Guideline Link on 'Review User Descriptions' Page?

[Kakaru_of_DOOM]

I do not have the description guidelines memorized, and when reviewing a description I'm unsure of, I like to look at the description guidelines page to help me judge. Unfortunately, that means I must go scroll -> dragon (actions) -> describe -> description guidelines.

 

Putting a link direct from reviewing descriptions would make that quite a bit smoother. It should be a rather quick fix, and I cannot imagine complaints about it.

 

Please?

 

((Thanks in advance!))

[Obscure_Trash]

This is a good idea, although I'd prefer descriptions be auto-approved in which case a reviewing page wouldn't exist. xP

[xeyla]

If you are usingva PC to review descriptions, you can have another tab opened with the Guidelines, and just switch between the two. That is what I do.

[CNR4806]

If you are usingva PC to review descriptions, you can have another tab opened with the Guidelines, and just switch between the two. That is what I do.

Doesn't really excuse the fact that you have to go through hoops to fetch the guidelines that you're supposed to review descriptions with.

[Fuzzbucket]

This is a good idea, although I'd prefer descriptions be auto-approved in which case a reviewing page wouldn't exist. xP

This. Please this.

 

Best of ALL options.

[Lythiaren]

If you are usingva PC to review descriptions, you can have another tab opened with the Guidelines, and just switch between the two. That is what I do.

Design-wise, less clicks to access desired information is always better than more clicks.

 

Conveniently-placed link would be good.

 

Quick-ref version right on the review page would be ideal if we're going to keep the approval system at all imo. Just bullet list. A reviewer doesn't need the justification fluff, just reminders. And then it's right there, no extra tabs required.

Edited November 23, 2015 by Lythiaren

[Lurhstaap]

I personally don't understand why descriptions DON'T auto-approve. This is the only game I've EVER played where descriptions had to be approved by staff. And it's NOT the only game where player-made content could conceivably be mistaken for official, which is the only justification I've ever heard for descriptions not being auto'd. That has simply never been a problem for a pet/click game, at least not that I am aware of. Inappropriate content can be handled using filter scripts, user-based reporting, and staff countermeasures, just like with names, which work just fine on auto.

 

And I did run a semi-similar game for two years, so I have some idea about this sort of game design issue. I'm not just talking out my butt here. Industry standard is to have auto-approval for descriptions, period, full stop. And I've never heard a good reason for DC to buck that standard of game design.

 

However, if we really, really can't have auto-approval, then this would certainly be a handy improvement to the current (broken, inefficient, unscaleable) system. So from that perspective I support this. But I'd much rather see DC move to the industry standard way of handling pet descriptions.

Edited November 23, 2015 by Lurhstaap

[Kakaru_of_DOOM]

...I personally like the quality assurance that the reviewing provides - there is a lot of underwhelming work people throw at describing. But this is somewhat off-topic: whether auto-accepting is eventually implemented or not, this could be a fix until then.

Edited December 1, 2015 by Kakaru_of_DOOM

[diaveborn]

If descriptions are a thing, people should be able to write what they want about their own dragons even if it's not good grammar, talks about modern stuff, etc. So my vote goes to overhauling the guidelines before they're linked. Just make it clear that it's user content and provide a report button.

 

(But yeah, I prefer auto-approved also.)