Print Page | Close Window

Review Reporting Thread

Printed From: MetalMusicArchives.com
Category: Site News, Newbies, Help and Improvements
Forum Name: Report abuse here
Forum Description: Let us know about inappropriate reviews, posts, PMs, etc.
URL: http://www.MetalMusicArchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=2
Printed Date: 24 Sep 2017 at 2:36am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 10.16 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Review Reporting Thread
Posted By: graphix
Subject: Review Reporting Thread
Date Posted: 26 Jan 2010 at 10:25am

With immediate effect, this thread replaces the "Inappropriate reviews" . Please use it to report reviews which you feel do not comply with the MMA guidelines As a reminder, the guidelines can be seen http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=180&title=reviews-guidelines" rel="nofollow -

c) Once a report is done for a particular review any other reports related to the same review may be deleted unless they contain relevant additional information. Please do not simply post in support of the original report, or indeed to challenge the original report. The admin team will consider each reported review independently and impartially.

d) Issues related to plagiarism, copyrights and other legal questions shall be reported directly to the Admin Team ([email protected]). These issues shall NOT be reported here.

e) Issues related to personal taste, misunderstandings, doubtful interpretations, accuracy, etc, of a particular review shall be reported directly to the reviewer by PM. These issues should NOT be reported here. (Once the final changes to the site have been made, all reviewers will have a forum ID).

f) Reports containing sarcastic or disrespectful comments toward the reviewer should not be made. They shall be edited or even deleted.

g) Reviewers whose reviews are reported may use this thread to defend their review. One report, and one response only for each review though please.

h) A new thread for the general discussion of reviews has been created http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1198&title=review-discussion-thread" rel="nofollow - - "Reviews Discussion" thread.)

The MMA Admin Team





Replies:
Posted By: Pekka
Date Posted: 16 Apr 2010 at 2:28pm
http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/high-fashion--review.aspx?id=214674 - http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/high-fashion--review.aspx?id=214674

After reading this thread's opening post I'm not sure if I should report this here, but there's a lot of comments made in this review towards another reviewer. I don't think it was OK to write a review discussing other people's opinions? I guess that's one of the things what the shout option is for.


-------------
http://iamthreepeople.bandcamp.com" rel="nofollow"> <- Click on this!


Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 16 Apr 2010 at 2:35pm
You are right about the shout option, Pekka, but the review in question is neither sarcastic nor disrespectful - which, obviously, would have doomed it to being at least heavily edited. As I see things, it is a rather  mild-mannered response to a review with which the author clearly disagrees, and offers a lot of valuable information about the band. The only point I find a bit strong is when he/she uses the expression 'complete and utter fallacy'. In comparison to some of the stuff I've seen on PA over the years, this is nothing - which does not mean we should encourage this trend. 


Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: 16 Apr 2010 at 3:54pm
BTW, I would be a little light-handed on censuring any new people we get that are willing to do reviews. If they violate guidelines a little PM saying "Hey this is how we're trying to keep things around here." But we need the reviews. Just something to keep in mind. Seeing non-PAers contributing is very good.

-------------
We're gonna do a little number featuring Randy Rhoads...

Wine is fine but whisky's quicker.

That's what Rock n' Roll's About!!!!


Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 16 Apr 2010 at 4:01pm
I have nothing else to add to the above post but a big Clap. Very well said, Master GandalfWink!


Posted By: NJCat_11
Date Posted: 16 Apr 2010 at 4:04pm
that's Sarumon... with a guitar

-------------
http://www.chess.com/members/view/NJCat?ref_id=1432587 - Come and play me at Chess.com
http://www.youtube.com/user/NJCat?feature=mhw4 - Homepage


Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 16 Apr 2010 at 4:39pm
Silly meLOL!


Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: 17 Apr 2010 at 2:48am
I find both reviews very well written and it´s nice to see two very different opinions about the same album. I´m not usually for people mentioning other reviewers in their reviews or commenting on others reviews in their own reviews but I think it´s allright in this case. As long as it doesn´t become a trend.

-------------
http://www.lyngby-boldklub.dk/" rel="nofollow - Forever TRUE - Forever BLUE!
https://rateyourmusic.com/~UMUR" rel="nofollow - UMUR on RYM


Posted By: bonnek
Date Posted: 17 May 2010 at 4:13pm

I would like to report my own review of Nostradamus Embarrassed
http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/nostradamus--review.aspx?id=215642 - http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/nostradamus--review.aspx?id=215642

It's something I've written 2 years ago and I didn't give the album a new spin before posting it.
I don't do that on PA and I don't want to start doing that here neither.

Could you delete it?
I'll post it again when I have more time for a full Priest retrospective! Smile



Posted By: graphix
Date Posted: 21 May 2010 at 9:59am
^ Deleted


Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: 06 Jun 2010 at 1:36pm
Not really "breaking any rules" and it's a fine review, but I think some editing should have been done to fit the context of the site, rather than a simple cut-and-paste job. A few of his other posted reviews today (all on the front page) have the same issue:

http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/st-anger--review.aspx?id=217221 - http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/st-anger--review.aspx?id=217221

In the second sentence he says " It's remarkably comical that this album is even on Prog Archives", but this is actually METALMUSIC Archives, not PROG Archives.

-------------
Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime


Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: 06 Jun 2010 at 2:02pm
Yep I think people who copy/ paste their reivews from other sites ( especially from PA) should look them over at make edits before posting them here on MMA.

-------------
http://www.lyngby-boldklub.dk/" rel="nofollow - Forever TRUE - Forever BLUE!
https://rateyourmusic.com/~UMUR" rel="nofollow - UMUR on RYM


Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: 06 Jun 2010 at 2:12pm
^ His recently posted Master of Puppets review has the same problem.... Ermm

Should I send him a PM about that and let him know about this "unwritten law"?


-------------
Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime


Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 06 Jun 2010 at 3:23pm
Yes, please, Jeff... I know that I (as all of us here) had to be very careful to edit any references to prog from the reviews I had originally written for PA - unless they referred to prog-metal acts.


Posted By: AtomicCrimsonRush
Date Posted: 06 Jun 2010 at 7:57pm
^ on that note I pasted all my metal related reviews here and had to edit them a lot but if I mentioned PA in any or slipped up let me know and I will fix but I read thru them all....
I am now over that and will be writing new reviews for this site
But as its a new site its a good thing to at least have a number of reviews to get us going here. After that I think the cut and paste reviewing style wiill simmer to a crawl from PAers.
 
But iam not one to reinvent the wheel and i pasted a heap from progarchives specifically changing some info to suit the metal archives. it seemed the sensible thing to do. And It didnt take as long as writing them from scratch .... so I hope thats OK - i wasnt going to do it but I noticed heaps of others were doing it so i just joined in.


-------------
GLAM METAL!


Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: 07 Jun 2010 at 10:56am
There´s absolutely nothing wrong with you posting the same reviews that you write for PA here on MMA, just as long as you edit those that are specifically targeted PA with references to the site and those that evaluate releases from a progressive rock listener point of view ( of course progressive releases are an exception, but there´s no use reviewing an old school black metal release from a progressive standpoint if you know what I mean). Not all your reviews need editing, but reviewers should keep in mind that some may.

-------------
http://www.lyngby-boldklub.dk/" rel="nofollow - Forever TRUE - Forever BLUE!
https://rateyourmusic.com/~UMUR" rel="nofollow - UMUR on RYM


Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 07 Jun 2010 at 4:36pm
I posted most of my metal reviews from PA here on MMA, and in most cases they needed minimal editing. There was one, however, that needed almost to be completely rewritten - it was the review for Queensryche's seminal Operation Mindcrime, which of course I had originally tackled from a progressive rock point of view.


Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: 30 Jun 2010 at 12:52pm
The line in this review: http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/voyeurs--review.aspx?id=218423 - http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/voyeurs--review.aspx?id=218423  about being gay and a rocker is not acceptable IMO. I think the reviewer should be asked to remove that line from his otherwise acceptable review.

-------------
http://www.lyngby-boldklub.dk/" rel="nofollow - Forever TRUE - Forever BLUE!
https://rateyourmusic.com/~UMUR" rel="nofollow - UMUR on RYM


Posted By: Vehemency
Date Posted: 30 Jun 2010 at 1:03pm
Not to judge anyone, but it is not easy to read reviews with tons of exlamation marks and whatnot. Healthy use of paragraphs and reduced use of special characters always makes a review already better. I'm definitely not a good writer nor excellent in English, but I think those are worthy tips for improving reviews. :-)


Posted By: [email protected]
Date Posted: 30 Jun 2010 at 1:07pm
Thanks for reporting ! 

Question: Do we have a review admin/moderator ? LOL


Posted By: Sleepwalker
Date Posted: 30 Jun 2010 at 1:19pm
I sent ovidiu a PM. 

Seeing [email protected]'s reply before me maybe ovidiu now has got two messages concerning his review. 


Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: 30 Jun 2010 at 1:22pm
Originally posted by Vehemency Vehemency wrote:

Not to judge anyone, but it is not easy to read reviews with tons of exlamation marks and whatnot. Healthy use of paragraphs and reduced use of special characters always makes a review already better. I'm definitely not a good writer nor excellent in English, but I think those are worthy tips for improving reviews. :-)
 
That´s a matter of personal style. Not much to do about thatSmile


-------------
http://www.lyngby-boldklub.dk/" rel="nofollow - Forever TRUE - Forever BLUE!
https://rateyourmusic.com/~UMUR" rel="nofollow - UMUR on RYM


Posted By: Vehemency
Date Posted: 30 Jun 2010 at 1:43pm
^ Yeah, true too. And I must underline that I'm not expecting anyone to write formal and professional reviews (because I can't and don't want to do so either). :-)

Anyhow, I think there should be SOME line that shouldn't be crossed, when the text becomes way too hard to read / understand. I'm not talking about any specific one (nothing wrong with ovidius's reviews even if their appearance is not for my taste!) but in general for the times to come: perhaps we need some vague guidelines / "rules"? Or perhaps not, we can always just moderate / report reviews if so needed? Just philosphizing. :-)


Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: 30 Jun 2010 at 2:03pm
I think one of the main reasons why PA is so succesful ( and we´re dealing with a similar concept here on MMA) is the fact that people can more or less write reviews in the style they want as long as they don´t break some basic rules. Restricting people´s multitude of different writing styles might turn some people off from writing reviews.

-------------
http://www.lyngby-boldklub.dk/" rel="nofollow - Forever TRUE - Forever BLUE!
https://rateyourmusic.com/~UMUR" rel="nofollow - UMUR on RYM


Posted By: Sleepwalker
Date Posted: 30 Jun 2010 at 2:03pm
Originally posted by Vehemency Vehemency wrote:

^ Yeah, true too. And I must underline that I'm not expecting anyone to write formal and professional reviews (because I can't and don't want to do so either). :-)

Anyhow, I think there should be SOME line that shouldn't be crossed, when the text becomes way too hard to read / understand. I'm not talking about any specific one (nothing wrong with ovidius's reviews even if their appearance is not for my taste!) but in general for the times to come: perhaps we need some vague guidelines / "rules"? Or perhaps not, we can always just moderate / report reviews if so needed? Just philosphizing. :-)

We've got this:
http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=180&PN=1 - http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=180&PN=1

But, in the end I'm sure there are people who won't read the guidelines or simply won't care, so moderating reviews always is a pretty important thing I suppose, definitely when the site will get bigger and more crowded.


-------------
http://fotopocket.nl" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Vehemency
Date Posted: 30 Jun 2010 at 2:12pm
^ Ah, I had a feeling that we already had those guidelines... Perhaps that topic should be linked somewhere near when posting a review? Just an idea, for people to see how things reviews are handled in MMA before submitting their first review.


Posted By: Sleepwalker
Date Posted: 30 Jun 2010 at 2:19pm
Originally posted by Vehemency Vehemency wrote:

^ Ah, I had a feeling that we already had those guidelines... Perhaps that topic should be linked somewhere near when posting a review? Just an idea, for people to see how things reviews are handled in MMA before submitting their first review.

That's the way it goes on PA as well. With every review you post you first must agree with the reviews guidelines. Perhaps it indeed is a good idea to do the same thing here as well. 


-------------
http://fotopocket.nl" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: [email protected]
Date Posted: 30 Jun 2010 at 2:50pm
Review Guidelines would be a good idea, mix with the light review style moderation (as mentionned by UMUR)

TODO, added

Thumbs Up


Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 30 Jun 2010 at 3:04pm
You can have all the guidelines you want, but if they are not enforced, they will serve no purpose. Personally, I would be in favour of some more editing - PA has been criticized quite often because of the poor quality of some reviews. Being an official reviewer for another site, I am a stickler for both style and substance, if you get what I mean. In any case, even if we decide to be more flexible than most reviews-based sites are, there are no excuses for remarks such as the ones Ovidiu wrote in his review. 


Posted By: Sleepwalker
Date Posted: 30 Jun 2010 at 4:10pm
I agree Raff, but when a reviewer has to agree with the guidelines to post a review at least they can't say they didn't know about those guidelines. Also, it's a good thing to make people aware of those guidelines to prevent them from accidentally not following them. 

-------------
http://fotopocket.nl" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 30 Jun 2010 at 4:29pm
I absolutely agree with you about making the guidelines as visible as possible. What I meant, however (even if I expressed myself rather badly), is that people who want to ignore the guidelines will do so anyway, therefore we have to be ready to act. On PA there are quite a few Prog Reviewers who break the guidelines all the time, even if they should know better. 


Posted By: Time Signature
Date Posted: 30 Jun 2010 at 4:55pm
Maybe if they're conceptualized as rules rather than guidelines, people would respect them more (at least according to the linguistic relativity theory)

-------------


Posted By: [email protected]
Date Posted: 02 Jul 2010 at 10:02pm
Please review PA guidelines and report so I can implement this on MMA soon.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROGARCHIVES REVIEWS GUIDELINES:
1 - Write in ENGLISH, we regret that we cannot accept reviews in other languages. Avoid the use of on-line translators wherever possible, they will not do justice to your efforts. Do not use ALL CAPITAL LETTERS in your reviews, standard sentence case should be used at all times. Do not use abbreviations or “texting” language. Remember to check your review for spelling, grammar and punctuation. A poorly presented review can distract the reader from the well written content. Reviews accepted should be a MINIMUM 100 words preferably substantially more, no maximum.

2 - While ratings without reviews are accepted, you are strongly encouraged to write a review to support your rating.

3 - Feel free to review as many discs as you like, and to construct your reviews in whatever way you wish. (Tip, to start a new paragraph in your review, put <p> at the end of the previous paragraph.)

4 - Write in an intelligent and considerate manner. Rude or insulting language (including blatant vulgarity) will not be tolerated! Show respect for other reviewers, readers, the artists, and the CD and song titles. Do not belittle reviews posted by others, their opinions are as welcome and valid as yours. It is generally best to avoid commenting on other reviews altogether. 

The following are examples of phrases which should NOT appear in reviews: "Reviewer Joe Smith is stupid for saying that...", "Anyone who doesn't like this album is an idiot", "The band which made this album is rubbish", etc.,

5 - Do not voice general opinions on matters such as whether a band/album/sub-genre should be included in the site, whether you agree with the star rating system, etc.. Such matters should be discussed in the forum. Keep the review pertinent to the specific album concerned. The reviews section is NOT the place for initiating or prolonging a debate.

6 - Try to write reviews that will be of real use and interest to other progressive music fans, who can benefit by finding new avenues for their musical exploration. Consider aspects which will be of interest to the reader such as the style of music, notable influences, similar bands, best tracks (don’t just say "this album is brilliant", explain what you like about it), production quality, musicians involved, album history, We suggest you listen to an album several times before writing a review. It can take a number of listens to Prog albums in particular to begin to appreciate the music.

7 - Remember that your reviews will be on the relevant album’s page for all to read for many years to come. Do not therefore word your review with only the front page (which shows the latest reviews) in mind. Consider whether the review will still make sense in 5 years time and more.

8 - Before assigning a star rating to an album, you should ensure you understand what the differing numbers of stars mean. Please use "one" and "five star" ratings very sparingly -- most albums you dislike will have at least some positive qualities, and not every album that you enjoy will be a perfect "masterpiece of prog".

9 - When quoting from elsewhere, ensure due credit is clearly given. Do not copy reviews or text from other sources and attempt to pass them off as your own.

10 - Any impersonation of another reviewer will be treated as an abuse of the Prog Archives site, and the offender will be barred from further use of the site.

THESE GUIDELINES are designed to help you to help us build a comprehensive reference of progressive rock (and related) recordings. By posting a review, you are indicating your acceptance of the guidelines, and undertaking to abide by them.

A special THANKS from Prog Archives to all those who submit reviews!

Useful links:
To report an inappropriate review
http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3317

Site rules and guidelines
http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=13083

Frequently asked questions
http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=13080

Legal Notice
http://www.progarchives.com/Legalnotice.asp

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks


Posted By: progshine
Date Posted: 02 Jul 2010 at 10:46pm
I have changed some PA/Progressive words for the right ones and changed links, but I couldn't find the 'Legal Notice' link Smile


METAL MUSIC ARCHIVES REVIEWS GUIDELINES:
1 - Write in ENGLISH, we regret that we cannot accept reviews in other languages. Avoid the use of on-line translators wherever possible, they will not do justice to your efforts. Do not use ALL CAPITAL LETTERS in your reviews, standard sentence case should be used at all times. Do not use abbreviations or “texting” language. Remember to check your review for spelling, grammar and punctuation. A poorly presented review can distract the reader from the well written content. Reviews accepted should be a MINIMUM 100 words preferably substantially more, no maximum.

2 - While ratings without reviews are accepted, you are strongly encouraged to write a review to support your rating.

3 - Feel free to review as many discs as you like, and to construct your reviews in whatever way you wish.

4 - Write in an intelligent and considerate manner. Rude or insulting language (including blatant vulgarity) will not be tolerated! Show respect for other reviewers, readers, the artists, and the CD and song titles. Do not belittle reviews posted by others, their opinions are as welcome and valid as yours. It is generally best to avoid commenting on other reviews altogether. 

The following are examples of phrases which should NOT appear in reviews: "Reviewer Joe Smith is stupid for saying that...", "Anyone who doesn't like this album is an idiot", "The band which made this album is rubbish", etc.,

5 - Do not voice general opinions on matters such as whether a band/album/sub-genre should be included in the site, whether you agree with the star rating system, etc.. Such matters should be discussed in the forum. Keep the review pertinent to the specific album concerned. The reviews section is NOT the place for initiating or prolonging a debate.

6 - Try to write reviews that will be of real use and interest to other metal music fans, who can benefit by finding new avenues for their musical exploration. Consider aspects which will be of interest to the reader such as the style of music, notable influences, similar bands, best tracks (don’t just say "this album is brilliant", explain what you like about it), production quality, musicians involved, album history, We suggest you listen to an album several times before writing a review.

7 - Remember that your reviews will be on the relevant album’s page for all to read for many years to come. Do not therefore word your review with only the front page (which shows the latest reviews) in mind. Consider whether the review will still make sense in 5 years time and more.

8 - Before assigning a star rating to an album, you should ensure you understand what the differing numbers of stars mean. Please use "one" and "five star" ratings very sparingly -- most albums you dislike will have at least some positive qualities, and not every album that you enjoy will be a perfect "masterpiece of metal".

9 - When quoting from elsewhere, ensure due credit is clearly given. Do not copy reviews or text from other sources and attempt to pass them off as your own.

10 - Any impersonation of another reviewer will be treated as an abuse of the Metal Music Archives site, and the offender will be barred from further use of the site.

THESE GUIDELINES are designed to help you to help us build a comprehensive reference of metal music recordings. By posting a review, you are indicating your acceptance of the guidelines, and undertaking to abide by them.

A special THANKS from Metal Music Archives to all those who submit reviews!

Useful links:
To report an inappropriate review
http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=2&PN=1

Site rules and guidelines
http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=180&PN=1

Frequently asked questions
http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/about.aspx#faq

Legal Notice
? ? ?


-------------
Testing 1...2...3..
RAY, IT'S NOT WORKING!

www.progshine.net

Your resource of Prog Rock with weekly Podcasts, reviews, interviews and many more.


Posted By: Sleepwalker
Date Posted: 03 Jul 2010 at 11:29am
Guys, this has already been done. Wink

Originally posted by Sleepwalker Sleepwalker wrote:

We've got this:
http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=180&PN=1 - http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=180&PN=1

But, in the end I'm sure there are people who won't read the guidelines or simply won't care, so moderating reviews always is a pretty important thing I suppose, definitely when the site will get bigger and more crowded.


-------------
http://fotopocket.nl" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: progshine
Date Posted: 03 Jul 2010 at 11:44am
I think Max was talking about the text that appears under the review box on PA and do the same here on MMA, so everyone can see what's going on before post the reviewm cause let's just agree, nobody will look for this guidelines on Forum before post a review Cool

-------------
Testing 1...2...3..
RAY, IT'S NOT WORKING!

www.progshine.net

Your resource of Prog Rock with weekly Podcasts, reviews, interviews and many more.


Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 03 Jul 2010 at 3:18pm
Yes, I think it would be better to have the rules appear right under the review box, so that no one can claim they are not easily available to would-be reviewers. Not that having the guidelines so readily visible has ever stopped anyone from violating them...


Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: 04 Jul 2010 at 2:43am
^LOL You´re right about thatDisapprove. Well I´m not holier than thouEmbarrassed. I´ve broken the guidelines on occasion and taken the inevitable beating afterwards. I think I´ve learned my lessons though. It´s mostly the 1 star reviews that pose problems. A good 1 star review is extremely hard to write and actually requires more skill than writing 5 star reviews. Maintaining a respectful approach to something that you ultimately find annoying and a terrible listen, is a study in self-control. Not many master this skill and that´s why this thread is important. With a little guidance from an admin, some of those reviews can actually be re-written and become valuable assets to the site. 1 star reviews are as important to the site as the 5 star reviews are. They bring perspective.

-------------
http://www.lyngby-boldklub.dk/" rel="nofollow - Forever TRUE - Forever BLUE!
https://rateyourmusic.com/~UMUR" rel="nofollow - UMUR on RYM


Posted By: Time Signature
Date Posted: 04 Jul 2010 at 4:13am
I think that if you think something is shit, you should be allowed to say so. When it's about the music, I don't see the problem, because a review really just says something about yourself and your taste than about the music itself.

It's more reviews that attack groups of people or individuals because of sexuality, ethnicity, religion and whatever (like that review that attacked both Rob Halford as a person for his sexual orientation), because then it's not about the music - then its personal, and then its offensive. Also "this is crap because the the sound production is awful and the songs are too boring and formulaic" is much more informative than "this is crap because the singer i gay and the drummer is black" (which just informs us that the writer of the review is a racist homophobic C.P.)

I agree that writing a good and sober 1 star review can be very difficult, and that reviews that go beyond "this-sucks" or "this-is-crap" are more interesting to read (I especially enjoy negative reviews that make a lot of use of creative similes and metaphors - even if its a review that bashes one of my favorite artists). I don't mind "the music on this album is rubbish" reviews, but I don't like reviews that personally attack the artists (no matter how much they actually suck) and I don't like reviews that attack people who like or don't like that artist (I don't mind if reviews criticize, or agree with, the general attitude towards the release in question; those can actually become quite interesting to read).


-------------


Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 04 Jul 2010 at 6:04am
Great posts, Jonas and KimClap! I agree 100% with you on the difficulty of writing a 'good' 1-star review. I have written only three for PA, and all of them were of albums by bands I love (Deep Purple and Blue Oyster Cult). When I started writing for ProgressoR, I had to tackle really bad albums from completely unknown quantities, and that was a challenge. You have to straddle that fine line between clearly stating that the album is not up to scratch (and that's an understatement) and trying to be constructive - such as pointing out that the album in question might indeed appeal to someone. This is one of my most negative reviews ever (the band is prog-metal, though I don't believe they are on MMA yet):

http://www.progressor.net/review/eoi_2009.html - http://www.progressor.net/review/eoi_2009.html


Posted By: Time Signature
Date Posted: 05 Jul 2010 at 6:09am
Raff, I really love these expressions "the biggest flaw for the less than successful nature of this disc", "he album’s ill-judged mix", "mercifully, the band avoided overstretching themselves", "what is meant as the disc’s highlight", "somewhat uncomfortable listening on account of its amateurish sound", and "it is to be hoped that, for any future efforts, the band will try to get a better producer, and also tighten up on the compositional aspect"... that's a really classy way of saying "this shit fails" ;-) I wish I had the ability to do bashing with such style and class ;-)

-------------


Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 05 Jul 2010 at 6:41am
Thank youSmile! You know, it's easy to bash using four-letter words or their thinly-veiled surrogates - much less so to try and find something positive to say in order to avoid discouraging the musicians. Unless we're talking about really successful acts (like Metallica or Iron Maiden, for instance), those people have to hold day jobs in order to be able to play and record their music, and I believe we should at least respect the effort behind every release of this kind, even if we hate every minute of it.


Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 14 Jul 2010 at 4:26pm
Just found this on the ProgressiveEars forum:
http://www.progressiveears.com/forums/thread.asp?ForumID=1&TopicID=121186&posttime=7%2F14%2F2010+2%3A17%3A42+PM&private= - http://www.progressiveears.com/forums/thread.asp?ForumID=1&TopicID=121186&posttime=7%2F14%2F2010+2%3A17%3A42+PM&private=

The review in question is now on PA's front page. This is one of the reasons why we should pay a lot of attention to anything that is published here. People have eyes, and will comment on what they find around the web.



Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: 14 Jul 2010 at 4:45pm
link didn't work for me. 

-------------


Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 14 Jul 2010 at 4:48pm
It does for me, and I'm not even a member anymore (deleted my membership a few days ago - don't like cliquesDead). Anyway, if you go on the ProgEars homepage, you'll see the thread- it's the first in the list as to now.


Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: 14 Jul 2010 at 4:51pm
The DT punctuation one.  I kept looking for that on the MMA front page and couldn't figure out why I couldn't see it, but I see now that you say PA's front page.  I suppose it is only a matter of time before it finds the MMA front page.

-------------


Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 14 Jul 2010 at 4:52pm
Perhaps the people at PA should be told about that, but I'm not going to do it. 


Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: 15 Jul 2010 at 1:44am
I´m biased about it really! The very concept of MMA and PA is that everyone are allowed to post reviews and not allowing "certain" people to write reviews seems a bit hostile to me and goes against the spirit of the concept. On the other hand there are some reviews so badly written or auto-translated that no one but the reviewer himself/ herself is able to get anything out of them and those reviews might actually  be harmful to the site(s). So are we going to be harder on the reviewers who don´t write understandable English ( the really badly written ones) here on MMA than they are on PA?

-------------
http://www.lyngby-boldklub.dk/" rel="nofollow - Forever TRUE - Forever BLUE!
https://rateyourmusic.com/~UMUR" rel="nofollow - UMUR on RYM


Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 15 Jul 2010 at 7:12am
Unfortunately, PA gained a bad reputation in the prog world because of those unedited reviews. I believe ProgEars adopted the best solution: they have a person who is in charge of editing the reviews submitted by the site members. On a related note, I don't think it's a question of being a native speaker or not, or at least not always. Neither you nor I are (nor is Kim, to name another), and yet we write much better reviews that many native speakers who ignore the rules of punctuation and spelling.


Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: 15 Jul 2010 at 7:47am

Maybe a review watchdog or two might be the solution. I´m not against that. As long as enthusiastic members are treated with respect. Guided and not scoldedThumbs Up



-------------
http://www.lyngby-boldklub.dk/" rel="nofollow - Forever TRUE - Forever BLUE!
https://rateyourmusic.com/~UMUR" rel="nofollow - UMUR on RYM


Posted By: Pekka
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2010 at 1:30am
http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/the-final-frontier--review.aspx?id=219027 - http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/the-final-frontier--review.aspx?id=219027

I don't believe he has heard the album. I could complain about the writing style as well, could use a bit of editing...


-------------
http://iamthreepeople.bandcamp.com" rel="nofollow"> <- Click on this!


Posted By: progshine
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2010 at 2:57am
Originally posted by Pekka Pekka wrote:

http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/the-final-frontier--review.aspx?id=219027 - http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/the-final-frontier--review.aspx?id=219027

I don't believe he has heard the album. I could complain about the writing style as well, could use a bit of editing...

And... the official date is August 16, we should encourage illegal download? Cause is kinda obvious that this is not an official release.


-------------
Testing 1...2...3..
RAY, IT'S NOT WORKING!

www.progshine.net

Your resource of Prog Rock with weekly Podcasts, reviews, interviews and many more.


Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2010 at 3:06am
No we do not endorse illigal download, and until the official release date the review should be removed, unless of course, the reviewer have a promo copy.

-------------
http://www.lyngby-boldklub.dk/" rel="nofollow - Forever TRUE - Forever BLUE!
https://rateyourmusic.com/~UMUR" rel="nofollow - UMUR on RYM


Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2010 at 5:22am
OK guys, I've seen the review, and promptly PM'd Ovidiu, asking him to remove the review and repost it after the album's official release. If he doesn't, I'm going to delete the whole album entry (since here we can). We have to be very careful with high-profile releases like this one, and possibly avoid entering them in the DB before the official release date. Remember what happened on PA every time a well-known band released an album? 


Posted By: Time Signature
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2010 at 6:46am
What happened?

-------------


Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2010 at 7:01am
I deleted the entry, since even deleting the review the rating would remain. The album will be added again on August 16 - I have all the data saved in a Word document. Since we don't have access to a 'delete rating/review' facility, this was the only thing to be done. 


Posted By: Time Signature
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2010 at 1:26pm
I figured that out :-) but what was it that used to happen on PA whenever a well-known artist would release a new album?


-------------


Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2010 at 1:30pm
Tons of worthless reviews and either 5- or 1-star ratings (depending on whether we were dealing with worshippers or haters...). The Admins in charge of the reviews part of the site spent a lot of time deleting those unauthorized items, but no one would listen to us when we recommended not allowing the addition of the albums altogether. 


Posted By: Time Signature
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2010 at 1:44pm
Oh, so like really rabid fans would 5-star an album that wasn't out yet and that they probably hadn't even heard yet? That's a big problem, to be sure.

-------------


Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2010 at 1:47pm
It happened all the time with Dream Theater... I remember, when Octavarium was due to come out, things got particularly bad. 


Posted By: Time Signature
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2010 at 1:53pm
All the DT-haters couldn't wait? ;-)

-------------


Posted By: A Person
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2010 at 9:09pm
I remember that, I even gave an update or two about new illegitimate ratings. LOL It would've been much easier if the album had been added the day of/before release.

-------------
http://www.last.fm/user/I_am_A_Person" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: 14 Aug 2010 at 7:22am
This one should be deleted: http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/algedonic-awakening--review.aspx?id=219949#shout845 - http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/algedonic-awakening--review.aspx?id=219949#shout845

-------------
http://www.lyngby-boldklub.dk/" rel="nofollow - Forever TRUE - Forever BLUE!
https://rateyourmusic.com/~UMUR" rel="nofollow - UMUR on RYM


Posted By: Vehemency
Date Posted: 14 Aug 2010 at 7:24am
Thanks UMUR, didn't realize to post that here myself. :-)


Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 14 Aug 2010 at 9:02am
If you fixed the entry, then I can delete the review.

Edit: Done! @ Kim: great job with the Maiden reviewClap!


Posted By: Time Signature
Date Posted: 14 Aug 2010 at 11:55am
^ Thanks :-) I'm glad that my fears that it would be a second "Virtual XI" were put to shame. I'm looking forward to reading other people's reviews.

-------------


Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2010 at 3:16am
Has anyone invesitgated this guy yet?
 
http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/bratus%28member%29.aspx?reviews=all" rel="nofollow - http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/bratus(member).aspx?reviews=all
 
He's actually stating in his very low-rated non-reviews (non-reviews, because they don't review albums, merely state his intent) that the reason he's low-marking some albums is not because they're bad, but because he wants to frig our rating system to give higher visibility to other bands!
 
I can't believe he's actually telling us that!
 
The road to hell is paved with good intentions - I believe his intentions are good, it's just an abuse of our system, and frankly, to see Lovedrive get less than 5 stars MAKES MY BLOOD BOIL... Wink
 
http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/scorpions--lovedrive.aspx" rel="nofollow - http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/scorpions--lovedrive.aspx
 
OMG - he's half-star rated Sin After Sin, Van Halen, Forged In Fire and a ton of classics just to frig our system. I think he needs educating - trouble is, I would use a large breeze block tied to a baseball bat to perform said edcuation...


Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2010 at 5:27am
Thanks for reporting. We´ll look into this.

-------------
http://www.lyngby-boldklub.dk/" rel="nofollow - Forever TRUE - Forever BLUE!
https://rateyourmusic.com/~UMUR" rel="nofollow - UMUR on RYM


Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2010 at 10:11pm
Wow, that's really sad. I can't believe someone would give albums that they consider "good" 0.5 stars because it's "ranked too high"... really sickening. Ermm


-------------
Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime


Posted By: Stooge
Date Posted: 10 Dec 2010 at 10:29pm
Has a reviews guideline/agreement been established?  If so, I can't seem to find it.

Nevermind.  I found them: http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=180&title=reviews-guidelines" rel="nofollow - http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=180&title=reviews-guidelines

I guess Phil should add the link to the initial post in this thread since it says "Coming Soon" where the link should be.


Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: 11 Dec 2010 at 2:12am
Thanks Dan, we are working on that tooSmile.

-------------
http://www.lyngby-boldklub.dk/" rel="nofollow - Forever TRUE - Forever BLUE!
https://rateyourmusic.com/~UMUR" rel="nofollow - UMUR on RYM


Posted By: Time Signature
Date Posted: 11 Dec 2010 at 7:04am
Originally posted by J-Man J-Man wrote:

Wow, that's really sad. I can't believe someone would give albums that they consider "good" 0.5 stars because it's "ranked too high"... really sickening. Ermm


Downvoting just for the sake of downvoting certainly is unacceptable.


-------------


Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: 15 Dec 2010 at 3:03pm
Originally posted by Stooge Stooge wrote:

Has a reviews guideline/agreement been established?  If so, I can't seem to find it.

Nevermind.  I found them: http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=180&title=reviews-guidelines" rel="nofollow - http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=180&title=reviews-guidelines

I guess Phil should add the link to the initial post in this thread since it says "Coming Soon" where the link should be.
 
Thanks for noticing. I´ve edited the initial post with the link.


-------------
http://www.lyngby-boldklub.dk/" rel="nofollow - Forever TRUE - Forever BLUE!
https://rateyourmusic.com/~UMUR" rel="nofollow - UMUR on RYM


Posted By: Double-D
Date Posted: 16 Jan 2011 at 4:26pm
Hi, folks! Does anyone notice what the user named emersonbg is doing? After almost every review posted he puts 0.5 stars to the album and I'm sure that this guy has no idea what he is voting for. After my first review in this site I noticed that this man is checking the top rankings in different sections and votes with 0,5 stars for almost every new album there. Unfortunately there is no simple decision in these sort of situations. I guess there are many like this guy.


Posted By: The Block
Date Posted: 16 Jan 2011 at 4:35pm
We've already seen this guy, he says he does it to bring down the rating of an album that he thinks is rated to high. Also since it is a rating it is not worth as much.

-------------




Posted By: Double-D
Date Posted: 16 Jan 2011 at 4:44pm
So Master Of Puppets deserve 0,5 stars because it's overrated?!? I can agree but how can he explain that minutes after review he ranks something with 0,5 without even knowing what this album is. When I don't like any band I just don't vote for it, it's easy. I understand that every single user is important, but guys like this one should be banned immediately.


Posted By: The Block
Date Posted: 16 Jan 2011 at 4:50pm
Well, that's up for an admin to decide.

-------------




Posted By: Time Signature
Date Posted: 16 Jan 2011 at 8:07pm
Downvoting for the sake of downvoting is, of course, unacceptable.

-------------


Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: 16 Jan 2011 at 9:33pm
I believe I mentioned him a little while ago in the collab section.... technically he hasn't broken any rules as far as I know. His opinions and logic may be flawed, but as long as he's not putting the same ratings on more than one account, I don't believe it's ban-worthy material. His ratings are often distasteful, but we should also keep in mind that ratings are worth almost nothing once an honest collab/user review is submitted. I think a collab review is worth 20x, where as a rating is only 1x. Correct me if I'm wrong, of course...

-------------
Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime


Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: 17 Jan 2011 at 1:52am
Originally posted by Time Signature Time Signature wrote:

Downvoting for the sake of downvoting is, of course, unacceptable.
 
When someone explicitly states that this is what they are doing, then it's an abuse of the system to my mind, and the user should be banned (after reminders, warnings, etc) and all ratings/reviews deleted.
 
It's one thing to vote something low because you don't like it, which is fair enough, and another to deliberately try to frig the ratings system. Even if the votes don't count for much, the principle sucks.


Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: 17 Jan 2011 at 2:41am
We are discussing the issue in the Admin Zone and will post our decision here.

-------------
http://www.lyngby-boldklub.dk/" rel="nofollow - Forever TRUE - Forever BLUE!
https://rateyourmusic.com/~UMUR" rel="nofollow - UMUR on RYM


Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: 21 Jan 2011 at 4:53am
OK so to prevent rating abuse Phil has now changed the rating weigthing to this:
  • 20x rating for Collaborators/Admins
  • 10x rating for 100+ words reviews (non collab)
  • 1x rating for rating only (non collab)

There´s also been sent a PM to emersonbg where we voice our concern about his ratings.

When that is said, he hasn´t as such done anything illegal. He hasn´t stated anywhere that he rates low for the sake of it and he is entitled to rate any album in the database with exactly the rating he would like to. Just like you and I. That doesn´t mean we shouldn´t voice our concern when we find something suspicious, so please continue to report issues. Thanks.


-------------
http://www.lyngby-boldklub.dk/" rel="nofollow - Forever TRUE - Forever BLUE!
https://rateyourmusic.com/~UMUR" rel="nofollow - UMUR on RYM


Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: 21 Jan 2011 at 8:25pm
^ That's a fair outcome. Thumbs Up

-------------
Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime


Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: 21 Jan 2011 at 8:35pm
LOL, collab weight is totally Overkill. Pun intended.

-------------


Posted By: The Angry Scotsman
Date Posted: 25 Jan 2011 at 3:58am
When it comes to reviews I almost never point fingers, since we have diverse tastes and usually abuse is not really so, but I have noticed a good amount of .5 stars on popular albums. (EDIT: Never mind, you said the user has been PM'd)

Up to them, but apparently there has been admittance of downvoting albums just to drive it down? Is this true or just an assumption?
Regardless. it is outright abuse, and for albums with few reviews a very low/high one can move it a bit.

For now I think the weighting system is good. All our collabs have been fair, so while this site is young I'm ok with collab overkill to prevent abuse.

ALSO OVERKILL Headbanger


-------------
Megadeth, Metallica, Slayer and Testament. The real Big Four of thrash metal!



Listen to doom metal, worship Satan


Posted By: Colt
Date Posted: 25 Jan 2011 at 4:43am
Originally posted by The Angry Scotsman The Angry Scotsman wrote:

When it comes to reviews I almost never point fingers, since we have diverse tastes and usually abuse is not really so, but I have noticed a good amount of .5 stars on popular albums. (EDIT: Never mind, you said the user has been PM'd)

Up to them, but apparently there has been admittance of downvoting albums just to drive it down? Is this true or just an assumption?
Regardless. it is outright abuse, and for albums with few reviews a very low/high one can move it a bit.

For now I think the weighting system is good. All our collabs have been fair, so while this site is young I'm ok with collab overkill to prevent abuse.

ALSO OVERKILL Headbanger
 
Can you expand?


-------------
http://www.last.fm/user/colt2112" rel="nofollow - http://www.last.fm/user/colt2112





Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: 25 Jan 2011 at 4:55am
Suspicious ratings should always be reported, but we have to look at it case by case, and while many of us don´t agree with the reported user´s ratings, and some I sense are really frustrated about them, you won´t find only 0.5 ratings or only 5 star ratings among his ratings. He has also rated albums with more moderate ratings and in a case like this I think sending a friendly PM reminding the user that we´re watching his actions and expect him to consider his ratings is enough. Again he has not stated anywhere that he is downvoting those albums for the sake of it and as long as his profile shows a diverse range of ratings I think it´s hard to prove abuse.

-------------
http://www.lyngby-boldklub.dk/" rel="nofollow - Forever TRUE - Forever BLUE!
https://rateyourmusic.com/~UMUR" rel="nofollow - UMUR on RYM


Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: 25 Jan 2011 at 4:57am
Originally posted by The Angry Scotsman The Angry Scotsman wrote:


Up to them, but apparently there has been admittance of downvoting albums just to drive it down? Is this true or just an assumption?
Regardless. it is outright abuse, and for albums with few reviews a very low/high one can move it a bit.

 
Sadly it's true.
 
I PM'd another guy who wrote in his reviews that this was exactly what he was doing - he actually seemed to think it was a fair and reasonable thing to do.
 
I educated him, politely at first, then applied increasingly heavier lumps of concrete to my baseball bat until he gave in.
 
This may not be site policy, so I won't make a habit of it, but I'm very keen to send out strong messages to would-be abusers...
 
Evil Smile


Posted By: Pekka
Date Posted: 25 Jan 2011 at 6:00am
^ Clap That was the Scorpions case I presume?

-------------
http://iamthreepeople.bandcamp.com" rel="nofollow"> <- Click on this!


Posted By: The Angry Scotsman
Date Posted: 26 Jan 2011 at 2:44pm
Originally posted by Certif1ed Certif1ed wrote:

Originally posted by The Angry Scotsman The Angry Scotsman wrote:


Up to them, but apparently there has been admittance of downvoting albums just to drive it down? Is this true or just an assumption?
Regardless. it is outright abuse, and for albums with few reviews a very low/high one can move it a bit.

 
Sadly it's true.
 
I PM'd another guy who wrote in his reviews that this was exactly what he was doing - he actually seemed to think it was a fair and reasonable thing to do.
 
I educated him, politely at first, then applied increasingly heavier lumps of concrete to my baseball bat until he gave in.
 
This may not be site policy, so I won't make a habit of it, but I'm very keen to send out strong messages to would-be abusers...
 
Evil Smile


I've always said benevolent dictatorships are the best way to get things done!
Just use your power for good and it's ok LOL

I'm ok with it, I assume you didn't threaten the guy or anything and really, it shouldn't be tolerated since he admitted it.
Fair and reasonable? Erm Ermm



-------------
Megadeth, Metallica, Slayer and Testament. The real Big Four of thrash metal!



Listen to doom metal, worship Satan


Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: 26 Aug 2012 at 9:21am
Does this count as a review? All I see are URLS and album info: http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/the-death-of-art--review.aspx?id=273100" rel="nofollow - http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/the-death-of-art--review.aspx?id=273100

EDIT: Looks like it was already deleted, nevermind! LOL


-------------
Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime


Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: 26 Aug 2012 at 11:14am
^Yep I´ve deleted the review and had a talk with the member who posted it. It happened to be a band member and we have a nice talkSmile.

-------------
http://www.lyngby-boldklub.dk/" rel="nofollow - Forever TRUE - Forever BLUE!
https://rateyourmusic.com/~UMUR" rel="nofollow - UMUR on RYM



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 10.16 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2013 Web Wiz Ltd. - http://www.webwiz.co.uk