| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Canklefish 
"Let's Get OUTTA Here!"
|
 Posted - 06/30/2007 : 19:31:30
|
Here's a question that's been burning me up since I joined the site back in March..... How the hell do some users get benign and banal reviews pushed thru, sometimes 5-8 at a time when the reviews I've poured over for minutes at a time(hehehe) are continuously kicked back in my face. You wanna submit a thread praising the MERPs, well write one about the users who help drive this site....
Sure, the simple and convenient response would be "Well, you're reviews must simply suck, if users are getting under your skin... hell you've only been a member since March, quit your fuckin' crying", but I also sumbit this.... Since March I've managed to climb pretty high, even with the 20 submission limit, and I'm a little upset when I log into the site and see 7-8 reviews for Shrek the III , none of which have a chance of 'flying'. Hell, the review(ONE, 1) I wrote for this film is as good as many reviews melded together, yet they all seemed to get thru. Here's my theory... some reviewers are actually the same person, logging in and voting for the boring, lame and banal reviews they write in an attempt to climb the FWFR ladder.
I know my stance will not be a popular one, especially for the first thread I've posted to, but hell.... I can't be the only one who's noticed the reviews that make it thru, when quality ones are kicked back for seemingly no reason. Check my track record before you respond to this, and tell me if I'm correct or if this hangover I'm nursing is making me act crazy.
I know this thread will spark unnecessary drama on a site that I love to visit and contribute to, but I will keep silent no longer. And this will not be submitted under Alan Smithee's name, that guy gets all the crap thrown at him.
Thank-you for your time and understanding in this matter...
Damn, I just really wanted to come back and edit this B.S. Not continue it. See page 5 or 7 for complete contrition....
|
Edited by - Canklefish on 09/01/2007 10:13:40 |
|
|
Canklefish
"Let's Get OUTTA Here!"
|
Posted - 06/30/2007 : 19:45:53
|
I just read my own post and I wanna add that Benj Clews and the other MERPs do a helluva job reviewing and posting reviews in order to continue this site's rich tradition(can't be stressed enough).... but like I said in the original post, I will stay silent no longer, even if that translates into a struggle on my part to get future reviews pushed thru the meat grinder.
I think I've been here long enough to have an opinion in this matter....................
well, maybe anyway....
Love this site to a fault, check it more than my email & my fantasy ESPN teams, perhaps that's where the passion comes from.
|
 |
|
|
Beanmimo 
"August review site"
|
Posted - 06/30/2007 : 19:49:46
|
Nowhere on this site does it say that you have to LIKE any of the reviews published here. What you may find boring other people may find amusing enough to vote on.
The reviews just have to be relevant enough to a scene an idea or about an actor/character. This may produce many reviews that just blatantly outline the plot of a movie. I have over 1.900 review published and many if them are like this. Other reviewers have a much more stringent Quality standard when it comes to their reviews and maybe you are one of them.
And now to the drama, if you could please refrain from actually publicly singling out other users when something is bothering you. It is a policy here that we try to uphold which generally keep these fourumii a place I like to visit more regularly that I go to the toilet.
|
Edited by - Beanmimo on 06/30/2007 19:52:10 |
|
|
|
Canklefish
"Let's Get OUTTA Here!"
|
Posted - 06/30/2007 : 20:22:11
|
You are absolutely correct, I shouldn't have singled out any reviewers whatsoever, and I knew that was wrong even when I was typing it. It was certainly not my intention to put those 2 users on my own personal chopping block, even though it will cetainly come thru that way.
My point could have been made without naming any names, but when I logged in this afternoon/morning, the entire 'latest reviews' board was dominated by 1 user and the reviews simply irked me beyond measure.
My sincere apologies to the users I named for actually naming you in my rant, I've actually voted for many of your previous reviews and know for certain that I will do so in the future. Your longevity on the site is paralleled by very few.
Much drama where drama needn't be.......
|
Edited by - Canklefish on 09/01/2007 09:54:33 |
|
|
|
Beanmimo
"August review site"
|
Posted - 06/30/2007 : 20:50:51
|
I do understand the frustration of seeing loads of reviews by the same reviewer appearing on the front page but it just means that they have a larger pending pile than my own.
Oh and by the way you could even go as far as deleting any reference to the two reviewers from the two posts that you mentioned them in if you like....
|
Edited by - Beanmimo on 06/30/2007 22:16:46 |
|
|
|
Koli
"Striving lackadaisically for perfection."
|
Posted - 06/30/2007 : 22:08:01
|
| There was a time when American teenagers were so polite. Calling their daddy Sir, and that sort of thing. What happened? |
|
|
|
Beanmimo
"August review site"
|
Posted - 06/30/2007 : 22:17:24
|
James Dean I think. |
|
|
|
BaftaBaby 
"Always entranced by cinema."
|
Posted - 06/30/2007 : 22:33:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Koli
There was a time when American teenagers were so polite. Calling their daddy Sir, and that sort of thing. What happened?
The 60's 
|
|
|
|
Whippersnapper.
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 06/30/2007 : 23:23:22
|
Canklefetish
You misunderstand what the editors - Benj & The Merps as they are known when touring - are supposed to be doing.
They are NOT editing on the basis of the "quality" of the reviews, that's to say how many votes they think it will get. That's irrelevant to them. Whether its clever or boring makes no difference to their job at all.
They select on the basis of whether a review meets the criteria, which is essentially relevance without being too generic. So, for an editor, its probably easier to decide on a very straightforward review than a clever one. Some of the straightforward reviews are obviously correct and, provided they don't apply to a lot of other films, they are shoo-ins.
The fact, if its correct, that you write clever reviews, does not mean that they meet the criteria and its very likely thats why they are being rejected.
At the moment review acceptances is at a very low rate as Benj has the audacity to go on honeymoon and therefore not edit as many reviews as he normally would. I have a second-pass review which is more than 9 months old and 38 reviews which are more than 6 months old. Frankly its frustrating, but that's life.
It should be a general rule not to criticise the quality of another reviewers work in general terms - some of us are better than others like most things in life, but everyone makes their contribution here.
|
|
|
|
BaftaBaby
"Always entranced by cinema."
|
Posted - 06/30/2007 : 23:39:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
Canklefetish
You misunderstand what the editors - Benj & The Merps as they are known when touring - are supposed to be doing.
They are NOT editing on the basis of the "quality" of the reviews, that's to say how many votes they think it will get. That's irrelevant to them. Whether its clever or boring makes no difference to their job at all.
They select on the basis of whether a review meets the criteria, which is essentially relevance without being too generic. So, for an editor, its probably easier to decide on a very straightforward review than a clever one. Some of the straightforward reviews are obviously correct and, provided they don't apply to a lot of other films, they are shoo-ins.
The fact, if its correct, that you write clever reviews, does not mean that they meet the criteria and its very likely thats why they are being rejected.
At the moment review acceptances is at a very low rate as Benj has the audacity to go on honeymoon and therefore not edit as many reviews as he normally would. I have a second-pass review which is more than 9 months old and 38 reviews which are more than 6 months old. Frankly its frustrating, but that's life.
It should be a general rule not to criticise the quality of another reviewers work in general terms - some of us are better than others like most things in life, but everyone makes their contribution here.
what he said ...
|
|
|
|
Josh the cat 
"ice wouldn't melt, you'd think ....."
|
Posted - 07/01/2007 : 00:21:52
|
Why is it that good decent members of our community are being insulted and abused? I am growing ever more tired of members of FWFR thinking they have the right to be obnoxious, rude and insulting and getting away with it. Tori, Calmer or any other reviewer here has the right to enjoy the site as much as any other.
I am not a believer that longevity gives extra importance but being relatively new does not give anyone the right to the behaviour and attitude that we have seen in the fourum by a number of FWFRers recently.
As far as I am concerned people come here for simple enjoyment, if you don't like a reviewers work then don't vote for it, but have the decency to not shout your mouth off in a public fourum.
I have no doubt that I will come in for some abuse for this but sod it I am sick of people coming here to what was a friendly community and ruining it with a horrendous attitude, if you don't like other users then go make your own site and don't accept them as users, we'll see how well you do.
Your making people unhappy and upset gwt over yourself and give up!
Tori Calmer you have my full support keep enjoying FWFR.
Josh the cat |
|
|
|
Sean 
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 07/01/2007 : 00:22:07
|
Wow. Canklefetish, you sure know how to make friends. You've just walked into someone else's party, insulted the host, criticised someone's hairdo, spilled your beer on the carpet and tried to change the music. Obviously being liked isn't a priority...
Seeing as you asked so nicely, I'll point out that everyone has many, many reviews declined when they begin fwfring. When they've learned the site rules their decline rate drops. Those reviewers you've singled out know the rules.
Please list some of your declined reviews here and I'll explain to you why they were declined, and perhaps suggest a way of getting them approved. |
|
|
|
turrell
"Ohhhh Ohhhh Ohhhh Ohhhh "
|
Posted - 07/01/2007 : 00:26:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by Koli
There was a time when American teenagers were so polite. Calling their daddy Sir, and that sort of thing. What happened?
We're continually trying to distance ourselves from England - for 231 years next week by the way!
As to cankles post - its been said here, but I wanted to further add that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. A valid review need not be clever by your standards, but must be accurate and follow the rules which many people here know pretty well. The best reviews will garner many votes, the less creative reviews will be passed and not get many votes.
If you want to measure how good your reviews are in total versus others, look for yourself in this list http://www.fwfr.com/topreviewers.asp?mode=avr It is the top reviewers by average votes per review. Incidentally Calmer has more than twice your average votes per review and Tori has nearly 6 times your average votes per review. They have also shown to be infinitely better FWFR citizens than you have. |
Edited by - turrell on 07/01/2007 00:59:48 |
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 07/01/2007 : 00:48:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by turrell
quote:
Originally posted by Koli
There was a time when American teenagers were so polite. Calling their daddy Sir, and that sort of thing. What happened?
We're continually trying to distance ourselves from England - for 231 years next week by the way!
We're as far away from the UK as it's possible to be (20,000km) but still have their flag in the corner of our flag. 
Viva la revolucion! Etc etc.  |
|
|
|
TitanPa
"Here four more"
|
Posted - 07/01/2007 : 01:27:22
|
#1 - Welcome to the site
#2 - Where the hell do you come off with pointing fingers.
It was ok to make a statement and give your opinion. But then you had to use names. Benj does not ask for intelligent reviews all the time. And it ticks me off that you are new to the forums and yet you shoot off at the mouth. No, "Hello I'm new, I dont understand". No, "Its great to be here." You come pouncing in making asumptions and pointing fingers. Where do you get off Sir/Ma'am???? |
|
|
|
rockfsh
"Laugh, Love, Cheer"
|
Posted - 07/01/2007 : 01:28:54
|
quote:
Se�n wrote: We're as far away from the UK as it's possible to be (20,000km) but still have their flag in the corner of our flag.
Well I'm about 11K kilometers from the UK and my state has their flag in the corner of the state flag too. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
How the hell do some reviews....
