I was glad when rejected my file by reviewer RimV. Because he given the reason for rejection.
here is my file link this template for facebook fan pagehttp://geniecoder.com/facebook/fantemplate/
here is the reason:
This File Did Not Meet Our Criteria
Thank you for submitting this file to ActiveDen. Although the idea is good, XML driven template is much more usable because user doesn’t need Flash Professional to edit content. Please consider to take another approach and increase file complexity to meet our standard quality.
Your reviewer was [removed by mod] .
My file was not XML driven so i thought the file is not XML driven this is the reason for rejection. And I was upload again after make it fully XML driven with good code quality and fully tested.
I didn’t change design and function just made it XML driven. And last time reviewer said my idea is good but now he said, Files that are visually simple must have amazing functionality.
But it was again rejected:
Unfortunately, we were unable to approve your submission due its simplicity. Files that are visually simple must have amazing functionality and files that are technically simple must be visually stunning. Please check out our quality standards (http://wiki.envato.com/selling/tips-selling/activeden-quality-standards/) and popular files (http://activeden.net/page/top_sellers) to get a good idea of what types of files will be successful on ActiveDen.
Your reviewer was loziosecchi.
is it visually really simple or low quality ? here is my file
- Repeatedly Helped protect Envato Marketplaces against copyright violations
- Exclusive Author
- Has been a member for 4-5 years
- Sold between 10 000 and 50 000 dollars
- Grew a moustache for the Envato Movember competition
- Beta Tester
- Bought between 50 and 99 items
It is a good start but it is too simple. You could use better animation with some cool effects. Look at some of the new facebook templates to have an idea of what the quality needs to be.
Here is a flash master check out his templates specially the facebook ones to have an idea:http://activeden.net/user/igniteflash/portfolio
I question whether it should be a reviewer’s, or even activeden’s, choice whether the author sources content with XML . I prefer JSON , but wouldn’t enforce that.
Reviews are terribly inconsistent, and often feel subject to the reviewers personal mood at the time imo. We’ve seen the same file rejected for a reason as simple as “The comments weren’t done as we prefer”, and after fixing the comments as the activeden reviewer prefers, it’s rejected for something else rather silly.
We’re beginning to question the motives of some of the reviewers, since they are often reviewing their own competition…