| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| [matt] |
Posted - 03/09/2009 : 01:42:13
Benj,
I truly hate to complain, but I'm almost constantly getting no reason given when I get declines, and it's really annoying me! 
I've just had 13 declines in one go (most of which I cannot see anything wrong with), only 1 of which has a reason! ("Don't understand".)
But the even more annoying thing is, I actually included explanations for all the reviews which could possibly need them, so as to avoid any problems.
Please can you make the MERPs at least give reasons, because it's really frustrating (especially since that's over half of my submissions declined, which will now have to take up most of this week's slots in resubmissions).
|
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| randall |
Posted - 03/25/2009 : 13:28:38
I've had two or three declined recently with no explanation. That's OK with me, but I thought one of them in particular deserved at least a "The editor doesn't understand" because it was so obviously wordplay that I intended to mean something. Maybe there is a programming glitch somewhere. Or maybe my wordplay was so lousy that it went without saying... |
| benj clews |
Posted - 03/12/2009 : 01:37:17
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
If I knew I was doing something that both irritated and was inconveniencing other people
Well, since I am not telepathic, I obviously did not know that. I'm of course not going to submit another review on that basis.
I'm very glad to hear that.
quote:
quote:
If the review is valid then don't put "PLEASE DO NOT PROCESS YET -- I WOULD LIKE TO WORK ON THIS ONE" against it. The MERPs can then get on with acting one way or the other on the review. If you don't want it looked at yet, don't submit it. It's a simple rule... 
It's a rule now that you have stated it -- but once again, I am not telepathic!
I know! I know! It's not so simple to realise that if you submit a review it will be approved or declined by an editor regardless of if you've finished it or not. Who'd've thunk it?
quote:
quote:
I see it as a MERP's civic duty to decline such reviews for the good of the pending queue.
That makes no sense at all. Approving the review would have done the pending queue just as much good, and perhaps more (I might not have been able to improve the review and thus might have left it approved, whereas now I will definitely put it back in the queue).
Hang on here... what exactly are you talking about? I thought we were discussing how annoying it is when you say "PLEASE DO NOT PROCESS YET -- I WOULD LIKE TO WORK ON THIS ONE." against a review and it's then declined. Now you seem to be saying the editors should ignore your request to not process the review yet. You're making no sense at all.
quote:
quote:
I'm personally instructing the MERPs to decline any and all reviews that the author states aren't ready yet.
Thank you for letting us know about this new rule. Now it is fair (in the sense of the law if not justice) for the MERPs to act in this way, at least to people who have read this thread.
What's unjust about declining a review even the author has stated isn't ready yet? |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 03/12/2009 : 01:17:40
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
If I knew I was doing something that both irritated and was inconveniencing other people
Well, since I am not telepathic, I obviously did not know that. I'm of course not going to submit another review on that basis. Sadly, in contrast, the MERPs seem incapable of learning about any problems and so they make the same errors again and again and again (e.g. rejecting reviews as duplicates that say "This review is OLDER than so-and-so's").
quote:
If the review is valid then don't put "PLEASE DO NOT PROCESS YET -- I WOULD LIKE TO WORK ON THIS ONE" against it. The MERPs can then get on with acting one way or the other on the review. If you don't want it looked at yet, don't submit it. It's a simple rule...
It's a rule now that you have stated it -- but once again, I am not telepathic! There is a difference between making a polite request for deferral and the review not being valid for approval. Had I known that making a polite and peripheral request would cause my valid review to be punished with rejection, I of course wouldn't have made that request. I did not say "YOU MUST NOT PROCESS YET" or "THIS REVIEW IS NOT YET VALID". They could have perfectly well acted one way or the other on the review just as things stood.
quote:
I see it as a MERP's civic duty to decline such reviews for the good of the pending queue.
That makes no sense at all. Approving the review would have done the pending queue just as much good, and perhaps more (I might not have been able to improve the review and thus might have left it approved, whereas now I will definitely put it back in the queue).
quote:
I'm personally instructing the MERPs to decline any and all reviews that the author states aren't ready yet.
Thank you for letting us know about this new rule. Now it is fair (in the sense of the law if not justice) for the MERPs to act in this way, at least to people who have read this thread. |
| benj clews |
Posted - 03/12/2009 : 00:45:20
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
There are two issues here. One is how big a trauma leaving the reviews would be, even for a few MERPs in a row. Let's pretend that that would be a big trauma. Fine.
I never said it was big trauma, just that it's irritating and adds to the backlog. And you know what? If I knew I was doing something that both irritated and was inconveniencing other people (this being your fellow reviewers, whether they know it or not) I'd do my level best not to do it, rather than try and justify it by suggesting the system I'm violating should be changed. You can stick a lot more than just letters in a postbox, but that doesn't mean you should.
quote:
However, the other issue is what to do with the review if such a request would be traumatic to acquiesce to. It was valid for it to be in the pending queue because it was a totally valid review. The pun was not perfected but the literal meaning was still valid. Ignoring the polite request did not mean that the review should then be rejected. Ignoring it meant that it should then have been processed on face value.
If the review is valid then don't put "PLEASE DO NOT PROCESS YET -- I WOULD LIKE TO WORK ON THIS ONE" against it. The MERPs can then get on with acting one way or the other on the review. If you don't want it looked at yet, don't submit it. It's a simple rule...
At the end of the day, even if a MERP were to simply ignore your review, it'd then end up doing the rounds for all the other MERPs, which then stops another review from being looked at by each of them. I see it as a MERP's civic duty to decline such reviews for the good of the pending queue. I'm personally instructing the MERPs to decline any and all reviews that the author states aren't ready yet. |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 03/11/2009 : 14:55:16
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
I've asked this before but never got an answer -- if a review has a minor amendment, shouldn't the MERP just respect the previous MERP and not overturn their decision?
Benj, please would it be possible to get an answer to this? By the way, I don't mean cases where the second MERP realises that there is actually something wrong with the review (of which I haven't had any). I mean cases where they just don't happen to know why the substance of the review is fine.
Depends on what the minor amendment is, I guess. One person's minor change is another person's complete change of review intent.
Oh come on. We all know that we are not talking about ambiguous cases. As an example, in the medical one I mentioned above, I only changed "a... condi[tion]" to "ailment". There was no double meaning or anything like that on "condition". It was simply used in the sense of "illness".
Furthermore, I'm not talking about a scenario where one just tells the MERP that it is a minor change. I'm talking about one where the comment takes the form Already approved as "..." They can readily judge for themselves that it is a minor change. It is ridiculous for the new MERP to ask what the condition is and for it to then go round and round and round and round in circles for ever.
Anyway, are you acknowledging that if they agree it is a minor change then they should re-approve? |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 03/11/2009 : 14:47:33
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
And is it really that traumatic for them to skip one? If it is, it shouldn't be set up that way -- there will always be films where it is better for one MERP to leave reviews for another. However, the point here was also that the review was fine. (It specified two characters and accurately said that they were each under pressure.) So they shouldn't have rejected it just because I asked for it to be left altogether.
Yes they should since it had no reason being in the pending queue, adding to the backlog and, yes- being a bit irritating. It certainly shouldn't merely be skipped so other MERPs have to also stumble across the review that can't be processed.
There are two issues here. One is how big a trauma leaving the reviews would be, even for a few MERPs in a row. Let's pretend that that would be a big trauma. Fine.
However, the other issue is what to do with the review if such a request would be traumatic to acquiesce to. It was valid for it to be in the pending queue because it was a totally valid review. The pun was not perfected but the literal meaning was still valid. Ignoring the polite request did not mean that the review should then be rejected. Ignoring it meant that it should then have been processed on face value. |
| benj clews |
Posted - 03/11/2009 : 13:29:27
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
I've asked this before but never got an answer -- if a review has a minor amendment, shouldn't the MERP just respect the previous MERP and not overturn their decision?
Benj, please would it be possible to get an answer to this? By the way, I don't mean cases where the second MERP realises that there is actually something wrong with the review (of which I haven't had any). I mean cases where they just don't happen to know why the substance of the review is fine.
Please could you also let me know whether you are able to deal with my non-duplicates from what I have detailed in the other thread, or whether I do need to e-mail you after all?
Thanks.
Depends on what the minor amendment is, I guess. One person's minor change is another person's complete change of review intent. |
| benj clews |
Posted - 03/11/2009 : 13:27:37
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
And is it really that traumatic for them to skip one? If it is, it shouldn't be set up that way -- there will always be films where it is better for one MERP to leave reviews for another. However, the point here was also that the review was fine. (It specified two characters and accurately said that they were each under pressure.) So they shouldn't have rejected it just because I asked for it to be left altogether.
Yes they should since it had no reason being in the pending queue, adding to the backlog and, yes- being a bit irritating. It certainly shouldn't merely be skipped so other MERPs have to also stumble across the review that can't be processed. |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 03/11/2009 : 11:18:28
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
I've asked this before but never got an answer -- if a review has a minor amendment, shouldn't the MERP just respect the previous MERP and not overturn their decision?
Benj, please would it be possible to get an answer to this? By the way, I don't mean cases where the second MERP realises that there is actually something wrong with the review (of which I haven't had any). I mean cases where they just don't happen to know why the substance of the review is fine.
Please could you also let me know whether you are able to deal with my non-duplicates from what I have detailed in the other thread, or whether I do need to e-mail you after all?
Thanks. |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 03/11/2009 : 11:13:09
quote:
Originally posted by Josh_the_cat
That's interesting where did you find out that info I have never been able to find a stat about the backlog, or are you making an assumption?
I am just looking at my own backlog. It seems to me extremely unlikely that the MERPs have processed nearly all of my first passes but not done so roughly equally across the board. Why would they?! However, I acknowledge the possibility that they have -- if so, MERPs please stop!
However, one can also get a good idea of the backlog by looking at the I.D. numbers of the most recently approved films and comparing them to those of one's latest submissions. It's of course not a simple subtraction as the MERPs for some reason do not process reviews in order.
When I talk about the backlog (in this context), I mainly mean the backlog of first submissions. This is because when great swathes of reviews get rejected with no reason they are first submissions. Second submissions get dealt with at much more of a trickle and so cannot be what Benj means when he presents the MERPs as battling through the backlog. However, the bulk of my second submissions are also much more recent than they have been most of the time.
I stress though that I am not keen to have my backlog cleared, especially at the cost of proper decisions, so I do not view it as a priority at all. |
| Josh the cat |
Posted - 03/11/2009 : 10:48:06
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
The backlog doesn't seem to be that bad to me now.
That's interesting where did you find out that info I have never been able to find a stat about the backlog, or are you making an assumption? I am unsure and asking in a nice manner as to not offend.
I thought the backlog was only visable by Benj and he never really goes into to much detail over it, if you have more detail I'd love to know.
Cheers
Josh the cat |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 03/11/2009 : 10:31:06
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
Bear in mind that the MERPs are constantly trying to clear the sizeable backlog. Nothing is more irritating that someone clogging that up further by sticking something in there that shouldn't be in there. If you need to note down review ideas, your pending list is not the place to do it. I realise a scratchpad area of the site is something presently lacking and I'm working to resolve this but for now please refrain from submitting stuff that you don't want processed.
The backlog doesn't seem to be that bad to me now. I'd certainly rather they took their time with my reviews rather than rushed through processing them. And is it really that traumatic for them to skip one? If it is, it shouldn't be set up that way -- there will always be films where it is better for one MERP to leave reviews for another. However, the point here was also that the review was fine. (It specified two characters and accurately said that they were each under pressure.) So they shouldn't have rejected it just because I asked for it to be left altogether.
Do I take it that you agree with all the other problem areas being so? |
| benj clews |
Posted - 03/09/2009 : 18:28:10
quote:
Originally posted by [matt]
Ok cheers benj, I've emailed you, to [email protected] right?
Yep- cheers. |
| [matt] |
Posted - 03/09/2009 : 18:23:27
Ok cheers benj, I've emailed you, to [email protected] right?
|
| Whippersnapper. |
Posted - 03/09/2009 : 11:47:18
And I've just had my WASHING ELEPHANTS review refused - "Buns n Hoses".
Surely this HAS to be a bug, right?
 |
|
|
