When a Helium article is outstanding and praiseworthy, we have no problem communicating our approval to the writer. Positive comments are generally well- received and often make the writer's day. It is when we notice a shortcoming in content, or infraction in grammar or spelling, that effective communication becomes important.
There are four ways to communicate with other Helium members regarding their articles: Through rating, flagging, the Contact the Writer function and Peer Critique in the open forum. Each option has specific protocol and all have some communication etiquette in common.
* Rating
By participating in the rating process, we are communicating our opinion. Effectively rating, by reading each article presented and choosing which one of each pair best fulfills the writer guidelines of Helium, and rating that article "more" is a passive, but appropriate way to voice our approval, or disapproval, to the writer about his article.
* Flagging
Often, in the process of rating, we will come across an article that needs help in one area of another, and we might be inclined to notify the writer of what appears to be an oversight. Flagging is a limited, but sometimes timely and effective way to do this. There are approximately 83 characters in the flagging box, so comments must be concise. An example of an effect comment is, "The word _____ is misspelled in this otherwise good article." Another example: "Remove your name to avoid self-promotion and enhance rating." Flagging comments directly to the writer only works for practical tips regarding minor infractions.
* Contact the writer option
For comments of praise, or lengthy critiques, the Contact the Writer option is a better choice. Praise is self-explanatory, and a thoughtful and considerate thing to do for another writer.
Critique requires tact and diplomacy. By leading off your comments with positive remarks and then adding the infractions to be corrected will ensure the writer will not become offended or incensed by your message. Here is an example of a well-intentioned critique: "Your article__________ is well thought out and presented. I enjoyed reading it. I did notice, however, that your opening is weak and this good article deserves a stronger beginning. I also noticed a misspelled word in the second paragraph. I offer these comments to be helpful in order that you might enhance your rating on this good article."
Most writers will appreciate the assistance. In the event a writer is offended or angry, it would behoove you to offer an apology and reiterate that you were only trying to be helpful.
* Peer Critique
In the Writer's Critique forum a writer can submit his article for comments and suggestions from his peers. If you choose to make helpful comments, this is an especially sensitive area, for not only is the writer courageously putting himself "out there," but the responses are visible to the entire community. Since this is a more "in depth" effort, there are crucial steps involved for the individual offering the critique:
- Begin by reading the writer's profile, in order to acquaint yourself with him.
- After reading the article thoroughly, make notes of the areas in which you want to suggest change.
- Post positive comments first and then follow up with your suggestions. Temper any criticism with kindness.
- Keep any disagreement you may have with the writer's views or opinions to yourself. He is asking for a critique of his writing skill, not a debate about his values or politics.
- End your post on a positive note.
Even if the writer has alluded to another article in his request, refrain from using another article in your answer. It is distressing to read comments such as, "I agree, I thought your article was better than the #1." Remember, the #1 writer did not ask for a critique, nor does he deserve to have attention drawn to him in a public forum. It is poor form to focus your comments on anyone other than the writer requesting the critique.
Whichever of the above methods for communicating with writers you choose, remember to always keep your posts courteous, well-thought out and constructive.
If you have been the recipient of praise, or constructive critique, contribute to the ripple effect of good intentions and take the time to "pay it forward."
Taking the time to generously praise other writers contributes to the spirit of community Helium aspires to achieve.
Taking the time to assist fellow writers with improvements or corrections, contributes to the overall quality of the entire site. This benefit's the other writer, the quality of the Helium site and ultimately ourselves.