Major Upgrade to the Forum Engine

What I care about is the signals being sent out in an open to everyone forum  and the lack of any considerations, both intellectual and human considerations taken here. Attacking collabs and any other reviewers (including those who post reviews in good faith) without any good reasonings than "that is my/ours opinions = it is the objective truth" is demeaning ProgArchives into something much nastier than I signed up to when I joined here. It is certainly not making PA into a quality website.

Again: Think. 

I have said my piece (and edited it eight times). Goodnight and good mental health. 

Edited by toroddfuglesteg - February 09 2012 at 18:06

To be a bit more serious: Why do the site have collabs if they aren't consulted in matters which directly or indirectly affects their actions? Or at a base minimum informed?

I can see a number of good reasons for why that list of top quantity reviewers was removed, that it deterred new reviewers due to the silly amounts of reviews written by the people on that list as of now one of the topmost. But as it was also a tool and resource for those with a less keen involvement in the site as such and at least to some extent an inspiration or handy tool for the collabs on that list, removing it does have negative side effects. And sugarcoating that decision is a move that should have been thought of beforehand.

Whatever reasonings that were made behind closed doors, and however sound they may have been, someone should have realized that you don't make people happy by punching them in their face, even if the punch is a light and delicate one. The action becomes more important than the effect itself in such instances.

In the long run not an important issue, probably not in the short run either. The handling of it a matter of more  concern than the action itself in my opinion.

Oh well. There has been a call for words of wisdom from the learned sages. It'll be interesting to see if they will come down from their mountain and share their glorious knowledge with this small horde of uncouth, common barbarians.

Windhawk wrote: I have taken it for granted that the Lemming and admin team know their Hanslick from start to finish, and easily can outline the merits of a good review versus a not good review at the blink of an eye ;-)

Fantastic. I am so happy to discover a place like PA who has solved the 100 000 years old quandrum in finding the difference between good and bad in abstract matters like opinions.

Edited by toroddfuglesteg - February 09 2012 at 16:36

 

ExittheLemming wrote:   You brandish your tuned pitchforks upon the music listed on this site by providing detailed and informative reviews with substance that will make PA the most complete and powerful progressive rock resource. Yes, it was deliberate as the Top 100 Reviewers list was felt to contribute towards the steady decline in the standard of reviews being submitted for some considerable time. After all, the wrong type of competitive spirit engenders short cuts being taken and given the choice between good and hard work, we will always opt for the former. Like I said earlier in this thread, the information some of you seek i.e. a league table, is available on the collaborators page. A slew of flimsy reviews that tell you next to nothing about the subject matter is no better than zero reviews and strips the site of it's hard won credibility. We have a lot of brilliant reviewers on PA (including yourself) who will continue to make this site the 'first choice stop' for any inquisitive visitor.

Excellent news. I don't mind. We are now awaiting yours and the powers that is version and definiton of "good" and "bad" in the context of PA. Please post them and do it right now. 

Remember: A cow is a cow in someones eyes and a disfigured sheep in someone else's eyes again. What is the right definition of a cow ?

Remember to think when you think. That will make your thoughts a lot more considered. 

So, what is "good" and what is "bad" ? Or is no reviews at all "good" ? Is a hospital without any patients a better run hospital than a hospital with patients ? 

Please report back with your findings and definitions within hours (which should be no problems for you since you must have known what you wrote). This is a " 'first choice stop' for any inquisitive visitor " and a centre for excellense. Not a place for cheap, nasty accusations. Like the ones yours may be mistaken for.

.......but the removal of the Top 100 reviewers is warmly supported by me. 

 

 

Edited by toroddfuglesteg - February 09 2012 at 16:30

Well I've gotten back on the horse after a few months layoff...some backhanded compliments for whipping boy Toby Driver on the front page.

my ranking  lost in the woods ...

Finnforest wrote: Really unfortunate if it's permanent.  It was a nice little feather in the cap for the hard workers, a bit of recognition.  And it did have a gentle motivation effect, thus it encouraged reviewing.  A morale downer. Hopefully it is not permanent.

Ditto, tbh it's one of the main reasons that I started seriously reviewing after I was promoted. A nice little add-on to the homepage indeed.

tamijo wrote: I got the picture now, sorry that I missed the point. To me it sounded crystal clear form Lemmings post, that it was removed on purpose.

Might be, but why do so within what seems to be a cloud of mystery then? A small announcement about removing it because it's not really useful anymore would have sufficed. Perhaps also opening up a small debate about ample use for the freed up space due to this revised layout...or informing about what use it'll be given if already mapped out ;-)

Just noticed that as well...