moriaritytk
TMF Poster
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2001
- Messages
- 127
- Points
- 0
Video Review Format Submited For Your Approval
I just posted a review in the video review section of MTP's Angelica's First Time. My post here is to point out that I made an effort at a review format that others may want to adopt to provide some level of standarization. A general review standard will help other potential customers, and it will also provide a structure that may help promote more reviews from a wider group. Some people are intimidated by giving their opinion. Having a standard form to fit those opinions in can make people bolder.
The review format is simple and elastic enough that it doesn't have to stifle anyone's creativity. Here are the sections:
BASICS
Title:
Vendor:
Cost:
Summary:
(It would be great if we could anchor each review with the bare-bones basic info that will help people know what is being reviewed. There are multiple vendors and similar titles out there. Even Roger Ebert starts each of his print reviews with a recitation of the basics.)
TICKLEE
Description:
Bondage:
Targets:
Laugh Factor:
Struggle Factor:
Begging Factor:
(Usually, the key element of a video is WHO is tickled. This format forces reviewers to give others enough information that they can consider whether the video is for them. There is room in here to be as expressive as you want about as many ticklees as you want. Key to this section is the fact that you can't just say "she's ticklish" or "she's not ticklish". The format calls for some evidence to help others understand how the reviewer came to a conclusion on ticklishness. That evidence can be very valuable--and fun to write.)
TICKLER
Description:
Techniques:
Attitude:
(The tickler has a secondary but important role. Sometimes they get ignored in reviews. Potential buyers need a sense of who is doing the tickling and what their rack-side manner is.)
WHAT I LIKED MOST
ONE THING I WOULD DO DIFFERENT
(This section will force reviewers to say something good about videos they don't like and make them volunteer an improvement about a video they do like. This kind of information will really help others see where the reviewer is coming from and determine whether we trust their judgement. It also helps the reviewer focus on key points and limit rambling.)
WHAT ELSE?
(The review structure ends with the catch-all category that allows for extreme creativity. If you want to include a rant about fishnet stockings, here's the place. If you want to compare the ticklee to your third-grade teacher and talk about how much you wanted a shot at tickling her, have at it. Putting it at the end forces some discipline on the reviewer to give real information first and then go off on an tangent. Readers will then be able to get what they need from the review first and then decide to stick around based on who interesting or amusing the reviewer is here.)
That's the suggested format. You can go to the Review section and see it in action. Nobody HAS to use this format. People can and will do what they want. BUT, this format or some variation will help all of us organize our thinking and learn from the viewing experiences of others without limiting our self-expression. If we hope to be a viable community, it would be a good thing if we could help each other every way we can. This is one small way.
Just something to think about and discuss.
I just posted a review in the video review section of MTP's Angelica's First Time. My post here is to point out that I made an effort at a review format that others may want to adopt to provide some level of standarization. A general review standard will help other potential customers, and it will also provide a structure that may help promote more reviews from a wider group. Some people are intimidated by giving their opinion. Having a standard form to fit those opinions in can make people bolder.
The review format is simple and elastic enough that it doesn't have to stifle anyone's creativity. Here are the sections:
BASICS
Title:
Vendor:
Cost:
Summary:
(It would be great if we could anchor each review with the bare-bones basic info that will help people know what is being reviewed. There are multiple vendors and similar titles out there. Even Roger Ebert starts each of his print reviews with a recitation of the basics.)
TICKLEE
Description:
Bondage:
Targets:
Laugh Factor:
Struggle Factor:
Begging Factor:
(Usually, the key element of a video is WHO is tickled. This format forces reviewers to give others enough information that they can consider whether the video is for them. There is room in here to be as expressive as you want about as many ticklees as you want. Key to this section is the fact that you can't just say "she's ticklish" or "she's not ticklish". The format calls for some evidence to help others understand how the reviewer came to a conclusion on ticklishness. That evidence can be very valuable--and fun to write.)
TICKLER
Description:
Techniques:
Attitude:
(The tickler has a secondary but important role. Sometimes they get ignored in reviews. Potential buyers need a sense of who is doing the tickling and what their rack-side manner is.)
WHAT I LIKED MOST
ONE THING I WOULD DO DIFFERENT
(This section will force reviewers to say something good about videos they don't like and make them volunteer an improvement about a video they do like. This kind of information will really help others see where the reviewer is coming from and determine whether we trust their judgement. It also helps the reviewer focus on key points and limit rambling.)
WHAT ELSE?
(The review structure ends with the catch-all category that allows for extreme creativity. If you want to include a rant about fishnet stockings, here's the place. If you want to compare the ticklee to your third-grade teacher and talk about how much you wanted a shot at tickling her, have at it. Putting it at the end forces some discipline on the reviewer to give real information first and then go off on an tangent. Readers will then be able to get what they need from the review first and then decide to stick around based on who interesting or amusing the reviewer is here.)
That's the suggested format. You can go to the Review section and see it in action. Nobody HAS to use this format. People can and will do what they want. BUT, this format or some variation will help all of us organize our thinking and learn from the viewing experiences of others without limiting our self-expression. If we hope to be a viable community, it would be a good thing if we could help each other every way we can. This is one small way.
Just something to think about and discuss.
Last edited:
