| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Demisemicenturian 
"Four ever European"
|
 Posted - 06/30/2008 : 00:56:56
|
I find it frustrating that my allocation gets used up by having to submit reviews again after they get Don't understand completely inexplicably.
An example I have just seen is for "Kampani's illegal dealings" for Woodstock Villa. Guess what -- it's about the illegal dealings of someone called Kampani! It's not exactly rocket surgery, is it?! For each review "X" do we really need to add "The film is about X" as an explanation, on top of "I know how to spell; I know how to punctuate; I know what a word is"?! |
|
|
Larry 
"Larry's time / sat merrily"
|
Posted - 06/30/2008 : 12:11:53
|
| Yeah, I'm getting the "Don't Understand"s, too. I get the feeling somebody's not TRYING to understand. |
 |
|
|
Larry
"Larry's time / sat merrily"
|
Posted - 06/30/2008 : 13:23:57
|
| Now I'm getting the more-than-five-words message (when the reviews are obviously within regulations) and rejections without comment. I take back my previous Reply. Now I think some MERPs are just trying to move too fast -- not really savoring the reviews. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 06/30/2008 : 13:41:33
|
| I don't expect them to savour my reviews, but I am finding it frustrating that all my submissions are getting used up by having to resubmit perfectly valid reviews. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 07/12/2008 : 15:03:11
|
A new one (via <Click for details>, but still the same kind of thing) is not understanding why I had capitalised U and K in a review for a film about the U.K. Are they serious?! 
If a MERP doesn't understand a review, I'd rather they left it for another. The cap means that I have got a backlog of these sort of rejections to resubmit, which is rather frustrating. |
Edited by - Demisemicenturian on 07/12/2008 15:12:34 |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 09/15/2008 : 02:43:16
|
| Another one of this category: in a review for Bolt, I referred to Bolt as being a puppy dog in an unambiguous (if slightly -- only very slighty -- unusual) way. (At the time, I was genuinely thinking of him as being a puppy. I think he's actually probably fully grown, but he's definitely puppy-like in numerous ways.) Yes, I was punning on something, but I expected the MERP not to know what and they didn't need to. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 09/22/2008 : 01:06:18
|
| I thought that the Volga was a well known geographical feature, but apparently not... |
|
|
|
MguyXXV
"X marks the spot"
|
Posted - 09/22/2008 : 02:17:46
|
I'm having difficulty sympathizing with you Sal because the posts are becoming inaccessible to those of us who don't know the specific review you are referencing.
I know the Volga is a river in Russia, but if the review was "Simply Volga" and the film was "Richard Pryor: Live on the Sunset Strip", there might be a good reason for the decline (unless Pryor was secretly Russian). Obviously, my example is facetious, and I do not mean to imply that your review was inapt -- especially since I don't know what the heck it is! 
I'm happy to lend my agreement, if I know what I'm agreeing with.  |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 09/22/2008 : 02:35:13
|
I don't like to specify unapproved reviews, as then people get into arguing about irrelevant aspects of them. I always mention all necessary information. The review was for a film for which reviews punning on any part of the world are accepted. The other two words were very ordinary. You therefore only need to agree that the Volga is a notable geographical feature of the world.
However, I am not noting it here to gain support from other F.W.F.R.ers, since I am already quite sure that the review should be understandable. I am doing so so that the MERPs and Benj see it and are thus informed about problems with the process, so that they can improve it. |
|
|
|
MguyXXV
"X marks the spot"
|
Posted - 09/22/2008 : 06:21:33
|
I-hear-and-I-obey: "the Volga is a notable geographical feature of the world"  |
|
|
|
demonic
"Cinemaniac"
|
Posted - 09/22/2008 : 13:19:30
|
| Are the MERPs and Benj not made fully aware of your discontent in the explanations box when you submit or resubmit? I'd say that's the usual way to raise questions regarding individual reviews, and it seems to work 9 out of 10 times for me. |
|
|
|
Airbolt 
"teil mann, teil maschine"
|
Posted - 09/22/2008 : 15:35:14
|
Rocket Surgery? You sure you didnt mean Brain Science?
They both sound like Adam Sandler films anyway!
|
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 09/23/2008 : 04:38:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by demonic
Are the MERPs and Benj not made fully aware of your discontent in the explanations box when you submit or resubmit? I'd say that's the usual way to raise questions regarding individual reviews, and it seems to work 9 out of 10 times for me.
As I've said repeatedly, (i) MERPs often obviously do not read or ignore the comment (the evidence being that reviews still get rejected as duplicates even if the comment is "This review is older than so-and-so's") and (ii) having to resubmit reviews is now wasting a large proportion of my quota. The whole point is that I don't mind explaining obscure things with a resubmission, but I shouldn't have to resubmit with ordinary general knowledge. And as I've also repeatedly said, I'm not posting here in order to get individual reviews dealt with: I'm doing so so that Benj et al are informed of the general problem. |
|
|
|
demonic
"Cinemaniac"
|
Posted - 09/23/2008 : 05:18:35
|
| Perhaps you do have to resubmit with ordinary general knowledge, or maybe spell things out in the explanation box at the initial submission. Unless my review is completely transparent I'll usually put some detail (obvious to me or otherwise) to avoid that potential re-sub. |
|
|
|
w22dheartlivie
"Kitty Lover"
|
Posted - 09/23/2008 : 06:18:18
|
| I think the MERPs and Benj are aware of some general issues discontent. I had one review that had a typo declined the other day with a note saying that because of (paraphrasing here) objections to correcting what appeared to be honest typo errors, whoever was MERPing didn't want to mistakely change something that wasn't otherwise clear. For myself, I noted that if it is obviously an error, it was fine with me to correct it (mostly because my eyes have been really bad lately). But the point being, they aren't oblivious to what's being posted. |
|
|
|
MguyXXV
"X marks the spot"
|
Posted - 09/23/2008 : 06:41:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by AIRBOLT
Rocket Surgery? You sure you didnt mean Brain Science?
They both sound like Adam Sandler films anyway!
You have to give Sal credit for this one. The "rocket surgery" term is hilarious (and, yes, he did it on purpose as a joke). |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
What's not to understand?
