Seriously. If you forgot your athletic supporter, I don't want to hear about it..
-
Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)
One simple way YOU can make this site great...
- Thread starter deBebbler
- Start date
Seriously. If you forgot your athletic supporter, I don't want to hear about it..
I used a bag holder once in attempt to get my camera off the ground to get a new perspective video... didn't work. One other time I attempted to use one because I was slightly amused at the fact that the hook was 12 inches off the ground, you'd have to have a very short strap to even keep the bag off the ground... anyway, bag holders, worthless, I don't think I've ever mentioned them in a review.
And if by critiquing hole layout, if you're talking about saying something like "Hole 7 should have been a dogleg left rather than the straight hole that it was" I agree with that. I will comment on apparent use of land available, I'll often mention something like "only 3 holes played through the woods, it was disappointing that more of the open holes didn't use the wooded area as there appeared to be plenty of room" Granted I was not and have not been involved in the course design and I don't know the reasoning for not using the woods, maybe it was personal design preference, maybe it was zoning, or maybe they're planning on adding new wooded holes, rarely do I know the actual answer. But is this information not helpful?
I will always comment on technical variety - this is the most important aspect to the enjoyability factor of a course for me. Good variety often equals higher rating, a lot of similar holes will garner a lower rating.
And if by critiquing hole layout, if you're talking about saying something like "Hole 7 should have been a dogleg left rather than the straight hole that it was" I agree with that. I will comment on apparent use of land available, I'll often mention something like "only 3 holes played through the woods, it was disappointing that more of the open holes didn't use the wooded area as there appeared to be plenty of room" Granted I was not and have not been involved in the course design and I don't know the reasoning for not using the woods, maybe it was personal design preference, maybe it was zoning, or maybe they're planning on adding new wooded holes, rarely do I know the actual answer. But is this information not helpful?
I will always comment on technical variety - this is the most important aspect to the enjoyability factor of a course for me. Good variety often equals higher rating, a lot of similar holes will garner a lower rating.
jtencer
Eagle Member
If some of those people live 1000 miles away from that course and never travel, you didn't really help them at all.
If a guy says that the park is only open from 8am-5pm, would you still think it was good information if the park was actually open from 10am-dark? I'd be pretty unhappy if I showed up at 9.
As far as the people who get pissed off and thumb down reviews, they are cheating the system. I don't condone that, but it isn't exactly relevant. Does that really happen very often? Is trying to talk people into giving more thumbs when they aren't using the information to counteract that really the best solution? Do two wrongs make a right?
jtencer
Eagle Member
Just to be clear, I'm against thumbing reviews just because they're on the front page, even if you have no intention to ever play the course (which is what the OP is advocating). I'm not against thumbing up reviews that helped you plan a trip even if you don't visit the course or against thumbing down bad reviews if they contain no information.
All the OB is doing is trying to get people more active in reading reviews since the average review only has 4-5 thumbs total. :wall:
jtencer
Eagle Member
"When logging on to DGCR, make your first step to vote on any review that was posted that day. If each of us takes this simple step, our members can get the feedback they need, whether they are the reviewer, or a potential visitor to the course. "
That's not how I read it.
jtencer
Eagle Member
BTW, I'm not going around thumbing reviews down because I don't agree with them. I may not be writing my own reviews, but I'm also not critiquing anyone else's work. I have actually never given a thumbs down.
"Then why are they reading the review, if that is the case, why thumb it at all?A thumbs down has to be a worthless review, it should be in the bottom 5% of reviews you have read. There is no rule you have to thumb, if a review is not a thumbs up, you can choose not to click either"
This is exactly my point. The OP is advocating that those people thumb the review. I'm saying that they shouldn't.
"Then why are they reading the review, if that is the case, why thumb it at all?A thumbs down has to be a worthless review, it should be in the bottom 5% of reviews you have read. There is no rule you have to thumb, if a review is not a thumbs up, you can choose not to click either"
This is exactly my point. The OP is advocating that those people thumb the review. I'm saying that they shouldn't.
The OP is trying to get peope to read reviews, I have had reviews sit for 1.5 years before getting a single thumbs up or down. The Average TR has only 5 total thumbs per course. To get 100 thumbs they have to review 20 courses.
What the OP is saying is lets show the reviewers some appreciation by reading their work. It does not take a genius to see if the review is good or not.
What the OP is saying is lets show the reviewers some appreciation by reading their work. It does not take a genius to see if the review is good or not.
jtencer
Eagle Member
So you don't see anything wrong with voting on every review that was posted that day which is what the OP says?
He is not saying vote on every review, just one.
jtencer
Eagle Member
He says "vote on any review that was posted that day" not "vote on a review that was posted that day."
I don't have any problem with voting on courses that you have played or are thinking about playing. I thought (and still think) that the OP was asking for more than that.
I think we agree on how the voting should be conducted but disagree on the intent of the OP. It would be nice if he would clarify by saying "a" or "every" instead of "any" which can apparently be interpreted different ways.
I don't have any problem with voting on courses that you have played or are thinking about playing. I thought (and still think) that the OP was asking for more than that.
I think we agree on how the voting should be conducted but disagree on the intent of the OP. It would be nice if he would clarify by saying "a" or "every" instead of "any" which can apparently be interpreted different ways.
any does not mean all. It means pick as many as you want.
jtencer
Eagle Member
What about this:
I'm about to mow. I need to go into the yard and pick up any dog crap that I find.
In this case it means "all." The wording is ambiguous.
I'm about to mow. I need to go into the yard and pick up any dog crap that I find.
In this case it means "all." The wording is ambiguous.
"Go to the store and pick out any candy bar" is more the way I read the word "any" in his post
or "eat any donuts on the table"
or "eat any donuts on the table"
jtencer
Eagle Member
Well I don't have a problem with that. I just don't think people should just go out and thumb a bunch of random reviews. I think we agree on that, so the intent of the OP is pretty immaterial.
I can see why my comments apparently came out of left field if you didn't read the OP the same way I did.
I can see why my comments apparently came out of left field if you didn't read the OP the same way I did.
So you prefer different formatting, some thing closer to bullet points. It is easy to read your way and I respect your opinion, but that seems to be more of a nit compared to the way he covered all of the salient points of that course (and I've played it) in just a few paragraphs.
Olorin is another of my favorites, he's a little more wordy but he covers many details that others miss.
If I were to take my highest rated review, change a few words, and paste it onto another course; you would read the review, and hit thumbs up. The review could say the course is wooded with lots of elevation changes and water hazards. Amenities. Bathrooms. Pro shop. 5 disc rated extravaganza. The review is fantastic, but there are no pictures on the course page for verification. People like you thumb it up and then someone finally reads them and decides to play the course. They go out and it's quaint 9 hole park course with some big oak trees and a relatively large stone fountain. Maybe a few park benches and a walmart nearby with measly disc selection.
Good thing you played it before you thumbed up.
OB, huh? You sayin' I'm an obstruction around here? Them's fightin' words!
I was specifically ambiguous, hoping some people might do just more than one. You know, do something. Anything more than you are doing now. (you meaning anyone, but also you specifically. Yeah, you. I know what you did last summer.)
If you had said that the content was a great example, I would have agreed. But you said 'Template'. If I am going to hold up a review as one to aspire to, I'm not going to choose one that could be made much easier to read and comprehend with 30 seconds of ctrl-x & ctrl-v.
Had that review just reordered the info into groups (first the flatness, then the tees, then the baskets, etc.) and still had it all in one jumble paragraph, I would probably not have responded. But it was NOT easy to read and that is not 'helpful'.
Not one review that I have read prior to my playing the course has grossly misrepresented a course in the manner you describe. The closest was a course that got ripped out and redesigned in the interim. If I were to have that experience, I think that I would PM the reviewer, and report it to a mod, with confidence that it would be dealt with swiftly.
Your argument is to not participate on a grander scale on the possibility that someone is grossly representing the facts in the review. If this were a common problem at DGCR, maybe, but as of now, I wholeheartedly disagree.
Besides, until former journalists from the New Your Times start reviewing here, I don't think you have much to worry about concerning blatant lies invented out of whole cloth.
thats why i always take my camera with me when playing a new course (unless im playing a tourney of course). I try to take good pictures so people can get a feel for the course as well as the review
Me too, but I was going to save my bitching about lack of pictures for another thread....
Similar threads
