| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Demisemicenturian 
"Four ever European"
|
 Posted - 05/26/2008 : 13:53:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
This kind of thing is a matter for self-regulation rather than Benj or MERPs.
Quite. We all acknowledge that duplicates across films are within the rules. It's just up to our personal standards whether we want to keep them. |
 |
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 05/26/2008 : 13:56:44
|
| An analogy I've always had in mind with this is academic plagiarism. If one submits a thesis that is too similar to another, even if one could somehow prove that one hasn't read it, one doesn't just get to have a doctorate anyway. It's just too bad: one has to go away and write something else. |
|
|
|
MM0rkeleb 
"Better than HBO."
|
Posted - 05/26/2008 : 15:51:35
|
I think Whipper's idea is a good one. More information is always better in my opinion, and this would save me from having to figure out which of my review ideas I need to Google.
I also have no problem with reviewers deciding, according to their own conscience, whether or not to keep a review that has been identified as an accidental dupe. I myself would delete the dupe, but I don't expect others to live the way I do.
I will say that there are circumstances where a dupe review can be valid for more than one film, if it works in different ways for different films. For example, if there's a film out there about an evil pork sausage, we'll have an excuse for another 'Brat out of Hell' review.
However, there is something that's been said on this thread I disagree with very much, and that's the implication that we've somehow run out of reviews, and so duplication is unavoidable. Flat out false.
Let's look at some numbers. The average person knows about 20,000 words (although the English language has over 500,000 total, not counting all those obscure technical/chemical words). Adding in names, made-up words, and the fact that people on this site are likely a touch smarter than the average bear, this gives us 25,000 'words' to choose from. Now, I'm going to assume that only about 10% of those words are applicable to any particular film, and further, that one word out of four is going to be completely fixed in order for the FWFR to make sense.
According to these assumptions, which frankly seem a little conservative to me, there are 2500^3, or more than 15 billion, different reviews that could be written (reviews shorter than 4 words ignored as negligible). This means we've uncovered about .002% of the possibilities out there.
Even if I'm off by 2 orders of magnitude, at our present pace, it'll be more than 2000 years before we run out of reviews.
|
|
|
|
BaftaBaby 
"Always entranced by cinema."
|
Posted - 05/26/2008 : 16:09:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by MM0rkeleb
I think Whipper's idea is a good one. More information is always better in my opinion, and this would save me from having to figure out which of my review ideas I need to Google.
I also have no problem with reviewers deciding, according to their own conscience, whether or not to keep a review that has been identified as an accidental dupe. I myself would delete the dupe, but I don't expect others to live the way I do.
I will say that there are circumstances where a dupe review can be valid for more than one film, if it works in different ways for different films. For example, if there's a film out there about an evil pork sausage, we'll have an excuse for another 'Brat out of Hell' review.
However, there is something that's been said on this thread I disagree with very much, and that's the implication that we've somehow run out of reviews, and so duplication is unavoidable. Flat out false.
Let's look at some numbers. The average person knows about 20,000 words (although the English language has over 500,000 total, not counting all those obscure technical/chemical words). Adding in names, made-up words, and the fact that people on this site are likely a touch smarter than the average bear, this gives us 25,000 'words' to choose from. Now, I'm going to assume that only about 10% of those words are applicable to any particular film, and further, that one word out of four is going to be completely fixed in order for the FWFR to make sense.
According to these assumptions, which frankly seem a little conservative to me, there are 2500^3, or more than 15 billion, different reviews that could be written (reviews shorter than 4 words ignored as negligible). This means we've uncovered about .002% of the possibilities out there.
Even if I'm off by 2 orders of magnitude, at our present pace, it'll be more than 2000 years before we run out of reviews.
Where were you when I needed help with my math homework?!!!!!
|
|
|
|
turrell 
"Ohhhh Ohhhh Ohhhh Ohhhh "
|
Posted - 05/26/2008 : 23:41:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
Sean is right that this is a big problem now, which is why when I recognise F.W.F.R.s in the F.Y.C.T.H./MIHAI or can tell that they will have definitely been used I now post links to the earlier cases.
Speaking for myself I might be more apt to remove an inadvertent duplicate if you pm'd me instead of went the public shame route. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 05/27/2008 : 00:05:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by turrell
Speaking for myself I might be more apt to remove an inadvertent duplicate if you pm'd me instead of went the public shame route.
That's up to you, but the point of posting openly is not to try to force the person to delete -- it's to give everyone the knowledge of what reviews there are, so they can decide which to vote for. |
|
|
|
Herky 
|
Posted - 05/27/2008 : 23:53:03
|
The only drawback to the "review already exists for another film" feature that I can see is that it may encourange reviewers (especially newcomers) to become less diligent in checking the extant reviews for film they are reviewing to see if there's a similarity, in much the same way that spell checkers now encourage people to be lackadaisical in their spelling. However, I believe the benefits outweigh the drawbacks and I support this feature.
|
|
|
|
RockGolf
"1500+ reviews. 1 joke."
|
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 00:18:05
|
quote:
According to these assumptions, which frankly seem a little conservative to me, there are 2500^3, or more than 15 billion, different reviews that could be written (reviews shorter than 4 words ignored as negligible). This means we've uncovered about .002% of the possibilities out there.
I'm still trying to find a film for the review "Shark calliope often fucshia."
|
Edited by - RockGolf on 05/28/2008 00:18:30 |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 00:23:34
|
I'd like to find one for "Green ideas sleep furiously."  |
|
|
|
MM0rkeleb
"Better than HBO."
|
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 03:17:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by R o � k G 0 1 f
quote:
According to these assumptions, which frankly seem a little conservative to me, there are 2500^3, or more than 15 billion, different reviews that could be written (reviews shorter than 4 words ignored as negligible). This means we've uncovered about .002% of the possibilities out there.
I'm still trying to find a film for the review "Shark calliope often fucshia."
Entirely possible that's one of the 400 quadrillion or so I eliminated in the 10% section of the estimate.
|
|
|
|
turrell
"Ohhhh Ohhhh Ohhhh Ohhhh "
|
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 05:48:57
|
quote:
Originally posted by R o � k G 0 1 f
quote:
According to these assumptions, which frankly seem a little conservative to me, there are 2500^3, or more than 15 billion, different reviews that could be written (reviews shorter than 4 words ignored as negligible). This means we've uncovered about .002% of the possibilities out there.
I'm still trying to find a film for the review "Shark calliope often fucshia."
Watch Shark Week - something might fit  |
|
|
|
turrell
"Ohhhh Ohhhh Ohhhh Ohhhh "
|
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 05:49:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
I'd like to find one for "Green ideas sleep furiously."
Sounds like a ringer for "Who Killed the Electric Car?". |
|
|
|
ChocolateLady
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 06:24:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by turrell
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
I'd like to find one for "Green ideas sleep furiously."
Sounds like a ringer for "Who Killed the Electric Car?".
Or Soylent Green?
(Although I'm not sure furiously works.
|
|
|
|
Beanmimo
"August review site"
|
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 13:59:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by MM0rkeleb
and the fact that people on this site are likely a touch smarter than the average bear
I'm not fonda your implication here and would rather you dunaway with your accusation or else I'm walken outta this site, I swear I'll sue dead people if I have to.
|
Edited by - Beanmimo on 05/28/2008 14:29:24 |
|
|
|
Ali
"Those aren't pillows."
|
Posted - 05/28/2008 : 14:04:52
|
I recently reviewed The Eyes of Laura Mars: "Eyes see dead people." It got a few votes. I am awesome.
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
I never thought ...
