into their community, and those people create content, their reward should be that some founder cant come in later and easily duplicate all of their work by quickly cross posting reviews into their community.  That's not fair IMO.

I personally believe that not allowing for cross posting is HUGELY beneficial to Lunch overall, the current founders, and to new founders who are good at marketing their community to new people and exposing new people to Lunch.  So I have been against cross posting from the begginning.  However when i hear founders like @woopak_the_thrill @Adrianna and @Sharrie (three early founders who are actually really benefiting the most in the long term from this) getting really upset about not being able to cross post... that's enough to get me thinking about it again.  So for now... things will remain status quo, but i hear you guys... and we'll keep thinking about.  I just want to give each community it's best chance to succeed in the long term and i'll do what ever i can to make that happen.
April 13, 2010
Great explanation of the pros and cons, JR! I laughed when I read how detailed your cons were in comparison to the pros.  ;)

Having community founder guidelines or rules of etiquette will help alleviate some of the fears from 3, 4, and 5.

For 1 and 2, allowing the founders more control to personalize the communities with html code or colors and image formatting  will help protect the unique individuality of each community. Also, the context of a community is controlled by the founders who are constantly asking reviewers for new content as well as placing new items as the featured topic to review. I really don't see a loss of context happening unless a community founder stops caring about their community.
April 13, 2010
Hey, yep I do really like this idea about a community for funders and it is a wonderful way for the staff and members to be able to touch base. Thanks for visiting my write up. 

Please don't think I was being snarky about that other founder, (he actually read this and liked it a lot) it's just that some other members have expressed that they are a little uncomfortable when they become approached with things like this. I feel really bad when they feel that they have to think about where they should post when they should just be enjoying the atmosphere in the site. I firmly believe that it is not about a founder and a community, it is all about the member's experience; in the long run, this would definitely benefit the site. I know you guys are working on it, and you guys know more about this kind of stuff than we would.

Me and Frank actually agree with your cons, when we really think about it. I do think that some things can be collaborated on certain topics--but not all. It may take too much work for two founders to coordinate everything too.

Well, I am happy that you paid us a visit (I hope Devora didn't think we were whiny LOL) I guess despite all the drama and some weird stuff, we are becoming a community by having disagreements LOL After all, families argue. ;-)
April 14, 2010
LOL... no, not getting upset at all, JR. I've seen worse thing on the last site, cross posting I figure is beneficial to a reviewer, that's all. Plus, it won't create fights among founders. I'm not in the habit of asking anyone to do anything, so moving reviews problems really isn't a problem as far as I am concerned. I move my own reviews between different communities (esp. within mine) quite regularly simply because some articles just never get any attention in a community or that community becomes so huge that I can't even find my own reviews within anymore! Anyway, in any site, there are bound to be trouble makers. That's simply life. Nothing to get upset about ;-)
April 14, 2010
Actually, it can easily be solved if what we are looking at are contributors who are really into reviewing. Just allow 2 reviews or multiple reviews on one topic! On the condition no copy & paste reviews allowed across the board. That means if I choose to write reviews from 2 different perspective on a single topic, that ought to be allowed. Afterall, quick tips are allowed, so why not reviews?
April 14, 2010
"However when i hear founders like @woopak_the_thrill @Adrianna and @Sharrie (three early founders who are actually really benefiting the most in the long term from this) getting really upset about not being able to cross post... that's enough to get me thinking about it again. " .... I'm not so sure about this, JR. There is still a "move" function which members can move reviews around. That translates to a lot of game play by people, be it new or old founders. Don't make a difference as to how long you've been on a site. That didn't work in a corporate environment either. Loyalty has nothing to do with online behaviors a all!
April 14, 2010
With regard to community founders, personally, I don't relish the idea that anyone can set up one as soon as he/she joins the site. It may be better if the said member has at least been on Lunch for 6 months or so (or some numbers of reviews) and actively contributing before being allowed to set up a community. There may of course be exception, subject to approval from Lunch.
April 14, 2010
@Sharrie, I agree on her last comment. I find anyone able to set up a community right off the bat a little unfair (of course there can be exceptions) The staff needs to look at this member's reviewing habits and how they use the site before becoming a founder. Let's be honest, not all folks can be founders, and they can only be around to give grief to everybody else.
April 14, 2010
@jrjohnson, I'd like a new feature for community founder to send text messages to his/her members (somewhat like a comment on the community home page) whereby that short text will be recorded on the homepage of the community. This feature may be used for informing members of interesting news pertaining to the community theme or other news about the community itself. Like a tweet but one that will reach members' mailboxes. What do you think?
April 15, 2010
oh, @jrjohnson, I am no longer in favor of cross-posting now that I think about it.
 
April 13, 2010
No one has approached me about changing to their community (which sort of reinforces my feelings that nobody reads anything that I write, especially the head honchos), but that doesn't mean I haven't been in a turmoil about where to post reviews since a lot of my stuff is boundary crossing. Take my Bollywood vampire flick--I originally put it in foreign flix, but then moved it when the Count set up his Vampire community. I didn't feel good about doing it but that's where it really belonged. That community just hadn't existed when I put it in foreign films. If I had really LIKED the flick then I would have had an even bigger problem because I would have wanted to put it in the HYPE community!
April 13, 2010
Karen, I think the reason why you weren't approached is because your stuff wouldn't belong in this 'other' founder's communities. Also, I think it is a well known fact that active members like you, me, Trashie, Frank, Dave, Chris and Orlok are pretty close...the ones usually approached are the active reviewers who are just starting out. (actually this 'other' didn't know we were also buddies)
April 13, 2010
Oh guys, by head honchos, I meant the bigwigs with Lunch--not the community founders.
April 14, 2010
Ditto Queenbflix, I don't have such problem either. But as I said, I'm just a nobody, haha!
April 14, 2010
Welcome to the wonderful world of nobodys!
April 14, 2010
Oh well, continue the discussion. I'm heading out the Universal Studios Singapore for some fun. Will check back later tonight!
April 14, 2010
Sounds like fun to me too. Have a good time, Sharrie!
April 14, 2010
How many times have I tried to get you to join one of my communities?! We want people to read your stuff, because it's great and by joining the communities, you'll get more exposure and hopefully a wider range of readers. Plus, part of the reason that you may have fewer readers may be because you don't review as frequently as some people do. I know that that's the case with my stuff a lot of the time, since I spend so much time researching that months will go by between my reviews. Keep you head up though, you may not have as many readers as Stephen King does, but you have better fans!
April 14, 2010
Another reason is because a lot of people I read and comment on simply aren't returning the favor. Thanks for the pat on the back.
April 14, 2010
I have one rule when interacting online: if they don't acknowledge my comment by replying, then I stop visiting.
April 14, 2010
Actually, don't worry too much about other people. I've personal friends who actually complained that I wrote too much even before I joined Lunch! While it is true that over time I may have accumulated lots of writing and may proved to be overwhelming for them and probably most people don't read my reviews here on Lunch either coz what I had written don't really interest them (I've those who added me as friends and followers who hardly read or write me) or there are others who interact with them more and hence, they prefer to read others, I'm sure there are someone out there in the world who are reading. My main reason for writing is because I've something to share, not because I've readers or not. Even for Dan Brown, for many years, not many people read them. Same for Susan Boyle for the longest time too. No one truly listen to her. But if you keep at it, one day someone will. The joy of reviewing should be the ultimate reward, not viewership, imo. Naturally, when what you've written is read by some on this site, then that motivates one to write better and more.
April 15, 2010
I know, I know. It's just a downer sometimes. Especially when you have a bad case of writer's block going at the same time.
April 16, 2010
That is true. When you are inspired, just write them. When I was at VirtualTourist.com for the longest time I had writer's block. Nothing I can do about it, just let nature takes its course. It's good to know at least a person or two is reading it though :-) In any case, I write when I can. Not when someone else is reading...
April 16, 2010
That's what writer's block is, a lack of inspiration.
 
April 13, 2010
Thanks so much for sharing your experience and insight, Woo!  I'm impressed that you could talk on the phone and write such a great and thoughtful review ;P  We hear you loud and clear about cross-posting. Like I've mentioned to you before, competition was never our intention and the last thing we would ever want to do is create hostility among Lunchers.  That would totally go against our mission statement, so thank you for pointing this out.  Just a FYI, cross-posting has been a hot topic among the Lunch team (as it has been for Lunchers!), so we'll see what we can do.  As you pointed out, we've got a lot of stuff to weigh out.  Thanks again, Woo!
April 13, 2010
Hi, Lady, D, me and Adrianna had messaged each other about this issue also. I feel so bad when a member needs to weigh things out where he should post his review. All a reviewer needs to worry about is writing the review, (I actually got another message about this this morning) It is just sad that some founders are so tactless to put someone in that position. You know what this 'other' told me: "well, there are no guidelines that we can't do that.." Believe it, It is just annoying.
April 13, 2010
also, I told this 'other' founder to ask for the reviews that didn't belong to any community, I cannot comprehend why he would ask something to be moved when it already belonged under something else. Oh, I think this happened with other founders too.

also, besides getting phone calls, I was eating the huge pot stickers from U-Lee ;-P
April 14, 2010
I hear ya on that, Woo. J.R. did bring up some very good points about x-posting and Founders ethics in his comment above though. Ideally, community founders would be respectful and diplomatic, and should be able to fall back on one another as fellow Founders and resources.  We'll have to think about how to approach this.  The way you're feeling about it is totally understandable.

And I still need to try U-Lee!
April 14, 2010
Thanks, Lady D. Oh by the way, I responded to your comment under @Sharrie's profile; you both need to hit review # 500...but of course I want Sean Rhodes to come with so I don't have to order anything LOL! I have some more giant pot stickers...want some? ;-P
April 14, 2010
@Scotman, I'll have to say that I would have to agree that the approval process has to be reinstated. We shouldn't have folks who hasn't even reviewed that much in the site or real new members have a community when we don't even know how they're going to handle it. (of course there can be exceptions)
April 19, 2010
500, eh? At this point, it'll be another three years :P And yes, I'd like some giant potstickers!

@Scotman, if you wanna draft your own Bill of Rights for Founders, you're welcome to dish your two cents in this topic for Founders in Communities on Lunch! ;)
April 19, 2010
are you guys hinting at something at me? ;-)
April 19, 2010
>.>
<.<
>.>
<.<
 
April 13, 2010
Great review!! I'm really getting sick and tired of the community drama. It's taking away from the fun of the site! If I wanted to join a "group" or a "community," I would have joined more on Yahoo or Goodreads. Hell, I would have joined specific websites that function for a certain type of review. Things are getting to be too much with the exclusivity and specificity of communities. I'm about collaboration and working together with my community founders. Lunch does not make this easy! For example, I want more of a character limit for my home page message, so I can advertise for some affiliated and overlapping groups. The space is not there! I also agree that reviews are the property of the writers, NOT the communities. I'm pretty pissed that my reviews are limited to one locale, and I desperately hope Lunch changes this. Communities will not all look alike because not all members will want their reviews listed in multiple communities. Plus, if they limit the amount of cross-referencing, that will ensure uniqueness. 

For me, the beauty and attraction of Lunch was that I could find ANYTHING to review. I simply had to type in a topic, and if it wasn't on the site, I could add it as a data point. Now, topics are all tied up in communities. If your review doesn't belong in a community, it won't get noticed as much. Lunch has lost a lot of the freedom it provided users, or at least the freedom that attracted me to the site. Rather than having communities be interest groups that bring like-minded people together, communities are places to store and host your reviews, which I do not think is as valuable. I much would have preferred discussion type groups where we could have talked about reviews to write and what we liked about a topic rather than imprisoning our reviews in one community.

Because I am so disappointed with the communities, I refuse to make another.
April 13, 2010
Thanks, James. I'm not sure it will make as much sense outside of the context of William's review. Plus, I have made this point on numerous occasions to JR and his team, both over the phone and on the discussion topic where it was decreed that reviews would be limited to one community. At this point, it doesn't seem like they want to change their policies. It's more important for the communities to be unique than to satisfy the contributors.

Currently, I do not feel comfortable to write a review about communities nor do I have the time. I've fallen behind on review writing because of my thesis writing. Needless to say, I will not be generous and give communities a +4 or a +5. I will be on the lower end. I still want to reevaluate my feelings about this new feature and give it more time to hopefully grow and adapt to what users want it to be rather than the Lunch powers that be.
April 13, 2010
Hear hear! You are the first person I've heard to express this idea! The more I experience communities, the more I agree! I doubt Lunch will ever scrap this project, though. They have invested a lot of time and effort into selling the idea to users, and I think more people are voicing that they like it than that they don't. I've voiced my distaste, but not in review format yet. Maybe that's the only way we will get heard? Thanks for your thoughts on the matter, Francisco!
April 13, 2010
I'm sorry to hear this, Adrianna, but thank you so much for sharing your insight.  The community feature was created with the intention of bringing people together through common interests.  They are meant to allow users to create custom review sites for their own unique interests.

Rest assured, as hot a topic as cross-posting is for Lunchers, it is also a very hot topic for the behind-the-scenes Lunch team.  Right now, we're sifting through all the feedback that we've been receiving (like all of yours in this comment thread!) and weighing out all possibilities and outcomes before we make any decisions.  Your opinions do matter very much to us and we will see what we can do to improve Lunchers' user experiences.  At this point, this feature has been out for less than a month, so we've got kinks to work out and a ton of new ideas to implement, so sit tight.  Thanks again for the feedback!
April 13, 2010
@Scotman lol! My powers lie with a veggie sandwiches. ;)

@wrestleanimaniac Thanks for clarifying. I like the idea of communities or else I wouldn't belong in groups on other sites. I don't like the execution, though.

@devora Nods. I understand the purpose of communities, but I disagree with the intention/mission of them. If I wanted custom review sites for specific topics, I would go to other sites that offer that or even create my own website to feature something. I came to Lunch seeking a free forum where there were no boundaries. Now, I find myself boxed in my categories, aka communities. I'm just not digging them. I do look forward to what develops within upcoming months. I'm sitting back and giving Lunch time to develop and change the concept, which I do hope they take advantage of. :)
April 13, 2010
I agree with all you've said, Adrianna. I was just telling Debbie how a reviewer should just worry about writing--the writer has to control where the review goes and nothing else. It was horrible that this other founder made you feel bad about your own review. Me, I go by a simple rule: if a founder just popped out of nowhere to try to get my reviews, they never acknowledged me before (and I know my reviews wasn't really their thing) then my review stays where they are. I do try to help out other communities by moving my OWN reviews and not convince anyone to move theirs.
April 13, 2010
hey Adrianna... i hear you on the character limit on the community welcome... i thought we talked about that, and it's underway. I also want to be able to post more pictures for my community too... that will be coming as well. Thanks for sharing all the thoughts!! On the freedom to post anything... you still have that obviously and don't have to post anything in a community if you don't want to. I know you are aware of that, so i'm wondering why it feels like there is less freedom now... we haven't taken anything away... we've only added stuff. The fact is feels less free to post about anything is an issue we need to fix... any more thoughts on why you feel that way are really welcome and i've love to hear more about that.
April 13, 2010
@woopak_the_thrill THANKS! You speak my sentiments more eloquently than myself! I just find myself shying away from contributing too much to the other communities I've joined unless I really know the community founder. I don't want to feel pressured to move my reviews, and I don't want to feel hurt when I do move them. With so many new communities being made, it seems that more and more reviews will be flip-flopping about. I don't want to personally hurt some people by moving them, so I am starting to see leaving reviews out from communities as a good thing. Maybe something better will come along. Who knows!

@jrjohnson Great news about the character limit! I didn't realize that was under way. I can't wait to give some shout-outs to other communities where content materials overlap! This should be a lot of fun. In regards to your suggestion about not posting anything in communities, herein lies the problem: "I believe the best content is created within a community format where people are comfortable to get creative and contribute because they are surrounded by others who they trust and they share their interests." This is the type of mindset us nonconformists will be fighting against. People will begin to assume that the best content is in a community and will thus overlook us "free agents." I don't write to only get my belief system reinforced by like minded individuals. I write to expand others' perceptions about topics they might not usually give a second glance to as well as get other people reacting to my own content, even if it is critical or negative. I know having a safe zone for new reviewers to get started in is important, and I respect and am very happy that we have such amazing communities and founders doing that. I just want more freedom in regards to contributor options in communities.
 
April 13, 2010
One other thing, William, it is not just about writers or founders. It's about the billions of internet users out there who are potential Lunch members! That's where you should source for your new reviews and community members. Not within Lunch.
April 13, 2010
Again, you misundertand me. You should say that to the member/founder who always ask reviews to be moved to his community. There is a word for this: 'Phishing'. But see, folks see this person as to what he is, and I didn't even do anything. Co-exist and not compete.  

I say Reviews are about its writers because it is their creation, and founders should be committed to good members.
April 13, 2010
Actually, I do not think it is a sin although it is not nice of that founder to do so. But, you can not stop others from asking. Anyone can ask, it is really up to the member concerned to decide in the end where he wants his reviews to be. But that's just my take on it, I don't really like to ask anyone to do anything.
April 13, 2010
exactly. I bear no hard feelings if a member wants to help another out, (I've supported other communities this way, I've moved 30 reviews of my own from 'hype' to support someone new) but it was my choice. But for a member to go around different communities to see what or who he can snatch should be a no-no. Puts pressure on the member and builds animosity to some. God, a founder even made another founder guilty by writing his own review on the same topic. As I said guidelines--I'll talk to some of you in forums more about this.

See, you're lucky that you don't have to deal with stuff like this right now, but I do sometimes because my communities' core members are pretty close.
April 13, 2010
William, it's not i'm lucky. It's I'm nobody, LOL.. When you are active enough or profitable enough, people do that, not just online. It's the same thing out there in the world. Corporations do that! Welcome to the real world! I simply don't choose to deal with it when I'm not being paid for it! :p
April 13, 2010
you have a good attitude! LOL and you're not a nobody..you're a somebody to me. ;-) How many women have made me say GGRrrrrrr.....LOL But the day I let a clown push me around online is the day I lose my face. I already get screwed enough at work. see, you're used to this things (social network) while I'm used to the animosities of amazon.com....LOL
April 13, 2010
Oh, no worries. You're simply more passionate about movies and reviews than I'm. To me, the day when I don't enjoy a site is the day I loses motivation to put out anything in the world of social network. That would be the end of my online life! Never ever let someone out there crushed your spirit and enjoyment of a site. ;-)
April 13, 2010
Speaking of which, may be it's a guy's thing. You know, guys are wired to compete while women collaborate! We girls don't seem to have that problem (as yet!) ;-)
April 13, 2010
well, men need beer to collaborate. unfortunately, we can't have some online LOL
April 13, 2010
Just send the bill over to JR ;-)
 
April 13, 2010
I agree with most of what you say here. However, ethics is something that's difficult to accurately define. What's not ethical to you may be ethical to someone else. Not that I disagree with you that there should be some form of ethical behavior. However, not forgetting that there is this similarity feature in Lunch which translates to the fact that your interest is also someone else's interest. Hence, overlapping or similar communities are bound to happen. It's also not fair for the site to claim that on first come first serve basis, not to mention another person might be serious about his/her community more than the first person who set it up!

In addition, there is the question of founders who have somewhat abandoned their community after a period of inactivity on the site without prior notice to members. Why set it up then? If there is just 1 or 2 members in the community, I can at least understand. But if there are 20+ members there, does that founder expect the community to self-run without even bother to log onto Lunch?

Deleting a community is a delicate issue. If Lunch chooses to exercise that, they must first outline what are the behaviors not allowed, i.e. rules. Otherwise, it's not fair to anyone who had contributed their time to set up something without getting paid for it!
April 13, 2010
actually you misunderstand what I said about ethics. As I said it is all about the writer's decision, if they want to move a review, so be it (for whatever reason), I have moved several of my reviews to a new community to help out truth be told. I say ethics because while I cannot expect everyone to follow a code, and of course overlapping things will happen, another founder should not do questionable behavior.

I never said delete a community, but there has to be guidelines because we can all agree that different personalities always clash. Undesirable behavior such as being a troll, and such; but I think it'll never come to that since members see the disagreeable actions of a founder, and members can make a community fail. We are all guests in this site, so it is only right to have guidelines for founders, but no, members should not be banned.

As for the founders who had seemingly abandoned the site, maybe if a founder hasn't logged in for a period of time, maybe they need to contact him as to what happened? A founder needs to be defined. Again, I agree that deleting a community is a delicate issue, but what happens if it's inactive for a long time or if the founder doesn't treat his members well? takes things as too mcuh of a competition. Again, guidelines is the answer.
April 13, 2010
If it's inactive or founder is not to the members liking for whatever reason, with just a click, anyone can leave the community. Members have freedom to leave, ya know ;-)
April 13, 2010
never said it wasn't. Leaving is one's own decision (did I say they didn't have a choice or I'm tying them down?)
April 13, 2010
Oh, don't be defensive on me. I'm simply responding to your statement "but what happens if it's inactive for a long time or if the founder doesn't treat his members well?". The said community will simply cease to exist.
April 13, 2010
as well it should. I would delete my own community if I can't do it anymore. guidelines, my friend, guidelines!
April 13, 2010
There is no button for you to delete your own community, btw ;-)
April 13, 2010
I'll make my own LOL!
April 13, 2010
LOL... I'd like to make one to delete some people off this planet, LOL!!! 
April 13, 2010
How about some K-Pop to lighten up the mood? ;-)
April 13, 2010
alright...just because you asked. I'll write one about one of the popular Kpop artists...see? I am a nice guy....
April 13, 2010
Oh, I thought you mentioned it the day before yesterday! I was merely checking, ;-). If you're going to take as long as that email which you said you're going to draft out some 1 month ago, I thought I'd get going on K-pop instead, LOL...

I can't have you thinking I'm "robbing" you your reviews! ;p
April 13, 2010
BOOOO...regarding that, I'll e-mail you again...
April 16, 2010
I'm still waiting!!!
April 16, 2010
patience, my dear....patience. I already made the topic points. ;-)
 
1
More Reviews in Communities on Lunc... reviews
Quick Tip by . September 22, 2010
Nice way of getting your thoughts out, it's too bad that once the review is in a community and won't apply to lunch as a whole for Badges or linking to lists.
Quick Tip by . April 13, 2010
The communities are great, but cross-posting between communities would make the content better.
Quick Tip by . April 13, 2010
How about creating another window whereby founders can add reviews from non-member & a link to other 'professional' sites?
About the reviewer
William ()
Ranked #1
Please "Like" Film and Movies and Keep the Economy strong....LOL!!      My Interests: Movies, Anime, History, Martial Arts, Comics, Entertainment,Cooking, Things I don't … more
Consider the Source

Use Trust Points to see how much you can rely on this review.

You
woopak_the_thrill
Your ratings:
rate more to improve this
About this topic

Wiki

Reviews in Commununities on Lunch are written critical evaluation and retrospective view by Community Founders and their members.

As a Community Founder, you can shape the tone of the reviews in your community and help guide your members in writing reviews by providing review prompts.  Founders can also choose reviews that are stellar examples of what their communities are about and feature them on their community homepage.
view wiki

Details

Polls
About Section in Communities on Lunch

Favorite Features on Lunch.com

by

© 2014 Lunch.com, LLC All Rights Reserved
Lunch.com - Relevant reviews by real people.
()
This is you!
Ranked #
Last login
Member since
reviews
comments
ratings
questions
compliments
lists