| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Downtown 
"Welcome back, Billy Buck"
|
 Posted - 05/06/2008 : 18:51:08
|
| Forget it, Sal...they just didn't like the review itself but nobody will ever admit that to you. You'll only get more frustrated expecting real consistency and fairness. |
 |
|
|
Whippersnapper. 
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 05/06/2008 : 19:07:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
[quote]Originally posted by Salopian
An animus is an animating spirit. Whatever soul means, it's something along those lines. However, animus has a related but distinct meaning of animosity. This gives napper's review a nice double meaning that I was not previously aware of, but double meanings are not a requirement of reviews. Soul is also closer to conscience, but not to the extent that evildoers are supposed not to have souls. A slight difference in B's favour.
A rectum is not the same as an anus. A slight difference in A's favour.
I have detailed all this to highlight the issue of precedents being neither followed nor retrospectively rejected.
I intended it predominantly in this sense:
strong dislike or enmity; hostile attitude; animosity.
It may even be possible that some fwfrs have this kind of animus towards each other - who knows?
I guess, and hope, it was in this sense that it was accepted. To merely say the rectum is alive is really not very interesting and "soul" implies a religious dimension which, as far as I am aware, is not relevant to the film.
If all my review meant was something like "rectum with a spirit" then I really wouldn't have complained about a refusal.
|
|
|
|
bife 
"Winners never quit ... fwfr ... "
|
Posted - 05/06/2008 : 19:12:51
|
You really can't see the difference?
Soul:
�noun 1. the principle of life, feeling, thought, and action in humans, regarded as a distinct entity separate from the body, and commonly held to be separable in existence from the body; the spiritual part of humans as distinct from the physical part.
Animus:
�noun 1. strong dislike or enmity; hostile attitude; animosity
Does the film make any suggestion that the arsehole has a soul? Maybe it does, I haven't seen it, but it is a B-grade comedy/horror, I do not think the question is raised.
Does the film make a suggestion the the anus has a hostile attitude. I'd say that was pretty well the foundation for the film.
I could be wrong, this is not a science no matter how you try to make it one, but it seems to me that the MERPs could justifiably seperate these two reviews.
That isn't to say that there aren't inconsistencies, I can see that there are by looking only at my own approve/decline piles. But why are you so obsessed with the minutae of every approval/decline, and why do you feel so victimised? We all get bad declines (and bad approvals, occassionally  ).
Do you really expect someone to go trawling through all historic reviews to make sure everything is 100% lined up with your own approval/decline profile? Damn, I'd be happy just to see my pending pile go away, I don't want anyone distracted from approving my reviews by following up in detail every review that every fwfrer believes is inconsistent with a previous review. |
Edited by - bife on 05/06/2008 19:27:48 |
|
|
|
bife
"Winners never quit ... fwfr ... "
|
Posted - 05/06/2008 : 19:13:35
|
| Looks like whipper got there first |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 05/06/2008 : 23:25:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
I intended it predominantly in this sense:
strong dislike or enmity; hostile attitude; animosity.
O.K., I did not know this meaning of the word before starting my post -- although I did acknowledge it once I found out. I was not prompted to think there was another meaning to the one I knew because of the inclusion of the indefinite article. While there are occasional uses in this sense, the only ones I can find are in cases where an animosity would fit. Animosity of course usually appears without an indefinite article, and with one it has a nuanced meaning of being more targeted, such as in a vendetta against a certain group of people. The distribution of animus on the Internet makes me guess that it follows the same pattern. Nothing I know of the film leads me to think that the rectum goes on anything other than a totally random rampage, so "Anus with animus" would make more sense if you did not intend to use the spirit meaning.
quote:
To merely say the rectum is alive is really not very interesting
It's not a requirement for a review to be interesting, so that's of no relevance. Besides, I cannot really imagine how one could find the concept of a rectum's animosity any more interesting than the concept of its just being alive.
quote:
"soul" implies a religious dimension
Hhmmm, not really. The idea I'm sure developed within religions (although who knows whether it started there?), but unless you believe that a non-religious person could not validly claim to have a soul, nothing hinges on that. It can quite definitely be used to describe the animating force of conscious beings. And (as I added after you replied) any individual, especially one with consciousness, can be described as a soul. |
Edited by - Demisemicenturian on 05/07/2008 00:01:25 |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 05/06/2008 : 23:49:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by bife
Does the film make any suggestion that the arsehole has a soul?
In the wider sense of a consciousness, yes, I think it does -- something motivating it to act as it does. It's certainly close enough to comfortably pass in one of these sort of films, where there is clearly a lot of leeway.
quote:
Does the film make a suggestion the the anus has a hostile attitude.
Well no, because it's not about an anus, as I've already mentioned. This kind of leeway is fine, but it's at least as much as my review needs (if any).
quote:
That isn't to say that there aren't inconsistencies, I can see that there are by looking only at my own approve/decline piles. But why are you so obsessed with the minutae of every approval/decline
I'm simply not. But better consistency is not going to be achieved by magic or divine intervention. Issues have to be raised, and the occasional example given. I have ever mentioned probably less than one per cent of my rejections, and only ever as examples of wider problems.
quote:
why do you feel so victimised?
I don't. As you yourself wrote earlier, one only knows of one's own rejections. What other examples could I give?! I want fairness for anyone who wants it, not just for myself.
quote:
We all get... bad approvals, occassionally
Not that occasionally. I sometimes submit unreasonable reviews as a joke that I can just tell will be approved.
quote:
Do you really expect someone to go trawling through all historic reviews to make sure everything is 100% lined up with your own approval/decline profile?
Of course not. But the MERPs' knowledge of other reviews on the site/decisions indicated by Benj in the Fourum does seem to be poorer than I would consider ideal. (For example, it has been very well known for a long time that there are numerous reviews where closely - or not so closely - related species have been used. It is therefore not comprehensible how a MERP can reject a review on that basis.) I frequently cite other reviews exactly so that the MERPs do not need to know of them themselves. So this case, for example, relies wholly on them comparing the two reviews and feeling that my review is certainly not valid in comparison to napper's.
quote:
Damn, I'd be happy just to see my pending pile go away, I don't want anyone distracted from approving my reviews by following up in detail every review that every fwfrer believes is inconsistent with a previous review.
And I don't want my reviews misprocessed just so that you can have fewer pending reviews. I'd be perfectly happy for us to receive the same amount of MERP time, but for fewer of my reviews to be looked at. |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper.
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 05/07/2008 : 00:25:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
I intended it predominantly in this sense:
strong dislike or enmity; hostile attitude; animosity.
O.K., I did not know this meaning of the word before starting my post -- although I did acknowledge it once I found out. I was not prompted to think there was another meaning to the one I knew because of the inclusion of the indefinite article. While there are occasional uses in this sense, the only ones I can find are in cases where an animosity would fit. Animosity of course usually appears without an indefinite article, and with one it has a nuanced meaning of being more targeted, such as in a vendetta against a certain group of people. The distribution of animus on the Internet makes me guess that it follows the same pattern. Nothing I know of the film leads me to think that the rectum goes on anything other than a totally random rampage, so "Anus with animus" would make more sense if you did not intend to use the spirit meaning.
Wow! One minute he doesn't know a particular meaning of the word, the next he's lecturing me on its usage!
For your information I have heard the phrase "with an animus" on enough occasions in this sense, and googling gives hundreds of examples. So, how about you shut the fuck up giving lectures to people who know more about the subject than you do?
quote:
To merely say the rectum is alive is really not very interesting
It's not a requirement for a review to be interesting, so that's of no relevance. Besides, I cannot really imagine how one could find the concept of a rectum's animosity any more interesting than the concept of its just being alive.
No, it's not a requirement that a review be interesting, but it should be reason enough for you to stop whining about it's rejection already. Move on.
quote:
"soul" implies a religious dimension
Hhmmm, not really. The idea I'm sure developed within religions (although who knows whether it started there?), but unless you believe that a non-religious person could not validly claim to have a soul, nothing hinges on that. It can quite definitely be used to describe the animating force of conscious beings. And (as I added after you replied) any individual, especially one with consciousness, can be described a soul.
Of course "soul" implies religious or quasi-religious attitudes, which is, apparently, not in keeping with the film. Hence the rejection.
|
|
|
|
bife
"Winners never quit ... fwfr ... "
|
Posted - 05/07/2008 : 00:53:13
|
So Sal, here is the source of your inconsistency problem.
Whipper and I both believe his review is sound, and that yours should be rejected. We are openly stating this in a public fourum, not processing behind-the-scenes in a darkened and private MERP-world, and I hope you agree that whether or not we are right we do genuinely believe our positions based on the merits of the reviews and not because it is you vs Whipper.
You, on the other hand, disagree, think that both reviews are equivalent, and that Whipper's approval is evidence that yours should also be approved.
Were the three of us MERPs, we would process these reviews in different ways, no favouritism, just different viewpoints. Even after protracted discussion. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Benj - Is there a new MERP out there or something?
