@iapcsolutions, I dont know buddy, but there is 6 reviewers on GR / i dont know the other sites. But its also interesting all my items was reviewed by the same guys. Only once or twice different. Thats something also makes me think, does it just accident? for me it seems like “supervisor” / outside-worker system. And all those 6 person are still there, so who is left? and how is that possible if only few person left, makes such a big impact like this?
This is probably the one and only thing I dislike about the Marketplaces. Reviews take too much time. I’m not saying that people are not doing their job. I’m just saying that we can do with a better process.
I vote up this idea.
@iapcsolutions, But its also interesting all my items was reviewed by the same guys. Only once or twice different. Thats something also makes me think, does it just accident?
I believe that reviewers are assigned to specific categories. So if your items mostly belong to a category then chances are they would be reviewed by the same reviewer. It happens to me, too. Because there are many categories, so maybe a reviewer would work on multiple categories.
Hi everyone, I have to be quick here so forgive me if I’ve missed any extra details. I just wanted to quickly pop in on this thread.
The concept proposed here isn’t new and is something, among many other concepts, considered for the team. There are pros and cons to each different concept applied to reviewing, staffing, etc. as well as other aspects to consider for the whole of Envato. There are benefits to the proposed concept, but there are also drawbacks, which is why it hasn’t been implemented already.
Having said that, our two current reviewers have moved to full-time and we are hiring another full-time ThemeForest reviewer. Our two current reviewers used to split across to GraphicRiver and will be full-time for ThemeForest only. The time dedicated to new item reviews is being increased as well to provide more thorough inspections and more specific feedback.
With that said, items are typically reviewed in under 48 hours, usually faster. Considering the size of ThemeForest, this is very good.
If they hire a “pre-reviewer” it should not be a current author on the marketplace. Everyone is competing for sales and it wouldn’t be fair if another author gets to reject you… my 2 cents
You don’t know then that both current TF reviewers started out here as authors. Who else would be a better fit then an experienced author!
They hire some great designer who has no idea about the marketplace and takes months before TF integrates into his/her DNA.
Dany’s DNA is already interwoven with TF no question about that.
I think the idea is good, Ben says it takes only seconds to filter out the crap but i think it takes actually few minutes including writing the mail. even if they just copy paste parts of it.
But there is another thing that I think would change, the quality of approved items.
Right now reviewer gets the crap the bad, the good and the excellent items to review, then they filter them out and approve the best ones.
but if the pre-reviewer would take out the crap and bad stuff they would never see them and only focus on the good and excellent stuff then they would choose the ones to approve from an already higher quality set of items and they would reject the ones that are on the edge of bad and good more easily. Since now those get lost because they are also compared to crap and compared to crap they are really good, but compared to excellent they are not.
This would mean faster reviews, even more rejections and better quality items on the marketplace.
So I vote for Dany to be the pre reviewer or anybody else with that much experience and a really good eye for design.
If this is not going to happen then that is to bad for Envato, and their Buyers and secondly for their Authors since they would gain only the faster review times. Which is like 1% of the benefit this would bring.
Very well said, webTypo!
And do not forget, the rejection would come pretty quick, no need to wait 4 days and chewing the nails. Every crap could get rejected, in few hours. Tell me guys it would not be an amazing feeling ? I mean seriously…
You can even get message, “hi… well done your submitted file successfully passed trough the crap zone. But do not open the champaign yet, probably you will get a soft rejection soon, and there will be no party tonight but home work”
Very well said, webTypo!
And do not forget, the rejection would come pretty quick, no need to wait 4 days and chewing the nails. Every crap could get rejected, in few hours. Tell me guys it would not be an amazing feeling ? I mean seriously…You can even get message, “hi… well done your submitted file successfully passed trough the crap zone. But do not open the champaign yet, probably you will get a soft rejection soon, and there will be no party tonight but home work”
Indeed, Dany’s idea is great and makes sense. It’s nice to have the community moderate itself and it will surely take a lot of load off the current reviewing process. This also allows for a more personal response regarding the rejection and how an author can improve and resubmit.
Currently, we see messages in the forums every two days or so where people are confused and frustrated about their rejections because they’d gotten a generic response with little to no hint on what improvements can be made to their items. Increasing the reviewers is also yet another idea, but the pre-screening process described by Dany sounds good.
Well done mate, you have my vote
Oh wow, happy to see this thread starting to make sense, didn’t thought it would happen seeing how it started
By the way guys, I don’t think you wish I would be the pre-reviewer Kailoon and Ivor would have 2-3 themes to review each day haha
Thanks Jarel, I appreciate your input.
hm so what exactly is the advantage over another “normal” reviewer?
The time to process the submission stays the same, no matter how you split it. actually, it takes more time now since the good files need to be reviewed 2 times, one time by the pre-reviewer, and then again by the actual reviewer.
The only thing that will get faster with this method is getting his item rejected. But for rejections, every author wishes to have more than a standard sentence about quality level, so if he wants to know what exactly is wrong with his theme, who does he have to contact? can pre-reviewer give tips about improving items? so basically he is skilled like the other reviewers?
This suggestions makes only sense if the pre-reviewer gets paid much less than a normal reviewer. And that’s btw the part that you are missing out in the doctor-nurse-example: the doctors time is more expensive, that’s why the nurse is sorting it out for him.
Simply hiring more normal reviewers is the easier solution.
Also you avoid problems like: prereviewer tells you what to change, you change it, get approved for actual reviewer – actual reviewer tells you what to change to get finally approved, you change it again. If your item was reviewed by the actual reviewer in the first place, you don’t have to change it twice.
“the doctors time is more expensive, that’s why the nurse is sorting it out for him.”
you are very wrong if you thinking in that way. It’s not the main reason man, they got this money for their job, and not doing a job for an amount of money. Sure they get less, because the responsibility the necessary knowledge are less. But if there would be no need to their job, then they would just simply does not exist. This is what happening now here. There is a system which is actually just shows their own fragile and faults. Here is a sober and rational idea (especially its not a brand new idea but a never-falling well known system of the proper selection methods, everywhere.) We are putting here more advantages with this which is already proven and works in another fields, but you think double the reviewers number would be the solution. Please, do not misunderstand me, no offense. But if you have a broken jar, the solution is not that to make it bigger against the loss, the problem is the hole, that the thing you should fix it.