Sounds good to me. I like the idea of having a wide variety of experience in the group as I think all too often I think views are from experienced viewpoints. Perhaps also make it so that all authors of modules to be included in a review are contacted prior to any work being done to see if they have any objections to it.

I started this thread with a review of most of the available (at the time) article modules based on my own tests of each. I posted the reviews since I had pretty much already done the work in order to decide which was best for my own purposes and I thought it might be helpful to others. To tell you the truth, I kind of regretted making the post almost immediately.

For one thing, I was flat wrong about a couple of things. For another, I got a bit of flak from some of the module writers who didn't agree with my testing methods and with my conclusions. That was partly my fault for having categories like "High power" which is more subjective than objective.

Point is, anyone trying to test modules on an "official" level is going to have a rather thankless job that will be extremely time-consuming.

The fact that you had to go through the process in the first place identifies the need for it.

I commend you at least having a shot in the first place and I for one found it useful.
The risk of getting things wrong still exists but a review pannel of five or so people would reduce these risks significantly.

The Review panel is an ongoing project. If it starts today it doesn't stop until XOOPS does.
If XOOPS wants to be inclusive it needs to connect with new and newish users.
256 people downloaded Wakka 0.12 R2, Why? on what basis? what does it do?
2103 have downloaded XT-Conteudo, is this the best content management system? does most popular = best?

If every new user is expected to install three or four modules to make a decision which one to use it does make the whole process a little daunting to a newbie and it still remains and issue of which three or four of the 22 content management modules to use.

Factors like how clonable the module is,
How many hacks offering other features,
bugs and module support should interest current users of the module as well.

Worth a bit of time I think.
Only wish I new more about it

Funny that you can go to the same place day after day and never see something in-front of your eyes!
Just seen this on the Repository index page,

All module submissions are reviewed by the Repository Team. You can also join that team and help in maintaining the Repository!

Ok so where are the reviews?
Who is in this team?
How/can I join?

The more I look at the descriptive text that accompanies many of the modules the more I am convinced that we need a standardised way of saying what they do and what they don't.
I have spent many hours installing, setting up, adding content to a module only to find it won't do what I want so have to spend more time cleaning up.
As more and more modules are released this situation will only get even more of an issue, especially for the 1147new members that have joined in the last 30 days or so.

I guess this post is possibly in the wrong place to guage interest but I think we need some "official" guidance as whether core members feel that this issue should be addressed before a placing a new post and raising the hopes in others who are searching for the ideal module for their site.