| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Sludge 
"Charlie Don't Serf!"
|
 Posted - 06/07/2006 : 16:39:58
|
The MERPs went on approval rampages a few times in the past year. When things slowed down to the level I was accustomed to (maybe I came in at a slow time), people started griping. More recently, newer users have done multiple posts about getting their pending pile reduced.
I would rather see a slowdown in approvals if it also means a better filter is in place. I don't mind having to justify a review.
I have reacted in different ways at different times to various review temptations, especially after being left in the dust. Dumping the whole A&E Biography series actually dropped me in the rankings, but I was fairly happy about the decision because it didn't feel too good to be reviewing films that weren't films (and I had several with top votes).
I currently have a fair number of votes I'd lose for gang bang film reviews, but personally I think all of the porn titles should be dumped with the exception of "Deep Throat", Paris Hilton and maybe one other, otherwise we could easily add another 15,000 films to the sight over night, and soon we'll have another 100,000 dick jokes.
Another example which also relates to "formula", putting the sequel number in the middle of a word of the title... once it had been done, it was old; yet, tons of them not only get approved, but actually get votes. In some cases, I've submitted things like this just as a way of slowing down others who do these, as I said, by the ton. Last night, I thought another solution for me could be to submit for all these formula reviews, and then give them up to Mr. Smithee. Therefore, having unfortunately seen the released-to-video Wes Craven epic "Dracula III: Legacy" last night, I have just submitted "DracuIIIa".
I have never deliberately voted for something that didn't deserve it, but I have accidentally given up votes on a couple of occasions. There's something to be said for bringing back some form of the negative vote per MguyX's historic overview, but only to make things easier in the categories already used in the forums, and which don't suspend the review but just draw it to the MERPs'/Benj's attention. This could make it much more efficient to tag duplicate reviews, for example. Perhaps this could be set up as an unlocked feature only for users with 500 or 1000 approved reviews.
I don't think just because a review is "unpopular" it should necessarily be pulled, but if there was no history of justifying the review on appeal and several users think it was unjustifiably approved, maybe it's time for a revisit. If it doesn't have any meaning, I'm left scratching my head trying to figure out the FWFR. For me, it is disappointing to finally figure out that the thing actually has no meaning other than "this happened in the film", AND it was something that had little meaning outside of one scene.
Unless it has to do with that one watch.
|
 |
|
|
Whippersnapper.
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 06/07/2006 : 17:47:51
|
Personally I am very parsonimonious with my votes - for example - terrible confession coming up  - I have NEVER given anyone 5/5 votes on FYC and, to the best of my recollection, I have only given 4 once! So that's mean, eh?
However, I have to admit that I am sometimes a little more generous to some people than others. There are some - more than one - nice people on the site who are not always the greatest reviewers and maybe they don't have the ready wit regularly on tap which some other reviewers have, and yet they plug away happily doing their best. I like to give them a little encouragement from time to time for a goodish review when probably the same review from another reviewer wouldn't have got it - regularly good reviewers need the vote a little less I think.
Showing a little humanity from time to time is more important than an unbending adherence to a cold impartiality.
Oh, and Hallellujah, Praise the Lord, BaffyBabe is Saved! 
|
|
|
|
BaftaBaby 
"Always entranced by cinema."
|
Posted - 06/07/2006 : 18:02:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
Personally I am very parsonimonious with my votes - for example - terrible confession coming up - I have NEVER given anyone 5/5 votes on FYC and, to the best of my recollection, I have only given 4 once! So that's mean, eh?
However, I have to admit that I am sometimes a little more generous to some people than others. There are some - more than one - nice people on the site who are not always the greatest reviewers and maybe they don't have the ready wit regularly on tap which some other reviewers have, and yet they plug away happily doing their best. I like to give them a little encouragement from time to time for a goodish review when probably the same review from another reviewer wouldn't have got it - regularly good reviewers need the vote a little less I think.
Showing a little humanity from time to time is more important than an unbending adherence to a cold impartiality.
Oh, and Hallellujah, Praise the Lord, BaffyBabe is Saved!
Uh-oh ... now ya got me wondering whether you're voting my stuff out of pity  
|
|
|
|
turrell 
"Ohhhh Ohhhh Ohhhh Ohhhh "
|
Posted - 06/07/2006 : 19:47:28
|
I agree - I am pretty stingy when it comes to scratching someone's back - I play fyc and other vote seeking games - but I always put what I feel are deserving or overlooked reviews into the mix - not my zeroes that should remain zeroes. And I do agree to read the other reviews I just don't vote all that often.
The homepage currently reads that there are 195,222 thats probaby 750,000 words which is probably a full-length novel. Add to the time spent reading the reviews time spent loading these pages it would takes weeks to give every review its fair accounting - I do not have that time. I do have the 30 minutes or so it takes once or twice a week to spin through people's latest reviews and vote on those I deem worthy. But I think there is nothing wrong with these games - there is no way I can read all the recent reviews and give them fair treatment - these posts are a nice tour guide through a sampling of what's fresh.
The only other way to achieve this would be to have the MERPs/benj as they review put some of these in an editor's choice category - that way their votes don't count extra but they could highlight the best of whats new. |
|
|
|
ChocolateLady 
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 06/07/2006 : 20:34:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by turrell
The only other way to achieve this would be to have the MERPs/benj as they review put some of these in an editor's choice category - that way their votes don't count extra but they could highlight the best of whats new.
What a great idea - why didn't I think of that... oh, I did... Nevermind. I still like the idea. It could be a daily thing or even a weekly thing that rotates.
Okay, now that aside, I've got to admit I'm probably way too generous with my votes. Perhaps its because I've been here for less than 6 months and still feel pretty new here. But if I "get" a review, I'll often vote for it. I only feel I wish I could vote higher on certain reviews - those being the ones that either make me cringe or laugh out loud. Still, its not that essential.
On the other hand I have to say that I'm very glad that no one knows who voted for which reviews (unless we tell that person). I'm on two consumer review sites and having the reader's name listed with how highly they've rated the review can cause people to either rate too highly on reviews just so the writer will rate their reviews just as highly in return, or get people angry when you're honest about your ratings and don't rate them high just to be their buddy. The system here keeps us honest(er), I think.
|
|
|
|
Josh the cat
"ice wouldn't melt, you'd think ....."
|
Posted - 06/07/2006 : 23:17:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tori
If I get involved in vote-giving, I look at the pages requested and vote for the ones I believe deserve a vote. I don't just vote for every review. Likewise, when I'm just browsing and giving votes, I don't just say "Oh, there's one of Josh's reviews...he's a good friend, I'll give him a vote." I vote for the ones of his that I love. Same with every other reviewer. I also don't hold back votes just because I may not like them or agree with them. It's about the quality of the review and nothing more.
Tori your a star thanks for the positive comment, its nice this place has some positivity left in it.
Just to state that I read a hell of a lot of reviews and I vote on a load of reviews, the reviewer is not important its the review that counts!
There is one exception to every rule and I have a justification for that, it is to the advantage of nobody but the being truthful to myself.
Josh the cat |
|
|
|
thefoxboy
"Four your eyes only."
|
Posted - 06/07/2006 : 23:35:23
|
If I like, I vote.
All these threads which people swap votes are fine with me cause it's an invite to look at a page of reviews, not a vote on every review.
thefoxboy 
|
Edited by - thefoxboy on 06/07/2006 23:40:46 |
|
|
|
GHcool
"Forever a curious character."
|
Posted - 06/07/2006 : 23:55:34
|
Wait a minute. You're supposed to vote for reviews you LIKE??? I thought votes were for reviews and reviewers you want to delete. Like on "Survivor" when people vote for other people to leave the island.
Now that I know this, I feel sorry that I gave thefoxboy so many votes!  |
|
|
|
thefoxboy
"Four your eyes only."
|
Posted - 06/08/2006 : 00:09:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by GHcool
Wait a minute. You're supposed to vote for reviews you LIKE??? I thought votes were for reviews and reviewers you want to delete. Like on "Survivor" when people vote for other people to leave the island.
Now that I know this, I feel sorry that I gave thefoxboy so many votes!
|
|
|
|
Whippersnapper.
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 06/08/2006 : 00:18:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by BaftaBabe
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
Personally I am very parsonimonious with my votes - for example - terrible confession coming up - I have NEVER given anyone 5/5 votes on FYC and, to the best of my recollection, I have only given 4 once! So that's mean, eh?
However, I have to admit that I am sometimes a little more generous to some people than others. There are some - more than one - nice people on the site who are not always the greatest reviewers and maybe they don't have the ready wit regularly on tap which some other reviewers have, and yet they plug away happily doing their best. I like to give them a little encouragement from time to time for a goodish review when probably the same review from another reviewer wouldn't have got it - regularly good reviewers need the vote a little less I think.
Showing a little humanity from time to time is more important than an unbending adherence to a cold impartiality.
Oh, and Hallellujah, Praise the Lord, BaffyBabe is Saved!
Uh-oh ... now ya got me wondering whether you're voting my stuff out of pity
Not YOU Baffy.
Like I said, I only do that for NICE people.
|
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 06/08/2006 : 00:45:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
Yep, I also never vote for reviews I don't think deserve it, but I do sometimes get the feeling there's a bit of "I'll vote on yours if you vote on mine" going on. Basically, whilst I reckon most folks generally subscribe to the point of view that votes are sacred, some are treating them as a form of currency. Just a feeling I get- no evidence of course
If you want hard evidence, check out my 1-5 voters (these are mostly my 2003 reviews when I wasn't even trying to be clever). IMO these have only received votes because of the 'need' for some to pay me back for votes I gave them (because I liked the reviews I voted for). They definitely aren't deserving of votes, and if I had a vote-stripping mechanism, I'd zap them all back to 0 (that would be 400 or so reviews). So I think you're dead right with your suspicion.
I only vote for reviews I like. Basically I vote for any review that somehow sticks it's head above mundane, i.e., contains a pun, a double meaning, or is somehow funny etc. There will usually be one person in every FYCTH round who gets a full house from me, but sometimes it might be more. |
|
|
|
demonic
"Cinemaniac"
|
Posted - 06/08/2006 : 05:24:19
|
Some really thought provoking stuff here... however it's gone 5am and my brain has turned to mush.
One thing I do want to say before I pass out is like many of you guys I only vote on what I think is worth a vote on the old forum vote exchanges - I too can be picky when it comes to FYC rounds, because I also treasure votes as something well worth giving and receiving, and if they are being thrown about randomly, how on earth can you ever discover what is worthy and what is not? The mark of your best reviews is their consistent approval by your peers and the winning of their votes.
Perhaps everyone should have a long hard look at the bottom of their approved pile, the old 0 and 1 range and just delete the waste matter? I for one am determined to have an impressive batch of reviews from top to bottom, and if I have duds in there, i'll work on them till they're good, even if they've been approved, even if they've gotten me votes. In recent weeks I've deleted 0 reviews and replaced them with new tries, and disowned reviews I didn't like that had gotten 1 or 2 votes already. Could go some way to increasing that quality that Benj is after. Beyond that I guess it's a case of; don't put rubbish up for approval, and don't take it personally if it gets declined.
Ah, that was more than one thing. I'm done.  |
|
|
|
MguyXXV
"X marks the spot"
|
Posted - 06/08/2006 : 06:23:18
|
Wow. I remember when benj FIRST introduced the fourum as a feature on the site. My how things have progressed.
Thanks, benj! |
|
|
|
duh 
"catpurrs"
|
Posted - 06/08/2006 : 15:23:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by demonic
and don't take it personally if it gets declined.
Okay, I'll cancel the order for the guns and explosives and poisons. |
|
|
|
ChocolateLady
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 06/08/2006 : 19:49:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by duh
quote:
Originally posted by demonic
and don't take it personally if it gets declined.
Okay, I'll cancel the order for the guns and explosives and poisons.
Sorry, no refunds, my dear.
(A girl's gotta make a living, you know.)
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Quality reviewing
