so how do i get started?
I would also like to take part in the Core Team, once I get some more reviews out, and get to know more of the people on here.
You’ve already started, everything is automatically tracked for you
I’m working on changing the requirement to being time-based, but for now, we’re going to reduce the number of topics to 15% based on your feedback. I agree that we don’t want an incentive to spend time in topics you aren’t interested in.
Does this mean there needs to be one review per every 100 days?
Like a chicken that blows out a double-yoked egg as her final opus, some of us may have only one great review in them.
I suspect that anyone capable of such similes has at least a few more reviews in them!
One of, and probably the, biggest benefits to being a Core Team member is that you qualify for the Community Preview Program. And one of the requirements for using that is that you post a review of any item of gear you get via that program.
I do know, for sure, that to remain a Core Team member you must maintain “Trust Level 3”, also known as “Regular”. That is automatically handled on a 100-day rolling basis … so active community participation is certainly an on-going requirement.
I’ll let @andrew or @taronlissimore comment on whether posting at least one review in every 100-day period is also a requirement to maintain Core Team membership - or if it is just required in the initial qualifying period. I can see reasonable arguments for either case.
@Carmantom to answer your question: No you do not need to post a review every 100 days but you do need to keep up your “trust level 3” status which is calculated on a rolling 100-day basis.
However, when you participate in the community preview program (a benefit of being a Core Team member) you are expected to do a write up on the gear you receive for the benefit of the community.
I hope that helps clear things up.
I would really like to met the Lissimore Bro’s.
This actually doesn’t sound like a very easy goal if you ask me. I certainly wouldn’t find it easy to spend 50 % of the day on here and it just seems like a lot. What I was hoping for was a headphone lending program sinular to the lending library from The Cable Company. You guys have stuff that they don’t carry or never heard of. Yes, I could tie all kinds of money up to buy just to try but then when I go to return its not like you guys can resell the headphones as new anymore. The way this is set up, you got to almost what seems like be on these forums day and night. Plus there’s the fact that even if I agreed to do a review, it would be from a blindness prospective with seveer hearing loss. There’s honestly a lot of headphones that just do not work for me as they can never get loud enough. I see 97 DB and 60 Ohme and i stop right there. I know such a headphone could never get driven to high enough levels for my loss no matter what amp is used. I’ve found also sat fit with universal IEMs is not an easy thing. plus if my dad wasn’t around, who would help me to put the tips on the ear pieces and put the cable on? But this comunity thing seems to be working for yall. but it still leaves the lending out of reach of most people. Its not like there are headphone stores around.
The “Community Preview Program” was significantly revised a while ago, with much lower requirements for participation and a broader array of available gear.
Also, you’re not interpreting the original requirements correctly anyway. You don’t need to be on here for 50% of every day. You just need an average of one visit per day for 50 days out of each 100 (i.e. every other day). Not a post, nor a response, just visiting.
But, again, the requirements were significantly adjusted months ago, as denoted in the above link to the new program.
As it stands, most moderately active members, including those that have joined recently, already meet the basic participation requirements and only need to post impressions of one piece of gear to qualify for the program as-is. It certainly doesn’t require heavy participation much less anything approaching night-and-day activity.
The requirement for a review or impressions (which are not that involved) is so that you’re giving back to the community in exchange for access to the gear. Sending gear around is not free, comes with various risks, and isn’t practical to do without some kind of return - here that’s simply being an active member of the community and posting impressions (which has no direct out of pocket cost).
The idea being that everybody benefits.
In special cases I am sure it’s possible to have the impressions cover non-sound related aspects - or to address them in the context of the case at hand, and focus more on build quality, comfort, convenience, and what did work well for said special case.
Without that, it’d either be necessary to impose a fee to cover shipping, insurance, overhead etc. or the program would rapidly become unsustainable.
So if I wanted to post my opinion of the Sure SE846 VS Fostext TH-600, That would be considered a impression or review?
I suppose my biggest concern is that this would be based on my hearing such as it is, (which is not like most peoples.), and the blindness thing.
For example one thing I would say is that getting those cables on and off is impossible for me, although I can get on and off the sure sleeves.
Pretty much, yes.
Impressions do not have to be particularly involved.
Though it is fair to say that the gear in the top tier is going to warrant more involved impressions than stuff in tier three.
You could either qualify/explain that at the start of your comments - and/or maybe not comment on the qualitative aspects of the sound at all.
If, for example, your primary need is to reach high dB/SPL levels while remaining clear and un-distorted, then you could limit comments on sound to that … and have the remainder of the impressions be on the package, quality, comfort, accessories etc.
That’d be a good example of something to include in non-audible impressions. I know I had a hell of a time with the MMCX connectors on the SE846, but with the BGVP DMG they were easy to get on and off.
Just for reference, to reach the required “Member” trust level for initial preview-program access, you’ve already hit all the requirements except for number of lifetime days visited … visit for two more days and you’ll hit that too. After which, its just a case of posting impressions on something.
Hey, JH. I really LIKE the idea of having a review that very specifically talks about how a particular headphone or combination fits some special need. That could be hearing loss, or perhaps ease of use for someone with motor problems. My Mother isn’t a headphone user, but she has age-related memory loss, and has hearing aids. Forget trying to get her to change batteries, but RED for Right and BLUE for left is way harder for her to remember than an R and L would be. And the manufacturer would do well to make a RED R and a BLUE L.
As long as you explain the issue and how a headphone does or does not help you overcome the problem I think that could be a great review.
That is an interesting idea for a review
- Do reviews have to be exclusive to this forum?
- Is membership to the Core Team automatic once the criteria above are achieved?
We are looking at revamping this in the new year… we will let everyone know once we have a good plan in place…
We would like to remove any confusion regarding “core team” members roles on the forum.
If anyone has suggestions feel free to post here!
Cheers and happy holidays!!
I’d like to see some more confusing, grandiose, and frustrating titles, to be given out in a pseudo-random matter once someone attains core-team level status. Or something similar.
Core Team (Junior Grade) - just for the heck of it
Inquisitor - possibly for people who ask questions
Order of the Tangled Cable - I’d give this to people who do wireless reviews
Inner Circle - Just like there is no STAX Mafia, there is no IC - or is there?
Blessed Icon of Enlightenment - Possibly give this to @Torq, whether he wants it or not.
Principal Deputy Under Secretary for Junior Grade Core Team Cable Untangler
Not ironic, unfortunately.
The principal deputy under secretary of defense for intelligence will now be known as the deputy under secretary of defense for intelligence and security, while the principal deputy under secretary of defense (comptroller) will now be called the deputy under secretary of defense (comptroller), according to two DOD directives issued this month.