| Author |
 Topic  |
|
redPen 
"Because I said so!"
|
 Posted - 11/14/2006 : 04:22:31
|
I understand that reviews get denied. I understand that GREAT reviews get denied. But NOW, a review I submitted that got ACCEPTED, and I even got lots o' votes on thru you fine folks, has now been RETROACTIVELY rejected as too similar to another review!!!!
Jesus, that's irritating! |
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 11/14/2006 : 04:36:33
|
Sorry about the bad news, but seeing as it's a duplicate, then it should never have been on the site in the first place.  Other reviews have ended up in the bin for that reason, sometimes months after acceptance. |
 |
|
|
ChocolateLady 
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 11/14/2006 : 06:22:56
|
| Of course, this is going to happen more often now that we have that little Nazi button. |
|
|
|
MguyXXV
"X marks the spot"
|
Posted - 11/14/2006 : 07:35:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
Of course, this is going to happen more often now that we have that little Nazi button.
Nazi button? That's a little harsh and, if I must say so, offensive.
The fact of the matter is that there are probably a finite number of ways to pun off of an actor's name in a given role, other identical word plays will occur to many people at different times, and a pivotal scene will lend itself to description by everyone. Accordingly, duplicates occur. Sometimes that happens because there are so many reviews for a given film that whoever is approving reviews has not gone through the lot to make sure it's not a duplicate. I don't know about the rest of you out there, but I don't really see the benefit in showing or knowing that two or 20 different people came up with the same review. So enlisting the aid of the public in correcting an error does not render the self-policing effort so indignant as to be plastered with the name of "Nazi."
I have come up with reviews on plenty occasions, only to discover that someone beat me to it. In that instance, I don't try and post it. I have on other occasions posted a duplicate, only to find out later that, had I looked more closely, I could have spared some MERP the effort. Once, I posted the same review as another, but mine was probably an hour later, so it got credited to the guy who beat me to it. Yes, it is annoying to discover that a favored review is a duplicate and will not be associated with the second writer's name. But that is a function of not checking to see whether the proposed review is a duplicate in the first place. The fault, dear Brutus, lies not in our stars, but in ourselves ... for not checking in the first place.
So now, CL, do I understand you correctly in basically denouncing anyone who brings the error to the attention of the editor? Or are you simply denouncing the editor? I would think that as a "Jewish, Poet, Chocolate Gourmet," you might exercise a bit more discretion before slinging around that name of "Nazi".
BTW: while nonetheless similar in its extremeness in relation to characterizing the "report" button, the term you probably meant to use is "fascist." The National Socialist movement to which you refer espoused a form of fascism, a characteristic of which is the encouragement of insular group members to distinguish themselves forcibly from others considered opponents. However, fascism exalts the state over the person, thus it imposes a political and often militaristic orthodoxy upon its members, demanding conformity to its dictates. Fascism does not, however, inherently involve the craven eradication of other racial, ethinic, or religious groups. National Socialism did. Accordingly, to describe the "report" button as a fascist feature might not have been so objectionable. While yet shocking and offensive in its own right, I offer that it still is nowhere near as vile as imbuing the feature with kinship in the single most depraved excuse for a political movement of the Twentieth Century.
FWFR provides us a playground.
So let's all try and play nicely. |
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 11/14/2006 : 08:09:40
|
Ditto to MguyX's post.  And I bow before his superior rant-ability.
I'll just add (or reiterate) that IMNSHO a dupe is a dupe and should not be there. Nobody has the right to enjoy a review - AND enjoy the votes - that's an accidental (or deliberate) copy of someone else's who got there first. So all dupes are living on borrowed time and the sooner they are gone the better. If one of mine gets the bullet in such a fashion then you won't find me crying over it in private, let alone public. 
So, I'm now a self-declared Nazi, and if/when I see a review that's incorrect or a dupe or has a typo, then I'll tie it's hands behind it's back, blindfold it and pump some hot lead into the back of it's head (or perhaps put it in a room with some Zyklon-B?) as I have been doing. 
Sorry. |
|
|
|
ChocolateLady
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 11/14/2006 : 08:14:45
|
Hey, calm down. It was just a joke, okay? You know, like Seinfeld and the "Soup Nazi" bit. Sorry to offend anyone. (Now I know why I didn't like that TV show.)
I actually think the "Report" button is a good idea - not a bad one. And no, if someone reports one of my reviews, I won't call them a Nazi.
Sorry!
Forgiven? |
Edited by - ChocolateLady on 11/14/2006 08:25:15 |
|
|
|
redPen
"Because I said so!"
|
Posted - 11/14/2006 : 08:38:36
|
My apologies all around. Certainly didn't intend to cause a firestorm. I'm calmer now, and I admit my part of the fault for not checking ahead, which I usually don't. It was just the "accept-then-deny" motion that caught me off guard.
Group hug, everyone! Back to the fun . . .
|
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 11/14/2006 : 10:56:42
|
This is where smileys are handy, so people know when you're joking or not. E.g., pick the statements where I'm serious and where I'm not:-
I like George Bush. 
I hate penguins. 
Foxy is a tosser.
I don't like dirty jokes.
etc... |
|
|
|
ChocolateLady
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 11/14/2006 : 11:15:07
|
The only thing I can say to that is:
(_E=mc2_)
(Translation can be found here. [Insert appropriate joking smilie here.]) |
|
|
|
Conan The Westy
"Father, Faithful Friend, Fwiffer"
|
Posted - 11/14/2006 : 11:47:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by redPen
... I'm calmer now, . . .
Make up your mind, I thought you were redPen. |
|
|
|
randall 
"I like to watch."
|
Posted - 11/14/2006 : 12:07:41
|
Class? Class? Settle down now.
Okay.
Bueller?
Bueller?
Bueller?
Bueller? |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper. 
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 11/14/2006 : 13:51:10
|
RedPen,
This is your Nazi speaking. 
Your review for "In The Cut" - "Seeing Ryan's Privates" was, IMHO, essentially the same as Joe Blevin's earlier "Showing Ryan's Privates". I did tell you about it in an earlier post but you choose not to do anything about it, which is fair enough if you didn't want to, but I don't think it was the right choice. So I in effect asked Benj to rule on it. The truth is probably that it was only accepted due to a MERPing oversight in the first place.
If your review were an improvement upon the first, fair enough, but IMHO it isn't any better or any worse, just essentially the same review. That doesn't do anything for the site, does it? I've recently written another review for this film "Sating Ryan's Privates" which, IMHO (and no-one has to agree with me!) is better because its only one letter away from "Saving" as in the original title, and also a little spicier.
The question arises "what if its only a teensy weensy bit better?" Well, then its up to Benj to judge. At the same time as I "reported" your review I reported one of my own (with several votes), which is a little better than a similar earlier review, inviting Benj to decide whether to delete mine or not. (I didn't see the other review when I wrote my own, and I don't think I would have bothered with mine had I seen it!) So far Benj has not deleted it but if he chooses to then so be it.
I recently saw a review by Lemmy to a film called "The Chastity Belt" - "Thighs wide shut". Its a very good review with over 50 votes, including mine. But I thought it was missing a trick and so I wrote my own: "Thighs wired shut". My justification, to myself and others, is that I think its better and Lemmy is a great inspiration to me!
I appreciate as a semi-newbie - I've only been here 18 months - that it is frustrating to find so many great reviews you have written have already been written by someone else, but that's the game. There are plenty of opportunities, some of them quite surprising omissions. I've just got accepted for the 2nd LOTR film "Sequel with familiar ring". How on earth was that missed for so long? Or maybe it was just invisible?
On the bright side, the votes you "lost" live on. They were given to Joe, who doesn't push his reviews on FYC, so it's good that his review gets some more recognition and praise. And you made it all possible. Now doesn't that give you a warm feeling deep inside? Or is it heartburn? 
|
|
|
|
lemmycaution
"Long mired in film"
|
Posted - 11/14/2006 : 14:05:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
RedPen,
I recently saw a review by Lemmy to a film called "The Chastity Belt" - "Thighs wide shut". Its a very good review with over 50 votes, including mine. But I thought it was missing a trick and so I wrote my own: "Thighs wired shut". My justification, to myself and others, is that I think its better and Lemmy is a great inspiration to me!
Gee, and I thought I had a lock on that review. 
That was one of my earliest, 'Shining' reviews, written when I was a mere Kubrick's Rube. |
Edited by - lemmycaution on 11/14/2006 14:07:17 |
|
|
|
Ali
"Those aren't pillows."
|
Posted - 11/14/2006 : 15:27:21
|
Stephen King says, in On Writing, that one should be ready to devour one's own children: not literally, of course, but rather an aphorism meaning, while writing, one will sometimes be faced with the painful task of scrapping examples of one's most favourite prose. While this might be consdiered a bit too weighty a statement to apply to such a wistful site as FWFR, I believe it is apt, nonetheless.
Last week, I deleted a particular favourite of mine for Marathon Man, namely: "Nazi transcends dental medication." It had already been accepted, had received 10 or so votes, but I realised, while going over the other reviews for the film, that someone else had thought of it before I did. Oh well.
BTW: And you thought Africans had problems...
|
|
|
|
redPen
"Because I said so!"
|
Posted - 11/14/2006 : 16:17:22
|
Conan, thanks for the self-clarification.
Whip, I gotcha pretty much on all. But in your own admission, it's all a matter of self-editing and decision-making. "Do I think it's too similar?" etc. To me, "Seeing" and "Shaving" weren't even close to being the same thing.
Ali, thanks for the input, but on a personal note, don't EVER quote King to me on the subject of being "original." The man stole all his career, and no one's called him on it. I love his "Dark Tower" series, but it isn't even a thinly-veiled theft of Tolkien. He deserves to be cast out of all the writers' clubs, yet instead, he continues to be rewarded. As a more recent example, remember a year or so ago when he "retired"? Well, I had no doubt whatsoever that he'd be back, and in short order, too. Just another lame attempt to drum up sales. ("King's retiring? I must buy his last book!" . . . "King's back? Hallelujah, where's his new classic?" etc.)
Just personal opinions . . . once again.
Thanks to all for your input on this and everything. I really do love this community of yours (dare I say "ours"?), and the intelligent debating/bantering/asskicking is merely one attractive part.
|
|
|
|
Beanmimo 
"August review site"
|
Posted - 11/14/2006 : 16:37:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Conan The Enlightened
quote:
Originally posted by redPen
... I'm calmer now, . . .
Make up your mind, I thought you were redPen.
I wish I was Calmer, bucket of great reviews there!! |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Okay, NOW I'm pissed!
