Genetic/Strain Review Ideas

  • MTOM rules:
    - When submitting phase opens, you are authorized to upload up to a maximum number of medias (configured by the admin).
    - Once submitting phase ends, voting phase starts and you will be able to vote for your preferred media.
    - At the end of the voting phase, the winner will be awarded !

Son of Hobbes

High of the Tiger
Staff member
Site Administrator
Oct 8, 2012
17,203
83,823
20
Colorado
www.autoflower.net
Hey there everyone, we were hoping we could get some feedback on what you'd like to see on a grow review. What kind of questions do you hope are asked and answered? What questions could you care less about or see on other reviews and go "who gives a shit?" We'd like to put together a more "grower input" guided review for cannabis strains that makes sense for the people reading them and actually wanting using them to make their decisions.

Further, we'd like to invite our vendors and breeders to help give some input on what they would like to see as well, especially when some reviews may be critical and certain details may be poised as questions that we could have answered from the get-go.

This is meant to be a joint effort and it's only as effective as the input from those that both use system for review and those that use the reviews for making decisions.

We appreciate any input, this is for you the growers and the rest of the community!
 

Waira

Growing strange,...
Staff member
Global Moderator
Mar 11, 2013
12,222
39,910
35
53
left coast central
Currently Smoking
Citrus Noir, C99 auto, Gorilla Breath
:thumbsup: Great idea Hobbes! First challenge will be to divide off what's "objective", simple matter of fact (basic data that matta', like lineage, total grow/bloom time), and what's subjective (things like effects, efficacy, potency, even aroma to a certain degree)....And get a fair comparison to what the grower experienced and ended up with, vs what the breeder claims,... There's a lot of hype and and fuzzy details, even outright BS about strains as per the breeders description,... I'll need to think on this a bit more! :thumbsup:

 

Animatey

Died drinking compost tea
Jul 14, 2013
503
544
10
:thumbsup: Great idea Hobbes! First challenge will be to divide off what's "objective", simple matter of fact (basic data that matta', like lineage, total grow/bloom time), and what's subjective (things like effects, efficacy, potency, even aroma to a certain degree)....And get a fair comparison to what the grower experienced and ended up with, vs what the breeder claims,... There's a lot of hype and and fuzzy details, even outright BS about strains as per the breeders description,... I'll need to think on this a bit more! :thumbsup:

I agree, for me the most important info in a strain review is: how close did the grow/results match the breeder description.
 

Frenjamin Banklin

Hello is this thing on
Feb 27, 2018
899
2,518
10
Currently Smoking
Nope
I’d like to play devils advocate here and suggest that reviews off strains are not like most reviews of most products. And I think are a bad idea. I’d love them if they were solid but the reality seems to me that strain reviews in and of themselves are just to objective IMHO. I’ve read some fantastic interactions between members here that are clearly seasoned growers and connoisseurs of fine cannabis on international levels and I know that what I’m reading has a high level of authenticity. And I know that the strains were cultivated in the correct way to give those plants the ability for their true potential to shine through.

I don’t think I can do that just chucking random new strains at the wall every 90 days. And I’m not sure that reviews won’t be written by hacks like me. So I honestly stay away from reading any reviews of strains. Equipment on the other hand is completely different. Objective is fine because the product is consistent.

So to end this crazy thought. I’d love reviews of strains if I could only see them from people I were sure were representing the true potential and had the experience to tell me the truth.

Maybe as a “final thought” or a possibility as a pop up after a completed tag. It would be nice if any review was able to be linked to an actual grow, that way we could see if we wanted how the grow went for that person. It would also help to protect the vendors from poor reviews in a way. I have seen many many folks growing fantastic genetics with poor results due to inexperience that I don’t think would deserve a poor review. So IMHO we just need to consider that to improve the concept.


FB
 

Damien50

Can't Help Myself
Feb 14, 2018
938
2,182
10
Currently Smoking
Malawi x Panama
I’d like to play devils advocate here and suggest that reviews off strains are not like most reviews of most products. And I think are a bad idea. I’d love them if they were solid but the reality seems to me that strain reviews in and of themselves are just to objective IMHO. I’ve read some fantastic interactions between members here that are clearly seasoned growers and connoisseurs of fine cannabis on international levels and I know that what I’m reading has a high level of authenticity. And I know that the strains were cultivated in the correct way to give those plants the ability for their true potential to shine through.

I don’t think I can do that just chucking random new strains at the wall every 90 days. And I’m not sure that reviews won’t be written by hacks like me. So I honestly stay away from reading any reviews of strains. Equipment on the other hand is completely different. Objective is fine because the product is consistent.

So to end this crazy thought. I’d love reviews of strains if I could only see them from people I were sure were representing the true potential and had the experience to tell me the truth.

Maybe as a “final thought” or a possibility as a pop up after a completed tag. It would be nice if any review was able to be linked to an actual grow, that way we could see if we wanted how the grow went for that person. It would also help to protect the vendors from poor reviews in a way. I have seen many many folks growing fantastic genetics with poor results due to inexperience that I don’t think would deserve a poor review. So IMHO we just need to consider that to improve the concept.


FB
Overall I think reviews lack structure and not everyone that grows is seasoned to which I agree with you wholeheartedly. When I pick strains now I like to talk to the breeders, see pictures from talented growers, and read reviews across various forums.

I try to keep my journals structured so that my introduction contains the majority of information that doesn't need to be repeated. The daily reports have lately been

Strain
Day
Temp
Humidity
Feed strength

However in my review I would ideally do

  • Introduction with links to journal and breeder
  • Veg review
  • Flower review
  • Conclusion with pros and cons
For the most part my review will be in depth to a point because I have an entire thread dedicated to the strain or strains that covers everything without summarization.

I think having a structured format for the reviews that goes through a few experienced growers would be helpful. They could determine if the review and the journal reflect a standard of quality and honesty or just inexperience. It's a wasted review if the grower lacked experience and gives others examples.

This group could create a structured format that focuses on decided important points of interest so that nothing is wasted or redundant.

I would like to see
  1. Strain/breeder/price/distributor
  2. Breeders description
  3. Growers experience/introduction
  4. Setup; fans, area, tent, lights, medium, grow method, etc
  5. Intro with environment info, methods used, light schedules, a summarization of sort
  6. Veg, flower, conclusion, recommendations, advice
  7. Smoke report if available though I thinking consuming and cultivation are two different things
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frenjamin Banklin

CoviklaFlaire

Doctor of Fu*king up Grows!
Sep 27, 2016
1,472
3,944
20
Bogota
Currently Smoking
Moist basement shitty moldy albanian weed..
Like SomeOne stated for me biggest problem is someone's tolerance.. I'm not flexing but sisnce I started growing I can smokeKOut 99% people that I know..My tolerance is thru the roof..So reading someones impressions about smoking strain he grew is big gamble for.. And Yes gower skill..We sub growers like me cannot be held on their word on strain potency/quality... Biggest evidence is at the site that Wecannot mention here..

Pick a strain then read grow diareis of it.. OmG..Horror movie..
 

Son of Hobbes

High of the Tiger
Staff member
Site Administrator
Oct 8, 2012
17,203
83,823
20
Colorado
www.autoflower.net
:thumbsup: Great idea Hobbes! First challenge will be to divide off what's "objective", simple matter of fact (basic data that matta', like lineage, total grow/bloom time), and what's subjective (things like effects, efficacy, potency, even aroma to a certain degree)....And get a fair comparison to what the grower experienced and ended up with, vs what the breeder claims,... There's a lot of hype and and fuzzy details, even outright BS about strains as per the breeders description,... I'll need to think on this a bit more! :thumbsup:


I agree, for me the most important info in a strain review is: how close did the grow/results match the breeder description.
Another point noted for having a breeder/grower comparison!

I’d like to play devils advocate here and suggest that reviews off strains are not like most reviews of most products. And I think are a bad idea. I’d love them if they were solid but the reality seems to me that strain reviews in and of themselves are just to objective IMHO. I’ve read some fantastic interactions between members here that are clearly seasoned growers and connoisseurs of fine cannabis on international levels and I know that what I’m reading has a high level of authenticity. And I know that the strains were cultivated in the correct way to give those plants the ability for their true potential to shine through.

I don’t think I can do that just chucking random new strains at the wall every 90 days. And I’m not sure that reviews won’t be written by hacks like me. So I honestly stay away from reading any reviews of strains. Equipment on the other hand is completely different. Objective is fine because the product is consistent.

So to end this crazy thought. I’d love reviews of strains if I could only see them from people I were sure were representing the true potential and had the experience to tell me the truth.

Maybe as a “final thought” or a possibility as a pop up after a completed tag. It would be nice if any review was able to be linked to an actual grow, that way we could see if we wanted how the grow went for that person. It would also help to protect the vendors from poor reviews in a way. I have seen many many folks growing fantastic genetics with poor results due to inexperience that I don’t think would deserve a poor review. So IMHO we just need to consider that to improve the concept.


FB
You raise some good points for sure. In my opinion, reviews -should- be written by growers of all experience levels. That's what gives people a well rounded idea of how something may perform, or hopefully even better, to see consistent comments among growers on certain things. I think the path we give them to get to that conclusion is part of the process though (asking joe-blow-never-grown to write a review on his grow on his own versus offering a guided, step-by-step review template, etc.)

When we ask the right questions, we get more of the answers we're wanting to see (whether it's good or bad.)

As to linking to the review, that's 100% doable and I believe we had a spot on the old review system for that purpose already. We can make the grow journal a required field on the review, that's not an issue at all and I agree should be a REQUIREMENT to even do a review on here (so we don't get newbies joining the site to post fluff reviews, etc.)

Overall I think reviews lack structure and not everyone that grows is seasoned to which I agree with you wholeheartedly. When I pick strains now I like to talk to the breeders, see pictures from talented growers, and read reviews across various forums.

I try to keep my journals structured so that my introduction contains the majority of information that doesn't need to be repeated. The daily reports have lately been

Strain
Day
Temp
Humidity
Feed strength

However in my review I would ideally do

  • Introduction with links to journal and breeder
  • Veg review
  • Flower review
  • Conclusion with pros and cons
For the most part my review will be in depth to a point because I have an entire thread dedicated to the strain or strains that covers everything without summarization.

I think having a structured format for the reviews that goes through a few experienced growers would be helpful. They could determine if the review and the journal reflect a standard of quality and honesty or just inexperience. It's a wasted review if the grower lacked experience and gives others examples.

This group could create a structured format that focuses on decided important points of interest so that nothing is wasted or redundant.

I would like to see
  1. Strain/breeder/price/distributor
  2. Breeders description
  3. Growers experience/introduction
  4. Setup; fans, area, tent, lights, medium, grow method, etc
  5. Intro with environment info, methods used, light schedules, a summarization of sort
  6. Veg, flower, conclusion, recommendations, advice
  7. Smoke report if available though I thinking consuming and cultivation are two different things
Maybe we could consider both a "grower/cultivation report" and an actual "consumption report?" A consumption report might be interesting, especially with legalization spreading and more people having access to dispensaries and cultivating.

Another thought is to making use the review to ask the rounded out questions, but make the review focus and emphasize the growers actual thread for the grow? That way it doesn't turn into a redundant pile of info (stuff copied from the thread, a gallery from the thread, etc.)

And a spot on the reviews where we can try to (as best we can) ask growers to be honest on their experience level.

Like SomeOne stated for me biggest problem is someone's tolerance.. I'm not flexing but sisnce I started growing I can smokeKOut 99% people that I know..My tolerance is thru the roof..So reading someones impressions about smoking strain he grew is big gamble for.. And Yes gower skill..We sub growers like me cannot be held on their word on strain potency/quality... Biggest evidence is at the site that Wecannot mention here..

Pick a strain then read grow diareis of it.. OmG..Horror movie..
I laughed reading this lol. Well again, I think this just drives home the point that we should keep cultivation reviews separate from consumption. I think most people are tempted to do the review after the grow anyway (not necessarily after the full dry and cure,) so asking for an individual potency review (oh I like how that sounds) should probably come after the product is actually ready. That'd be like asking someone to review beer that was just bottled but not aged.

So we can set up all reviews as categories (with sub categories: )
Screenshot 2019-10-05 at 7.25.21 AM.png


Eventually we'll grow the list out here, just not wanting to jump the gun.

Screenshot 2019-10-05 at 7.25.32 AM.png


Then every breeder on-site is listed out, and was thinking of having a "generic, catch-all" template for breeders NOT listed on the site (and then we can look at adding them as categories to keep it tidy, etc, or invite them to the site, etc etc.)

On the navigation side, every breeder forum on here would have a link back to their own review section (keeping it much tidier and neater to sort through reviews.)

The review system also has the option of creating a thread in a specific forum when the review is created (which links back to the actual review.) So there's numerous ways to link it back and forth (without getting messy.)
 

Damien50

Can't Help Myself
Feb 14, 2018
938
2,182
10
Currently Smoking
Malawi x Panama
@Son of Hobbes

I was thinking something like the below. It summarizes a lot without having to look through blocks of text. It could be separated into

an intro detailing the general info like set up and experience, etc.

A veg and Cloning/flower report with methods, nutrients, etc.

Conclusion with pros and cons, things to be done differently.


TypeSativa
FormatFeminized
Sativa / Indica ratio70 % sativa / 30 % indica
BreederSeedsman
ExperienceBeginner/experienced/veteran?
PriceFreebie
Flowering indoors8 weeks
Flowering outdoorsNot Available
Yield500g
Resistance against spider mites
Resistance against powder mildew
Resistance against botrytis
Resistance against white fly
Resistance against cold
Resistance against heat
Resistance against drought
GeneticsParents of the strain if known
StructureExcellent structure; very controllable stretch in flower with vigorous branching. Stems are hardy and leaves wide with medium length
BouquetAromas of skunk, pine, and fruity incense
Vegetative/Cloningvigorous vegging that easily takes toppings and stress.
Floweringstrong branching with moderate stretching and moderate demand for nutrients
Growing TipsI recommend SOG or SCROG for maximum yield.

Medium nutrient usage throughout