Get a review of your website. Launched today.
criticue.com
criticue.com
Specifically, let say I am on a receiving end of reviews made by some random people. I don't really care what they have to say unless it's credible or representative.
Let's look at latter, as it's an easier one. The way to ensure a review is representative, is to ask other people to look at the review and say if they agree with it or not. Once it gets 10-20-30 meta up/down votes, it'd be more or less possible to say if the review is meaningful or if it was a brain fart.
Make the meta reviewing process mandatory. You want to get your site reviewed, pull a "meta" duty on a dozen of past reviews and (perhaps) write a review. When selecting a review for meta, do it randomly, but favor those with low vote count and controversial ones (over those voted way up or way down).
This would be an MVP of your idea. Without this, it's nice, but it's generally useless.
(edit) Oh, and perhaps simplify reviewer's life a bit and have 3 sections - "what's good", "what's bad", "free-form comments".
But you've pointed out at least 5 new features. Let's say they add all of them and it fails.. Could they have learned that with only 4? 3? 1, new features?
To me, the MVP of this idea is that someone can review a site and have their site reviewed. Everything else is just a feature. Not to say they wouldn't greatly enhance the product, but MVP literally means minimum viable product; not minimum awesome product.
Nothing.
I also wasn't specific enough; I'm talking about the website of the company that I work for, not one I own. So the reason I'm reticent about using the service is that I'm merely casually interested in what people have to say, rather than submitting the site in an official capacity.
I think this site was meant for quick 1 or 2 sentence feedback from the general public for starter/personal sites and the feedback examples on the front page of their site clearly shows this.
- I forgot to submit the "star" ratings. Just entered the comment. May be you can have 1. give rating, 2. provide specific feedback (I would not use the word "comment")
- It would be nice to see the reviews I submitted and edit if needed
- Also, I'm not clear if the reviews will be made public. make it clear upfront.
- Not sure if you already do, I would like to see "Rating" of the reviewer. That would help to judge the feedback.
Keep it up!
Failing that, how about defaulting the rating to 3 star so at least if you do forget you don't end up giving the lowest rating possible?
Enjoying the whole process so far though, nice job.
Just one issue: it would be great if the service allowed me to accumulate credit by reviewing other sites, and have my site reviewed by many people when I launch it (using my credit).
Perhaps submitter should be able to score feedback as helpful or not, so people can't spam asdf on every site to gain "credits"?
That way, even low-quality posts ("i liek that u have a logo") can be accounted for, without treating them like spam. As the reviewer becomes better at reviewing, they will see an increase in their ranking and better reviews.
As it is now we're barely handling the flood of reviews. :) It's a good thing and very exciting but we had to scale up the number of heroku instances the second time in a row. So please bear with all the errors for a while, we're working on some issues esp. screenshot generation as it is not coping with the load.
Wow! We didn't expect an instant success like this. Thank you all for your contributions.
Anyway, your site not really a success yet. You've just been Hacker Newsed. Traffic will probably go back down after today. It's happened to me before.
Anyway, it looks like a major bottleneck you are experiencing is that you have to moderate every review that's written. I don't think that's going to be sustainable. I'd try having using rate reviews "helpful" or "not helpful" like they do for reviews on most online stores. And then maybe have an automatic filter for easily detectable things like foul language or gibberish.
Good luck, I like you site.
Yes, moderating is a bottleneck. :)
Thank you for the feedback! Greatly appreciated.
Cool concept, add a meta aspect as others have said.
a. I can't find a way to sign up as a pure critic or a viewer - a user without a website.
There will be plenty of people (the category also known as end-users) who don't have a website yet who would still like to look at and review designs by other folks.
I wasn't able to sign up because my website is down for now.
b. It'd be nice to have a way to 'save' credit and expend it later on reviews for sites that I may build later.
(a) TBD soon. (b) This will follow.
Re the site itself, I think it's a good idea but I agree with the meta-scoring. Add a point system that levels you up both by writing a review and later by reviewing reviews of the same site/commenting on them. The higher your level or the more points you have, the more your sites will be reviewed.
And please make https sites fail more elegantly. It's okay that you can't load them in an iframe, but make it look less broken. I submitted an https site and I doubt many people will review it when they are met with a huge screen saying "http only" through no fault of their own. Instead say "This site is using https (learn more), please click here to open the site in a new tab"
Also got some after-the-fact request to sign up before getting the review of my site I was promised... not too interested in that.
1. Enter comment. Submit it. 2. Repeat step 1. 3. Submit review.
Took me a few seconds as well to figure that out.
I do hope that issue gets sorted asap.
After posting on Y there was an unexpected surge in traffic. Everything works fine after increasing the number of Heroku instances.
As many people said already, it would be great to know the difference between "Add comment" and "Submit review". Seems like they could do the same thing.
Keep polishing it, and then post a changelog somewhere - it's always nice to see the list of bugs people have worked through at the early stages of a site. It's also really motivating for the developer as well.
"Add comment" is on its way out. There will be no way to post more than 1 comment, as ppl. post 1.1 comment on the average so it's just unnecessarily complicating things.
I'm keeping a backlog; good idea, posting it, thanks!
I just did three reviews and it should've been possible to make sure I got one in return by now, but that didn't seem to happen yet (or is it because my site is HTTPS only?)
I can second the comment about star ratings as well; the default of 1 star especially was not in line with my intent for at least one of my reviews.
Unfortunately, it looks like you're already getting spammed. I just reviewed Google.com and what I think would have been nsfw site had I let it load.
Also, it takes too long to generate the screenshot. I waited a few minutes before giving up on my third review. Why not just open the site in an iframe?
Getting to try it out without having to log into anything is fantastic.
Cool site.
As suggested in another reply, linking via iframe would still be a nice option to have when submitting.
Screenshot + link to open in a new window actually started as a sort of a workaround but I think this allows people to focus more on first impressions instead of going into usability testing.
Look at how other people do it for other sectors (for example Critters for fiction writing and okcupid for photos)
That said, this feels a bit like a Ponzi scheme in the sense that I'll only get reviews as long as there are new/active users... I could see that being a long-term issue (as with any site following this model).
That's my immediate critique of a website critique website called Criticue. It's like Inception.
I'm not sure if you're changing things right now or A/B testing, but when I initially went to your link there were examples of what I could expect. Now there's no way of knowing what the process looks like and how these viewers see my site. Is it a screengrab of the homepage, do they get the link and surf around?
Also, is there anything stopping someone from writing a bunch of useless one-liner reviews just to get their site seen?
As far as spamming, reviews are moderated but one-liners are very often passed through, because they are useful. The idea is to get, say, 10-20 reviews of your site, very quickly.
P.S. Yeah, it's A/B :)
Good luck!
Can you make a version for startup ideas, instead of websites? Keep everything else exactly the same. Then add leaderboards, scores, etc.
So many discussions here about startups, I feel like we have enough aggregate brainpower to create a great peer-reviewed top 50 ideas list. Then all we need to do is create teams and crack on!
Application Error
An error occurred in the application and your page could not be served. Please try again in a few moments.
If you are the application owner, check your logs for details.
"Very clean, I like it" - clean in what sense? Design-wise? Or is the HTML markup nice & tidy?
"Nice big calls to action" - Nice & big, but is bigger better? Do they work?
Etc.
I am keeping my eye on this one, could definitely evolve in something (even more) valuable. Keep it up!
what does that mean? how/when/why will I lose access to that account? I really want to see my site reviewed but I do not actually want a "proper" account.
I guess it should be pointed out (a "what does it mean" link). What do you think?
I click "get review" and I'm prompted to review someone's website first -- which I already did several times over.
There were some temporary problems because the site got overloaded, I boosted the number of heroku instances so the problem should no longer be there.
In short, having a single comment as you would a typical Amazon product review provides less depth than I'd like to see from peer reviews in this domain.
Also, signup email went to Gmail spam for me.
Additionally, a feature of perhaps marginal utility would be to see all the sites that I've reviewed (e.g. I want to take another look at a cool looking site that I remember reviewing but can't remember what it was).
So don't feel too bad OP.
I think this has a lot of potential, but it should be easier to offer better UI controls and testing. For example, I may want users to sign into a dummmy account or see specific pages. The home page of a website is rarely good enough to get meaningful impressions.
I'll also second the n-for-1 suggestion.
I was stoked to review my first site but the first thing I got was a shitty image porn blog. If you want it to be legitimate you gotta weed out the smut for people to take it seriously.
Great idea though.
I believe there's some database error that's serving other people's sites and that's really not good :(.
If that explains it then I'm sorry -- I'll try to make it more intuitive in the next update.
Add Comment vs Submit Review is confusing. After adding comment, it just disappeared. You have no idea what happened.
Scrolling down, I did also forget to leave a star rating. Maybe that can be clearer?
I don't think this is how it is supposed to look. Chrome under Mac OS.
I'm actually using a Mac to write this on with Chrome + Safari. There was a problem with too much traffic (fixed now by scaling the site up), I suppose CSS might not have loaded. Do you think this could be the case? Thank you.
Nice work!
Idea: take a page from the Yelp/Quora/HN/StackExchange playbook and gamify it by letting people build up some kind of reputation points/karma/credits or whatever. You'd be amazed how much time some people will invest in your site just for some pixels on their profile.
Also, this is awesome OP. Got some genuinely honest feedback and it's much appreciated.
The only thing I'm worried is spam proliferation once anything is public so everything needs to be really well planned ahead.