Just a minor thing, but in the spreadsheet Heike’s reviews are counted as public but they seem to be in the Author’s forum.
1 Like
Juhana, thanks for pointing this out! It’s fixed now.
I also added a cell that determines whether we should update the last-10 review lists on editing a reviewer/entry matchup. It is B92, set to “yes” by default. If anyone wants to edit any entries that are already there, they can change that cell to “no,” edit what they need, and change it back to “yes.”
If they forget to change it back to “yes,” that’s no big deal, as the next person can just change it back to “yes” and cut/paste the new cell onto itself.
I hope this solves more problems than it creates–I think and hope it should. Even if “no” is set for a while, we can use edit history to see the reviews added.
ETA: and another tweak … if we edit the same cell twice in a row, it now doesn’t appear twice in the “most recent” list. Again, not too bad a coding fix, and we could always have just cut/pasted the duplicate from the most-recent list, but why not add a bit of user-friendliess.
Andrew, my new authors’ forum reviews don’t seem to be added to the list any more? Is something broken?
There was. I tested on my own copy, then copied and pasted the code…but my own copy had the “copy links over?” cell in B92, and the original had it in B89. My guess is I remembered to copy over the stuff below the constant definitions the first time (or I noticed the constants would be different,) but I didn’t the second time.
I fixed a constant and copied and pasted back over, and it should work now. It looks like I put things in different squares because I’d used some cells for scratchwork on my own copy. Sorry about that–I thought I kept the copy of the spreadsheet more or less identical to the actual spreadsheet, but I didn’t.
I guess any links that were added to the spreadsheet but not the latest list can be cut and re-added, and they’ll show up in the list now.
I guess that my actions triggered the creation of the Should last reviews be updated? option. 
Can’t update the spreadsheet right now, but here’s a blog we’re not tracking yet, I think:
@VictorGijsbers done! It\s good to see him reviewing.
@mim It was more than one person–I think I saw it happen some other times, and it’s a flaw I saw in the whole system. When I was working on my own copy of the spreadsheet I kept changing the top-ten list, and I wondered if there was any way to avoid this.
Maybe next year we can extract the actual dates with formulas (LARGE and SMALL look like candidates) or something, but until then, this is table enough…I hope. I suppose I should get to experimenting. It would also be nice to flag each reviewer as in the Authors’ forum or not, instead of each review, but again, this can wait until next year!
1 Like
You know what we – we, the community – really should be doing? Converting that review spreadsheet into off-site reviews at the IFDB… Quite bit of work though.
4 Likes
I added a few reviews for mine the other day. Figured if people were good enough to write nice reviews, I should link them 
2 Likes
Good idea. [I think that maybe I need to tone down my reviews first.]
1 Like
We could have one person assigned to one reviewer and work at them one reviewer at a time (or even ten reviews). I’d be willing to volunteer. I think it could/would get done soon enough. Don’t know if I could lead the effort, but I’d be willing to sign up. Reviews that are linked to in IFDB could maybe be colored light blue or something, so we knew they were done.
2 Likes
I entered links to most of my reviews in the spreadsheet, but I plan to update and post them to IFDB myself, so don’t worry about them. It will be a couple of weeks more before I have time though.
2 Likes
That sounds like a nice convention. I don’t think we can really expect people to sign up for a roster or something – myself included, I’m terribly busy and don’t want to box myself in – but that will allow us to coordinate our efforts in a decentralised way. 
My only concern: some games may have negative reviews the author may not want linked to IFDB. It’s one thing if the author or the reviewer does it themselves, but is it really a good idea as a third party to just load up an entry with links that neither of the participants chose to curate themselves?
I understand IFDB is a wiki and publicly editable so there is nothing technically wrong with linking all the information that exists, but in my opinion, an IFDB entry is also kind of like a resume for the game and I wouldn’t appreciate if someone linked some of my scathing reviews that I’d rather not color a potential player’s initial impression.
Just something to consider. I suppose an author could just remove anything on there they don’t want - so long as they know about it.
6 Likes
Fair point!