ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

Can Peer Review Solve the Decadence?

Updated on March 9, 2020
Kyler J Falk profile image

Developing concepts that solve complex problems has always been a specialty and hobby of mine.


Do you appreciate it when a publishing site offers peer review?

See results

Rather than take this into the forums where toxicity runs rampant, I figured I would bring my ideas directly to the readers here on HubPages to get their valuable opinions and input on the topic. No doubt that the forum regularly makes myself and others feel as if they are being invalidated and even produces evidence of direct and ongoing harassment, so here we are to discuss in a safer environment that I would like to ensure is accepting of all views that are expressed without the intentions of harming others. What will we be discussing, though?

Today I would like to discuss the decadence that is unarguably present within the HubPages community, and is causing long-term damages to everyone involved; the solution to this problem is also quite simple in theory as well so long as HubPages sought to do the leg-work in developing the software.

Would you prefer peer reviews to seeking advice in the forums?

See results

The Problems

No doubt I have built up quite a bit of temporary infamy within the community after publishing my article "Is Prejudicial Discrimination the Answer?" which sought to point out the apparent toxic mentalities held by senior members within the community, and the subsequent spread of said mentalities that I would like to bring to a stop. However, I will recognize that there is a problem with lower-quality articles making it past the QAP and the association with such quality as a community member can lead to concerns that potential readers will leave before giving the site a fair chance. This is no excuse for beginning a witch hunt and being prejudiced against new writers, though, and I think I have come up with a concept that would see both the toxicity and low-quality addressed in a productive manner with long-term success being the outcome for everyone involved.

Should Hubbers be held more accountable for their criticisms of others?

See results

The Solution

HubPages already has a score system which regularly devalues writers with no constructive input being available from observing the score itself, and thus I would label this scoring system as underutilized and seemingly pointless unless the goal is to make your potential writers feel bad. What if HubPages were to use that scoring system as a way to streamline the process of determining which articles should be featured, and which articles simply bobbed and weaved their way around the QAP? Hear me out.

HubPages should break down the overarching Hubber score into subcategories that determine the necessity of peer-review and subsequent HubPages staff review. The subcategories would determine the amount of negative "peer reviews" left by those with a score of 80+ that are necessary for a staff editor to come in and determine the ongoing featured or published status of the article itself rather than leaving it solely up to the report and score features. Those subcategories would look like this:

0-30 Hubber score: A ratio of 5:1 negative to positive peer reviews to get an official editor decision.

31-60: A ratio of 10:1.

61-90: A ratio of 15:1.

91-100: A ratio of 25:1.

Then upon official editorial review by a staffer it would then be decided whether or not the article gets to remain published and featured, or whether it should be un-featured and given the basic reason why it was un-featured from the editor.

On top of this system would be the ability to include a short 200-500 word comment from the peer reviewing section of the article, offering a way to give constructive criticism with the peer-review. This should not come without some risk to the peer-reviewers' Hubber scores, though, as I feel it could be an abused system without consequence for the reviewers.

If an article under this system is deemed to be of a quality not worthy of the negative peer review score, and should remain published and featured, then all subsequent negative reviewers should be docked somewhere within the one-three point range from their overarching Hubber score upon conclusion of official editorial review. This would not only deter Hubbers from abusing the system, but also decrease the toxicity that is ever-present in the forums while offering a proper outlet for criticism and advice.

Do you feel this peer review system I proposed would be viable and productive for everyone?

See results

What Do You Think?

Do you think this would be a viable and productive system for not only increasing the quality of Hubpages as a whole, but also reducing the work load on those who have to officially edit the articles here on HubPages? Please, go down into the comments section and let me know what your opinion is on my proposed system, as well as offering your own solution as to decreasing the decadence, toxicity, and low-quality within HubPages.


This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at:

Show Details
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the or domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)