Quote:
|
Originally Posted by butterflybucks
I once had a reviewer bash one of my oldest sites because the site wasn't updated anymore. He said it was terrifc content but had to give it a very low score because of no updates. It's not my fault the model decided to move on with her life. The content is still great and many people have never seen it. Just a very odd review!
|
It's not odd for a reviewer to give a low score for a lack of updates. Most member's expect that your site is updated on a regular basis and if you can no longer do updates, then of course that's going to affect your score.
If a site is charging 29.95 or 39.95 for a site that isn't regularly updated or is skimpy inside the member's area, then I think the reader needs to know about that. As a reviewer, you have to weigh the pricing versus the type of content (pics, videos, or just feeds), amount of content, AND the exclusivity (big one for me). I'll give a site a better score if it's exclusive but doesn't have a lot of content versus non-exclusive with a bunch of "filler" (a little on niche content and then a lot of feeds and bonuses).
As far as slamming a site for a lack of hardcore, I would agree with you on that issue. Rate a hardcore site as a hardcore site and a softcore site as a softcore site. When I write a review, I will mention that there is no boy-girl hardcore inside a site, but I leave how they feel about that up to the reader and potential member.