Why do people hate my reviews?

[PHDParrot]

Recently signed up and started giving reviews and no one is "finding them helpful", I'm giving factual information and trying to help by giving my honest opinion of the course, I don't see what I'm doing wrong. I've seen some pretty terrible reviews that I disagree with but I didn't trash their review if they gave a genuine review with factual information. What's the issue?

 

[BogeyNoMore]

Try using a few sentences to describe the how the course plays and shot variety.
Did any holes stand out to you and why?

 

[BogeyNoMore]

Also, this crowd tends to take ratings seriously. By definition, 4.0 and above means excellence or better.
If you rate a course as 4.0 or better, you're telling us it's a course worth travelling to, not just "pretty good."
Active DGCR members want to see such claims of excellence supported by statements describing what makes that course appreciably better than very good.

The higher the rating, the more important it is to support it in the review.

That's just my take, and while I don't speak for everybody, I'd say I have a pretty good feel for how things work on DGCR.

 

[txmxer]

As a novice to DG, I jumped in and provided ratings and reviews as best I could. I didn't realize my reviews would be judged, but apparently they've been okay based on response.

I tried to convey my experience on the courses I reviewed based on where my game is. I can't review a course for an expert/pro level player, so I review it based on how it plays for me.

I try to document the course constants—baskets, tee pads, etc. Playing a new course, it's common to struggle with the layout. Does the UDisc map or other course map help you navigate the course? Cell coverage is important.

Do I need to bring water and are there bathrooms/port o johns?

Of course if you can add in humor that appeals to most.

 

[PHDParrot]

Try using a few sentences to describe the how the course plays and shot variety.
Did any holes stand out to you and why?

I mean, I did. Basically a paragraph per section, a couple just a sentence or two but usually longer. Not as long as some other reviews but a course that already has 20+ reviews, 15 of which are extremely long, probably doesn't need another book of a review. Also, similarly concise reviews were doing way better than mine, though not as well as the books.

 

[PHDParrot]

Also, this crowd tends to take ratings seriously. By definition, 4.0 and above means excellence or better.
If you rate a course as 4.0 or better, you're telling us it's a course worth travelling to, not just "pretty good."
Active DGCR members want to see such claims of excellence supported by statements describing what makes that course appreciably better than very good.

The higher the rating, the more important it is to support it in the review.

That's just my take, and while I don't speak for everybody, I'd say I have a pretty good feel for how things work on DGCR.

I didnt really give any crazy high or crazy low reviews. Maybe 1? But every course I gave 4+ to I think is worth traveling to. Tbh I think this points to a hiveminding of opinions on this website. For example, I gave a good rating to a course where I noticed some people giving middling ratings due to lack of multiple pins/pads on many holes. But for me, I don't like the courses that have a trillion tee pads and the basket moves weekly. My review was still open about the lack of multiple pads and pin locations, just imo it didn't take away from the course.

 

[nothinbuttree]

I will try to give some honest first impressions, I appreciate you reviewing, and wanting your reviews to be helpful. Please keep at it!

I just read one review, but here is the Pros section;

A course designed with the player in mind. Fun and unique on every hole. Plays through some tight woods but with smart pad design, nothing too daunting. Novice-friendly but not without its challenges.

It's pretty vague, and really gives no factual info other than tight woods. For instance- what does designed with player in mind mean? Which player? Eagle....or me? Not sure what smart pad design means.

I would suggest reading well liked reviews and seeing what content they offer. Most well liked reviews have good meat.

Don't give up!

 

[nothinbuttree]

Also, I don't frankly care what rating you give it, if you like it or not, etc. For me to 'like' a review, it has to do one thing, and that is answer the question: "would I want to play it?" I have liked as many 0.5 star reviews as 4.5 reviews. Tell a good story so I can either put it on my wish list, or in my bagger only bucket.

 

[PHDParrot]

I will try to give some honest first impressions, I appreciate you reviewing, and wanting your reviews to be helpful. Please keep at it!

I just read one review, but here is the Pros section;

A course designed with the player in mind. Fun and unique on every hole. Plays through some tight woods but with smart pad design, nothing too daunting. Novice-friendly but not without its challenges.

It's pretty vague, and really gives no factual info other than tight woods. For instance- what does designed with player in mind mean? Which player? Eagle....or me? Not sure what smart pad design means.

I would suggest reading well liked reviews and seeing what content they offer. Most well liked reviews have good meat.

Don't give up!

That's fair but what I don't want to do is have my reviews become so long, I mean so many courses already have tons of long reviews, I wanted my reviews to be fairly concise.

I tried to elaborate in that it was fun and unique on every hole, but without giving a detailed description on every hole, I'm not sure I could elaborate on that point. Maybe give a couple examples, and I concede that I could've done better, but I doubt many people honestly interested in the course are reading through 20+ reviews that are 15 paragraphs each. If that's the expectation, I am definitely giving up because what you call "meat" I would call "filler" and if people are really giving hole-by-hole reviews then just go to the course already ffs. I don't need toxicity from people who have such ridiculous expectations from every post. Those people probably have 20 page resumes. No thanks.

 

[Monocacy]

. . . Tbh I think this points to a hiveminding of opinions on this website. For example, I gave a good rating to a course where I noticed some people giving middling ratings due to lack of multiple pins/pads on many holes. But for me, I don't like the courses that have a trillion tee pads and the basket moves weekly. My review was still open about the lack of multiple pads and pin locations, just imo it didn't take away from the course.

People who express non-standard opinions in their reviews often get positive feedback as long as they explain WHY they hold an opinion that may be different than most. Explaining probably does not take a book, but voters are going to expect some explanation.

Using your example above, what is it that you do not like about courses with multiple pads and baskets that are regularly moved?

 

[BogeyNoMore]

...what you call "meat" I would call "filler" and if people are really giving hole-by-hole reviews then just go to the course already ffs. I don't need toxicity from people who have such ridiculous expectations from every post. Those people probably have 20 page resumes. No thanks.

I appreciate that you want to keep your reviews short, and agree that hole by hole descriptions are overkill. Combining conciseness with enough info to be descriptive is an art I obviously haven't mastered.

FWIW - My reviews are long, but I try to structure them so readers who don't want to read a novel, can look at my bullet points, and simply see:

• Variety: Good
• Challenge: Very good
• Elevation: Decent
• Equipment: Good

...and don't need to read the more descriptive detail unless they want to.

 

[DavidSauls]

You don't have to write a novel to get thumbs up on reviews. But you need enough specifics and unique details to be -- helpful.

Just glancing, a few of the courses you reviewed, have other reviews that are reasonably brief, but still found helpful.

I would ask you to consider why and what the thumbs mean to you. I never look at them, myself. If you're looking for validation, keep in mind that review reviewers can be fickle. If you're looking to be helpful, on the other hand, you might take them as a hint to do things differently, and take a glance at the reviews of the same course that were concise, but still helpful, and see what you can learn from them.

Myself, I look at reviews as recommendations; I imagine I'm telling a fellow disc golfer whether he might enjoy a course, or not, and why. In person, I wouldn't tell someone a course is "pretty good, but long"; I'd describe the course, so he can figure out whether it's right for him.

 

[Discette]

Recently signed up and started giving reviews and no one is "finding them helpful", I'm giving factual information and trying to help by giving my honest opinion of the course, I don't see what I'm doing wrong. I've seen some pretty terrible reviews that I disagree with but I didn't trash their review if they gave a genuine review with factual information. What's the issue?

I tend to only vote on reviews of courses I have played. I read your review of SeaTac. I did not vote, but my vote would be a thumb's down. While I would mostly agree SeaTac is a 4.0 to 4.5, there was zero substance in the review to back up that rating.


I would suggest NOT reading the other reviews before you write your review. You should focus on what features added to your rating (or prevented a higher rating). I would also suggest bullet points. That way if the review is "too long", the reader can focus on what matters most to them in a review. Write the review that YOU would want to read. Write about the features that matter to YOU when choosing which courses to play and chances are those things will matter to another player. Some folks don't care about crappy tees or lack of restrooms, while other folks want to avoid courses with crappy tees or no restrooms. Again, if a feature matters to you, talk about that feature.

Love this course! Rather difficult relative to par but no truly crazy holes. Good variety. Well planned course with plenty of unique, enjoyable holes. Don't skip out on the extra nine because the par 4s are the best holes on the course.

I think you could flesh out your sentences. What does "rather difficult relative to par mean? Is that for a Pro Player? For a new player? For a casual player? Take a sentence to explain your skill level so the reader can relate. What constitutes variety? Does variety include elevation, water carries, deep woods, wide open? SeaTac has very little elevation and no water in play so what creates the variety? What does well planned mean? Does well planned mean it has lots of great tees or great tee signs? For sure SeaTac is a very unique course, but dropping "unique" into a sentence about being well planned and enjoyable dilutes that fact.


If you are serious about writing helpful reviews, you have the ability to go back and edit your reviews to add more substance. Good luck PHD.

 

[nothinbuttree]

Here is another recent review:

" PROS: A lot of fun holes with interesting elevation change elements. Good course design with lots of open space. Great natural terrain to walk through. Relatively tough to lose a disc. Good parking and fairly easy access. All around solid course."

Your review review:

PROS:
tough to lose a disc--that's good meat, IMHO.
Good elevation change--some folks hate flat courses. Some hate elevation. Good info to have.
Good parking. Again--just good factual info.

CONS:
A lot of fun holes--tell us why YOU think they are fun. Must be something you like about them--distance, flight path needed, low ceiling, wide open fields with lack of trees, deer strolling across the fog-filled meadows. OK I'm getting a bit out there but you get the point.
Good course design with lots of open space--why is it good? Does good to you mean open/wooded mix? Does it mean no long walks between holes? Does it mean some straight, some left to right, some right to left? Explain how lots of open space meshes with your review title of "woodsy area".

I honestly think you are pretty close to getting to a more thumbs up place. Just describe some of your comments. The course is fresh in your mind, most of us have never been to that course, so we have no idea about it at all.

I seek out courses when I am out of town based solely on reviews provided on DGCR. Udisc is worthless as a review tool, most here would agree with that. And its not just the stars I look at--its what I in the mood for. Sometimes its park setting. Sometimes its elevation change. Sometimes its a short course because I only have an hour to kill, etc. Mu current wish list is made up mostly of courses I have read reviews on and decided I gotta play that one.

Final thoughts--I don't think anyone is 'hating' your reviews, I don't notice thumbs down much, just few thumbs up. There are reviews out there with ZERO up and many down votes. So you are closer than you think!

Also--another reason I am spending some time here is for any other reviewer who may get discouraged, and read the thread title and think--yeah, me too!
Good luck!

 

[The Shide]

It might seem unnecessary to write a review when there are multiple reviews already written. Some of them, though, might be old & outdated. So it is nice to see newer reviews because courses change. Hell, one here in my backyard has had three different make-overs (one of which I was a fieldhand on) in the last decade.

 

[dndelli]

I don't think there's anything wrong with shorter reviews. In fact, I wish I didn't have a tendency to be so wordy with my own. From what I have seen, I actually think most of your reviews seem like some genuine thought has gone into them, but it's hard for me to understand them at times. They, personally, don't offer me enough information to really feel like I am learning about the course. I think if you just slightly tweaked the way you present the information, you'd see immediate improvement in the Thumbs Up vs Down ratio.
I'll show you what I mean with your review of White River.

Pros:
This course feels like a nice walk in the park. (Why is this a good thing? Is it a scenic walk?)
Very good diversity and unique, well-designed holes. (This is fine.)
A lot of challenging but short holes and a couple open long ones. (This is fine.)

Cons:
A lot of people/trails nearby. (Could you explain to us why this is a con?)
Pad locations don't always make a ton of sense (This is okay, but could be strengthened if an example is given.)

Other Thoughts:
Tends to be quite crowded. (Is this explaining the con that about a lot of people? Might be better next to that point.)
One true river hole. (Is this a good or a bad thing? Or is it just a thought?)
Large variety in difficulty relative to par. (Again I can't tell if this is a good or bad thing.)

Reading this it seems like there are more Cons than Pros, but the course was given a 4.0 rating. Which could be creating confusion.

 

[aphilso1]

Recently signed up and started giving reviews and no one is "finding them helpful", I'm giving factual information and trying to help by giving my honest opinion of the course, I don't see what I'm doing wrong. I've seen some pretty terrible reviews that I disagree with but I didn't trash their review if they gave a genuine review with factual information. What's the issue?

You say you're giving factual information, but the reality is the opposite. Your reviews are short and subjective with no rationale to support your opinions.

Let's look at your justification for giving a 4.5* rating to Seatac:

"Pros: Love this course! Rather difficult relative to par but no truly crazy holes. Good variety. Well planned course with plenty of unique, enjoyable holes. Don't skip out on the extra nine because the par 4s are the best holes on the course."

That's five sentences, and only a single piece of factual information is provided (that there are nine extra holes, some of which are Par 4s). The remaining sentences you typed are 100% subjective and unsubstantiated. A break down:

-"Love this course!" - Why?
-"Rather difficult relative to par but no truly crazy holes." - This isn't a positive. It's just a stated opinion of par, which has very little impact on a course's enjoyment level. And it's also not really true (Seatac's difficulty is pretty average).
-"Good variety." First of all, this isn't true. Seatac is a course where 20+ out of the 27 holes look the same. But even if it was true, you didn't explain what variety it has. Lefthand vs righthand dog legs? Short and long? Tightly wooded and open bomber shots? What variety are you referring to? You didn't say, and that's why it's not helpful.
-"Well planned course with plenty of unique, enjoyable holes." What does well-planned mean? That the layout uses the available land well? That it doesn't conflict with other park activities? That it has restrooms and amenities? You don't say, and that's why it's not helpful. And back to the unique holes thing...that's just not true. Seatac is a bunch of up the gut hyzerflip holes that all start to feel the same by the end of the round.
-"Don't skip out on the extra nine because the par 4s are the best holes on the course." Useful info! :thmbup:

When I read your reviews, they look like they are written by someone who has only played a handful of courses in a single region of the country. It looks like you haven't played a wide enough variety of courses to know what to look for and truly differentiate an average course from a good course from a great course. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but sharing that opinion in a helpful way takes practice and breadth of experience.

 

[Horsman]

but I doubt many people honestly interested in the course are reading through 20+ reviews that are 15 paragraphs each. If that's the expectation, I am definitely giving up because what you call "meat" I would call "filler" and if people are really giving hole-by-hole reviews then just go to the course already ffs. I don't need toxicity from people who have such ridiculous expectations from every post. Those people probably have 20 page resumes. No thanks.

So I def read long reviews on courses. I plan vacations and traveling for work around disc golf courses. Without the people that take the time to put in some meaty reviews I would have been playing a lot of crappy courses. I read up on courses to figure out which ones are worth skipping.

The style of your reviews is just going to lead to more dislikes then normal since people come to the review section looking for a lot of information. It also sounds like your style of review might be better situated for uDisc. Nothing is stopping you from reviewing like you are, you might just have to temper your expectations.

 

[thrembo]

Recently signed up and started giving reviews and no one is "finding them helpful", I'm giving factual information and trying to help by giving my honest opinion of the course, I don't see what I'm doing wrong. I've seen some pretty terrible reviews that I disagree with but I didn't trash their review if they gave a genuine review with factual information. What's the issue?[/QUOTE

I tend to leave shorter reviews on courses that already have a bunch of reviews and focus them on what I liked /disliked about the course, add new information and updates about the course, and add my score to the overall total. For newer courses, especially if I am the first to review the course, do a longer more detailed review and even include individual hole info if necessary.

As others have said, you are off to an ok start, just beef the reviews up a little, if you want more thumb ups. Other things that could help get thumbs-up: Join the community here. Participate in discussions in the forums and make friends. Support the site by getting a travel tag and play with other members. Get a shiny crown etc.

 

[BogeyNoMore]

@PHD

You asked. We answered. Several people have provided a lot of well-intentioned of advice. It may take some time to soak it in, and decide how to use it to get the resultd you want.

We're simply telling you what WE think would make your reviews helpful to us. Hope you can find a way to incorporate some of what's been said into your style, to come up with concise reviews readers find useful.

That'd be a win-win. :hfive: