| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 06/16/2007 : 12:12:28
Today I clicked on the Top Review link and noticed that Tequila Mockingbird was in first place for his/her review of Henry VIII And His Six Wives with "Boleyn for concubine". Some of you may recall that I have that I've had that same review up for the movie Ann of a Thousand Days, and it is my highest voted review. Thing is, I now see that Tequila's was up for that movie on August 5, 2005, which is before I put mine up (Feb. 2, 2006) for Ann. So, what is the policy? Should I delete mine? Is it okay that the same review is up for two different movies? Please let me know.
|
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Beanmimo |
Posted - 06/19/2007 : 09:22:10
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
[quote]Originally posted by Beanmimo
Not sure why you'd want to do that though. 
Just thought i'd throw that one in to stir it up!!
Would never actually consider it!!
  |
| Sean |
Posted - 06/18/2007 : 23:51:07
quote:
Originally posted by Beanmimo
Ok, how about if you want to give your reviews to another reviewer??
I think the only way this would be done is to delete it and the other person writes it. Not sure why you'd want to do that though.
Occasionally when duplicates are merged that have plenty of votes, the votes are transferred from the dupe to the original. I believe benj does this manually. |
| Beanmimo |
Posted - 06/18/2007 : 15:14:07
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
quote:
Originally posted by Beanmimo
Seeing as this thread is going nowhere I've a question that I've been meaning to ask for a little while.
when you delete a review does it automatically become a Smithee or do you have to do something special??
When you delete it, it disappears off the face of cyberspace forever and ever. However, if you DISOWN it then it becomes the property of one Mr. Alan Smithee.
Ok, how about if you want to give your reviews to another revierer?? |
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 06/18/2007 : 14:13:47
quote:
Originally posted by Beanmimo
Seeing as this thread is going nowhere I've a question that I've been meaning to ask for a little while.
when you delete a review does it automatically become a Smithee or do you have to do something special??
When you delete it, it disappears off the face of cyberspace forever and ever. However, if you DISOWN it then it becomes the property of one Mr. Alan Smithee.
|
| Beanmimo |
Posted - 06/18/2007 : 13:52:09
Seeing as this thread is going nowhere I've a question that I've been meaning to ask for a little while.
when you delete a review does it automatically become a Smithee or do you have to do something special?? |
| Sean |
Posted - 06/18/2007 : 13:24:30
quote:
Originally posted by bife
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
Poor Sad Shallowpian!
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
You are so full of s**t they should bag you up and sell you in garden centres.
Whipper - this is getting far too personal. I have no problem with an occassional spat in the fourum, but there is nothing constructive in this, and I don't enjoy reading it.
Agreed, another dead and rotting thread. |
| bife |
Posted - 06/18/2007 : 11:31:06
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
Poor Sad Shallowpian!
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
You are so full of s**t they should bag you up and sell you in garden centres.
Whipper - this is getting far too personal. I have no problem with an occassional spat in the fourum, but there is nothing constructive in this, and I don't enjoy reading it. |
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 06/18/2007 : 07:02:52
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
O.K., yep, it's different outlooks. If I were in Tequila's position (which I am, with regards to Whippersnapper's duplicate of one of my reviews), it would be the duplication on the site that I minded, not whether or not the duplicate review were assigned to a real reviewer or Smithee.
I have written to Tequilla and asked him/her to decide what I should do. |
| Whippersnapper. |
Posted - 06/18/2007 : 01:40:01
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
My response here was completely reasonable. I still prefer my review, but gave you full license to have it removed. This was not imposing on Benj as it would only take him a few seconds. My reason for suggesting this route was so that the votes could be transferred. This was not for the sake of you gaining votes, but so that people who had voted on my review would not have wasted their time.
You are so full of s**t they should bag you up and sell you in garden centres.
|
| Whippersnapper. |
Posted - 06/18/2007 : 01:38:28
quote:
Originally posted by bife
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
He is no doubt referring to my "The Osmonds" review, "Band Of Brothers" which, it subsequently transpired, had already been written by him for another film also about the Osmonds.
Of course, it had been written for Bee Gees: This Is Where I Came In long before it was ever written for The Osmonds 
Yeah, but they don't have the class of the Osmonds, do they?
|
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 06/18/2007 : 00:35:52
quote:
Originally posted by bife
Of course, it had been written for Bee Gees: This Is Where I Came In long before it was ever written for The Osmonds
Indeed. Last time this came up, I apologised accordingly.  As I mentioned then, when I thought of the review, I thoroughly checked all the Osmond and Jackson films, but didn't think of the Bee Gees. If the Smithee one gets deleted, then I may well delete mine too. |
| bife |
Posted - 06/18/2007 : 00:21:35
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
He is no doubt referring to my "The Osmonds" review, "Band Of Brothers" which, it subsequently transpired, had already been written by him for another film also about the Osmonds.
Of course, it had been written for Bee Gees: This Is Where I Came In long before it was ever written for The Osmonds |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 06/17/2007 : 18:36:49
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
He is no doubt referring to my "The Osmonds" review, "Band Of Brothers" which, it subsequently transpired, had already been written by him for another film also about the Osmonds. (I didn't notice it originally as the other film title includes "Osmond" not "Osmonds" which I searched under.
As soon as it came to light I asked him, by PM, if he wanted me to delete my review and he replied "it doesn't matter."
No, that was not my wording. I said that, if you were keen to keep it, I wouldn't want to ask you to delete it.
quote:
Subsequently, having thought it over, I smitheed the review as anyone is now able to see.
This is no better a situation, so I don't know why you are trying to gain credit for doing this. It also goes against my endorsement of your keeping the review - I am not sure why you ever asked me if you were then going to act conversely. Perhaps you asked my opinion precisely so that you could do the opposite? Quite possibly.
quote:
Have a look at this:
Sliding Doors
Mine was first, and when the obvious duplication of his review - no doubt a simple failure to check properly first rather than intentional - was drawn to his attention on 15MAR he posted:
"Sorry - I had not seen that review. Mine is better [sic], but I agree that it is too similar and that Benj should reject it. Please use the 'Report' button on it."
Now why should it be that, if an author of a review believes his is too similar to someone else's, he doesn't do the decent thing and delete it himself, rather than leaving it there until Benj gets a chance to sort it out and causing him extra work?
My response here was completely reasonable. I still prefer my review, but gave you full license to have it removed. This was not imposing on Benj as it would only take him a few seconds. My reason for suggesting this route was so that the votes could be transferred. This was not for the sake of you gaining votes, but so that people who had voted on my review would not have wasted their time. |
| Whippersnapper. |
Posted - 06/17/2007 : 15:18:53
Poor Sad Shallowpian!
He is no doubt referring to my "The Osmonds" review, "Band Of Brothers" which, it subsequently transpired, had already been written by him for another film also about the Osmonds. (I didn't notice it originally as the other film title includes "Osmond" not "Osmonds" which I searched under.
As soon as it came to light I asked him, by PM, if he wanted me to delete my review and he replied "it doesn't matter."
Subsequently, having thought it over, I smitheed the review as anyone is now able to see.
Incidentally, let me show you what a piece of work Shallowpian really is.
Have a look at this:
Sliding Doors
Mine was first, and when the obvious duplication of his review - no doubt a simple failure to check properly first rather than intentional - was drawn to his attention on 15MAR he posted:
"Sorry - I had not seen that review. Mine is better [sic], but I agree that it is too similar and that Benj should reject it. Please use the 'Report' button on it."
Now why should it be that, if an author of a review believes his is too similar to someone else's, he doesn't do the decent thing and delete it himself, rather than leaving it there until Benj gets a chance to sort it out and causing him extra work?
Could it be because he is a malevolent hypocrite?
|
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 06/17/2007 : 14:22:40
O.K., yep, it's different outlooks. If I were in Tequila's position (which I am, with regards to Whippersnapper's duplicate of one of my reviews), it would be the duplication on the site that I minded, not whether or not the duplicate review were assigned to a real reviewer or Smithee. |
|
|
