Moderators are no longer required to leave comments related to the review process, although they’re still encouraged to leave relevant feedback at their own discretion. If your post was not upvoted during the first 72 hours, it is safe to assume it did not qualify for a reward.

It's very important to have a clearly communicated decision: yes or no, ideally with some explanation in the latter case. Keep in mind that without the Utopian interface it's even easier to make a mistake while submitting.

Posts have a limited window in which to earn rewards from all sources. A 72-hour silent rejection versus early feedback that can be addressed makes a significant difference.

Moderators do make mistakes. I've had it happen on one of my own contributions. It was addressed with patience and decorum on both sides. But if @knowledges had never mentioned his reasons to me that conversation would never have happened.

I would not have known if I'd been overlooked, ignored, or rejected — I would have been discouraged and received a disincentive. This will happen to someone if feedback is not consistently given.

Disincentive is the opposite of the mission for Utopian's OS economy, is it not @elear?

The moderators are fine people and I'm confident their discretion will guide them to leave a comment in most cases. Nevertheless removing the clear expectation that submissions will receive at least acknowledgement leaves contributors in the dark for too long.

I made it a point to offer verbose feedback every time I scored and have always gotten a positive reaction for that. Some have even pointed to such feedback as a motivator and part of the incentive. I know it is for me.

So while I know Utopian has a lot to deal with right now and that feedback may seem like a dispensable detail — consider that it may not be so small a thing. Utopian is still a young brand and many people are still forming that crucial first impression.

I hope everyone will comment when they moderate.