Editors' Comments Criteria

So that we can provide faster and better support, this forum (the "Public Suggestion Box") has been retired. Instead, please send any suggestions you have to us using the official website contact form.

This allows us to streamline our support system so that we can get to your message much faster. Instead of our support staff having to check three different places (support forum, suggestion box, and contact form messages), they know can respond to all message through one method, with that one method being the official website contact form.

Moderator: Official Reviewer Representatives

Post Reply
User avatar
Aftab Yunis
Book of the Month Participant
Posts: 103
Joined: 22 Nov 2018, 13:36
Currently Reading: The fourth Dimension
Bookshelf Size: 40
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-aftab-yunis-hakim.html
Latest Review: One Hand Two Hearts by S.K. Alfstad

Editors' Comments Criteria

Post by Aftab Yunis »

The two score cards system is quite brilliant as the editors are carefully reviewing the reviewers' reviews. However, one negative aspect of this system is both score cards do not match with each other before declaring results. As a result, similar corrections deduct the same marks again and again.
I suggest before declaring results, if both editors could see each others comments would benifit reviewers' score cards. Moreocverover, it would not deduct the reviewers' score.
User avatar
Kaitlyn Canedy
Previous Member of the Month
Posts: 3253
Joined: 28 Jul 2019, 20:55
Favorite Author: Napoleon Hill
Favorite Book: Too Old Too Soon
Currently Reading: Totem
Bookshelf Size: 507
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-kaitlyn-canedy.html
Latest Review: The Date Farm by Jack Winnick
2024 Reading Goal: 12
2024 Goal Completion: 0%

Post by Kaitlyn Canedy »

Aftab Yunis Hakim wrote: 28 Mar 2023, 12:40 The two score cards system is quite brilliant as the editors are carefully reviewing the reviewers' reviews. However, one negative aspect of this system is both score cards do not match with each other before declaring results. As a result, similar corrections deduct the same marks again and again.
I suggest before declaring results, if both editors could see each others comments would benifit reviewers' score cards. Moreocverover, it would not deduct the reviewers' score.
Hi,

Thank you for reaching out. If a review receives two scorecards that are inaccurate in the objective sections (the grammatical error and the guideline sections), both editors are shown each other's scorecards and must decide which one is more accurate.

How could OBC change the current two scorecard discrepency system to make it better for the reviewers and editors? I look forward to your response.
"I see now that the circumstances of one's birth are irrelevant, it is what you do with the gift of life that determines who you are.”- Mewtwo
User avatar
Aftab Yunis
Book of the Month Participant
Posts: 103
Joined: 22 Nov 2018, 13:36
Currently Reading: The fourth Dimension
Bookshelf Size: 40
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-aftab-yunis-hakim.html
Latest Review: One Hand Two Hearts by S.K. Alfstad

Post by Aftab Yunis »

I have faced this challenge. Both editors with my three reviews pointed out same grammatical and guidelines mistakes. Ultimately I have got deductions from both side with the same mistakes. My point was with the editors if the first editor has already pointed out those mistakes why did the other do the same. The response was, the editors cannot see each others comments. I may submit the proof as well.
So, the suggestion is both have knowledge of each others comments before declaring the results.
User avatar
Catalina Isabel
Previous Member of the Month
Posts: 627
Joined: 08 Jan 2023, 03:13
Favorite Book: Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
Currently Reading: In It Together
Bookshelf Size: 35
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-catalina-isabel.html
Latest Review: Phobia Relief by Kalliope Barlis

Post by Catalina Isabel »

Hi there, I actually had a similar discrepancy on 2 score cards. It seems that I had a better score with the initial editor, and then a 2nd one scored it lower. I agreed more with the initial one and I wondered if they should either be the average of the 2 score cards, or just going with the initial editor.
I think some things are subjective, hence the different ratings for the same review by 2 editors 🤔

Thanks for your help to understand this a bit better or improve it for the future!
User avatar
Kaitlyn Canedy
Previous Member of the Month
Posts: 3253
Joined: 28 Jul 2019, 20:55
Favorite Author: Napoleon Hill
Favorite Book: Too Old Too Soon
Currently Reading: Totem
Bookshelf Size: 507
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-kaitlyn-canedy.html
Latest Review: The Date Farm by Jack Winnick
2024 Reading Goal: 12
2024 Goal Completion: 0%

Post by Kaitlyn Canedy »

Aftab Yunis Hakim wrote: 28 Mar 2023, 23:15 I have faced this challenge. Both editors with my three reviews pointed out same grammatical and guidelines mistakes. Ultimately I have got deductions from both side with the same mistakes. My point was with the editors if the first editor has already pointed out those mistakes why did the other do the same. The response was, the editors cannot see each others comments. I may submit the proof as well.
So, the suggestion is both have knowledge of each others comments before declaring the results.
Hi,

Thank you for reaching out. During the editing process, only one editor scores the review. Then, if a second editor scores the same review but gives different points in the guideline and grammatical sections (the objective sections), a discrepancy occurs that they will have to resolve. If the scorecards are the same in the objective sections, a discrepancy does not occur at all. More information about scorecard discrepancies can be found here-
viewtopic.php?f=132&t=233173
"I see now that the circumstances of one's birth are irrelevant, it is what you do with the gift of life that determines who you are.”- Mewtwo
Post Reply

Return to “Public Suggestion Box (Retired)”