Forum Home Forum Home > Site News, Newbies, Help and Improvements > Help us improve the site
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Sigh
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedSigh

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
Message
tamijo View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 06 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 4287
Direct Link To This Post Topic: Sigh
    Posted: February 28 2012 at 05:53
So the 100 MOST PROLIFIC REVIEW SPAMMERS (provocation intended)
got the spot in the sun. 
While the (tiny part of a) rewiew, by the commoners, are still hidden away in the untastefull right.
 
  
Prog is whatevey you want it to be. So dont diss other peoples prog, and they wont diss yours
Back to Top
Tony R View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: July 16 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 11979
Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 28 2012 at 15:29
It's a reward for being an official Progarchives Collaborator or Prog Reviwer. There has to be some perks for their hard work.
Back to Top
Snow Dog View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 28 2012 at 15:38
^Do I sense irony?
Back to Top
clarke2001 View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: June 14 2006
Location: Croatia
Status: Offline
Points: 4160
Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 28 2012 at 15:50
Originally posted by tamijo tamijo wrote:

So the 100 MOST PROLIFIC REVIEW SPAMMERS (provocation intended)
got the spot in the sun. 
While the (tiny part of a) rewiew, by the commoners, are still hidden away in the untastefull right.
 
  


It's not only 100 reviewers, it's more than 250 people. Each one of their work and contribution was recognized, rather thank complaining about irrelevant issues.

Since you so eagerly love to click on those little stars and give the albums ratings only, I suggest that you next time click on "Show all reviews/ratings" link. It takes less effort than writing pathetic provocations.
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 28 2012 at 17:45
100 word minimum gets you in the game if I catch your drift. And a lot of the more prolific reviewers do much more than that.


Edited by Slartibartfast - February 28 2012 at 17:46
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...

Back to Top
tamijo View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 06 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 4287
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 04 2012 at 03:40
Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

100 word minimum gets you in the game if I catch your drift. And a lot of the more prolific reviewers do much more than that.
My drift was :
The 100 (not 250)  MOST PROLIFIC REVIEWERS, was reinstalled on the front page,
Giving them extra motivation to write even more reviews.
But the non Collaborators reviews, are not very well promoted, they are hidden in the right side, when you check out albums, giving them little motivation to write more rewievs. 
Thats all i was trying to say.
 
 
NB: I dont undenstand why sometimes it seems that ratings only, gets attacks as if it was something bad.
We got the option, its even been made easier resently, why is it a shame to use it. ?
I do write reviews (more than 100 words), but only if i think i have something to say about the album worth reading.
Sometimes i dont think i do, others have said it all, then i just rate. Later if i fell like it, i review my ratings only. 
Prog is whatevey you want it to be. So dont diss other peoples prog, and they wont diss yours
Back to Top
Tapfret View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: August 12 2007
Location: Bryant, Wa
Status: Offline
Points: 8581
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 26 2012 at 20:41
One thing almost all collaborators have in common is they did not complain about the status of collaborators and the weight of the ratings associated with their reviews prior to their status promotion. Ratings have little to say about an album outside of the context of the raters personal tastes. Once a review is written some perspective is applied.  When someone writes enough thoughtful and informative reviews they may be invited into the PR/collaborator ranks.  It does not mean that your ratings are bad, but they are simple and really don't tell anybody what you really feel. They are therefore given appropriate weight.  Do you think there would be more motivation to write reviews if ratings carried the same weight? That's not really how incentives work.

Also, ALL reviews get a spot on the front page as they are posted, regardless of member status. So there is incentive to put your thoughts into writing rather than merely applying a rating.

Also also, while what you say regarding reviews by non-collabs being relegated to the right side of the screen is true for album pages, the artist page has the latest 10 reviews for that artist regardless of member status.
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 27 2012 at 06:27
Originally posted by tamijo tamijo wrote:

My drift was :
The 100 (not 250)  MOST PROLIFIC REVIEWERS, was reinstalled on the front page,
Giving them extra motivation to write even more reviews.
But the non Collaborators reviews, are not very well promoted, they are hidden in the right side, when you check out albums, giving them little motivation to write more rewievs. 
Thats all i was trying to say.

I started out there but after putting in a few more reviews I was promoted.  Is there anyone here who hasn't been given the invite doing the same?  And yeah, it doesn't matter how few you have done you do get a moment on the main page.


Edited by Slartibartfast - March 27 2012 at 06:29
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...

Back to Top
UMUR View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 19 2007
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 3069
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 27 2012 at 07:24
If you write enough quality reviews and continue to do so on a regular basis, itīs very likely youīll be contacted by a member of the admin team. The admin team will either have heard about you through Collabs who have contacted them or they have noticed you themselves. And donīt worry, they know exactly whatīs going on both in the forum and in the review section on the frontpage.
 
...as for "regular" members who write reviews and donīt get promoted, itīs often because they donīt write very good reviews or simply because they donīt post reviews very often (or as the case often is, they stop writing reviews after a very short while). In my world there has to be a balance between writing quality reviews and posting reviews on a regular basis (if youīd like to earn the Prog Reviewer tag that is). Regular basis donīt mean you need to flood the frontpage with reviews, but a couple of well thought out reviews a month is probably a good guideline.


Edited by UMUR - March 27 2012 at 07:43
Back to Top
Guldbamsen View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin

Joined: January 22 2009
Location: Magic Theatre
Status: Offline
Points: 23104
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 27 2012 at 10:27
Well put Jonas.
“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”

- Douglas Adams
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 27 2012 at 11:40
Originally posted by tamijo tamijo wrote:

So the 100 MOST PROLIFIC REVIEW SPAMMERS (provocation intended)
got the spot in the sun. 
While the (tiny part of a) rewiew, by the commoners, are still hidden away in the untastefull right.
 
  

Are you sure you want a spot in the sun?  You might burn up...
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...

Back to Top
toroddfuglesteg View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
Retired

Joined: March 04 2008
Location: Retirement Home
Status: Offline
Points: 3658
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 28 2012 at 13:08

Sorry to burst the soap bubble about good/bad reviews, but consider this:

The debate about what is a good or a bad review has been dominating my sphere for the last month. A very silly debate in my view. So never mind the bollocks; here is the meat.

A view on a piece of music, art or a book is an abstract emotion as much as love is an abstract emotion. Passion and the urge to mate *insert a popular sex object here* is a mystery the science has solved now. But why person A want to marry person B while persons C,D,E,F,G,H,I and J does not want to marry person B is a mystery the scientists has not solved and will never do. It is down to abstract emotions as much as a person A's perception of a piece of music is different from persons B,C,D,E etc etc.

That brings us over to the art of reviewing. Or the non-art of reviewing. The general consensus is that a review should start with some researched facts about the piece of music first and then also include some labelling or description of the music. At the end, the reviewer should add his/her opinion about the music and then perhaps add a score. That is the general consensus and I agree with this rule of thumb. Besides of that; there is no such thing as a good or a bad review. The many debates about this issue is just bollocks and utter tripe. These debates is mostly run by people who want to establish a pecking order in a flock of hens/cockrels. It is a tool used in power struggles within a group. Or it is used by people who does not really have a clue what they are talking about, but who want to sound like they know what they are doing. It all boils down to ubermenschen vs untermenschen.

It also boils down to personal style. Some would call a pen for a pen. Others call a pen an analogue writing device. Some call a cow for a cow. Others call a cow an agricultural cowmilk producing device. If you call a pen for a pen; you would probably be compared to Ernest Hemingway (as I am being). If you use other words; you may find yourself being compared to Leo Tolstoy or someone else. Personally, I try to style myself on PG Wodehouse and Mario Puzo. But that is my own personal preference.

....moving on from my Wodehouse'esque disgression though...... My point is that we all have our own style, background and preferences. That is also mirrored in writing our own reviews. Some are more Tolstoy than Hemingway. But that does not mean a thing though in a review. Personal preferences has nothing to do with quality, typing and factual errors excluded.

In short; the whole bad or good reviews debate is pretty useless unless the subject is to establish who is ubermenschen and who is untermenschen. But that is based on other criterias than quality again. That is power struggles and nothing else.

So to the reviewers out there; keep on reviewing in a free world and ignore the naysayers.


(taken from my weekly newspaper feature, which was a reply to a debate in another publication + a small "celebration" of my 20 years anniversary as an album reviewer)

In short; the PA's collabs and non-collabs system is all bollocks and more about grown up men (?) playing "secret societies" (for example Freemasonry) games than facts and common sense. But it is harmless fun so noone should be offended. Those offended by this harmless game the powers-that-is is playing; set up your own blog and earn money from Google or any other advertisers. Period.

This message was sent from Glenview Retirement home where I am enjoying my retirement from ProgArchives. Cheers to all my hard working friends in PA !! 




Edited by toroddfuglesteg - March 28 2012 at 13:25
Back to Top
Rivertree View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Band Submissions

Joined: March 22 2006
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 17629
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 28 2012 at 13:30
Happy retirement! Sleepy



Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 28 2012 at 13:51
Originally posted by toroddfuglesteg toroddfuglesteg wrote:

Sorry to burst the soap bubble about good/bad reviews, but consider this:

The debate about what is a good or a bad review has been dominating my sphere for the last month. A very silly debate in my view. So never mind the bollocks; here is the meat.

A view on a piece of music, art or a book is an abstract emotion as much as love is an abstract emotion. Passion and the urge to mate *insert a popular sex object here* is a mystery the science has solved now. But why person A want to marry person B while persons C,D,E,F,G,H,I and J does not want to marry person B is a mystery the scientists has not solved and will never do. It is down to abstract emotions as much as a person A's perception of a piece of music is different from persons B,C,D,E etc etc.

That brings us over to the art of reviewing. Or the non-art of reviewing. The general consensus is that a review should start with some researched facts about the piece of music first and then also include some labelling or description of the music. At the end, the reviewer should add his/her opinion about the music and then perhaps add a score. That is the general consensus and I agree with this rule of thumb. Besides of that; there is no such thing as a good or a bad review. The many debates about this issue is just bollocks and utter tripe. These debates is mostly run by people who want to establish a pecking order in a flock of hens/cockrels. It is a tool used in power struggles within a group. Or it is used by people who does not really have a clue what they are talking about, but who want to sound like they know what they are doing. It all boils down to ubermenschen vs untermenschen.

It also boils down to personal style. Some would call a pen for a pen. Others call a pen an analogue writing device. Some call a cow for a cow. Others call a cow an agricultural cowmilk producing device. If you call a pen for a pen; you would probably be compared to Ernest Hemingway (as I am being). If you use other words; you may find yourself being compared to Leo Tolstoy or someone else. Personally, I try to style myself on PG Wodehouse and Mario Puzo. But that is my own personal preference.

....moving on from my Wodehouse'esque disgression though...... My point is that we all have our own style, background and preferences. That is also mirrored in writing our own reviews. Some are more Tolstoy than Hemingway. But that does not mean a thing though in a review. Personal preferences has nothing to do with quality, typing and factual errors excluded.

In short; the whole bad or good reviews debate is pretty useless unless the subject is to establish who is ubermenschen and who is untermenschen. But that is based on other criterias than quality again. That is power struggles and nothing else.

So to the reviewers out there; keep on reviewing in a free world and ignore the naysayers.


(taken from my weekly newspaper feature, which was a reply to a debate in another music magazine + the celebration of my 20 years anniversary as an album reviewer)

Well, you may have a point, though probably not the one you intend. Writing-style is a separate entity to content. Of course a style can be a great writing style of high literary worth that displays a wonderful use of language and still says very little, and there I sense is where the value of a review lies, not in the ability of the author to construct exquisitely flowing prose, but to impart some information: to be informative to the reader who, (let us be very honest and very clear here), is interested in the item you purport to describe and not the flowery locution that smears from your ink-dripped pen as it traverses the pristine vellum. In essence a bad review is one that says nothing about the thing being reviewed that cannot be garnered from reading the dust-jacket or hastily written publishers' press release. Any review that can be condensed into one pertinent phrase once all the inconsequential waffle has been stripped way is a classic representation of style over substance, and that can be a test we all apply to our own writing as easily as we can apply it to those that we read.
 
So sure, there are no absolutes of quality, but there are prerequisites that determine whether a block of text is a review of an album or merely a description of it, and paramount of those prerequisites is a critical evaluation of the music and/or lyric contained within the album by whatever measure we chose. 
 
Originally posted by toroddfuglesteg toroddfuglesteg wrote:

In short; the PA's collabs and non-collabs system is all bollocks and more about grown up men (?) playing "secret societies" (= PA has become Freemasonry) games than facts and common sense. But it is harmless fun so noone should be offended. Those offended by this harmless game the powers-that-is is playing; set up your own blog and earn money from Google or any other advertisers. Stop complaining about the freemasons.
I don't know. I'm not a reviewer and not at all interested in playing politics - in my time as an Admin reviewers have been chosen and appointed by two of the mildest and nicest chaps it's been my pleasure to know - the more vociferous (and militant) among us actually play no part in this aside from nodding in polite agreement at the thoughts of these sagely gnomes and going along with whatever and whoever they suggest. But then, since this is done behind closed doors there is no way that you would know this so fell free to spin your own conspiracy theories, it matters little to me or anyone else, people come and people go but the art school dance goes on forever.
 
But as you say, if you don't like the system you are free to go forth and start your own blog - post a link here and we'll even pass some trade your way because a blog that no one reads is lonely thing to behold.
What?
Back to Top
Guldbamsen View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin

Joined: January 22 2009
Location: Magic Theatre
Status: Offline
Points: 23104
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 28 2012 at 14:13
Originally posted by Rivertree Rivertree wrote:

Happy retirement! Sleepy



Yep. 

That was totally uncalled for. I mean, one thing is to openly describe the whole objectivity vs. subjectivity conundrum, which we all should have learned by now - ok, bravo I can dig it. Another thing entirely is to come back from retirement swinging like a bar brawler that don't particularly like the games we are playing. 
Well nothing has really changed since you left - or since you started out frequenting the site, so why did you even bother to begin with?

Yeah happy retirement.
“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”

- Douglas Adams
Back to Top
toroddfuglesteg View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
Retired

Joined: March 04 2008
Location: Retirement Home
Status: Offline
Points: 3658
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 28 2012 at 14:34

Yes, but if you want to have a reasonable transparent system, issue a reviewers guideline like everyone else is doing. Just copy and paste from other websides and give it some PA colours. That should make these four times a year debates absolete.

In any case; PA's system is harmless and all artists are happy about it. But someone started this thread and I replied with some sober thoughts. Mostly to kill these debates (see over) once and for all. 

And yes; everyone disagreeing with the collabs/non-collabs system is free to set up their own blogs. Absolute the way to go if chasing collabs status is the main motivation here.  

Originally posted by Guldbamsen Guldbamsen wrote:

  Another thing entirely is to come back from retirement swinging like a bar brawler that don't particularly like the games we are playing. 

When did I say that I did not like the games PA are playing ? I have never said that. You are lying about me, young dane. Go and wash your fingers in chlorine and say Hail Haggis 50 times. Twice. 

Btw. I retired because of time constraints and not being able to contribute any quality anymore. Not because of any form of fall outs (besides of with the software). And my retirement was and is a wrench for me. Not made better by your cheap lies, young dane. 

Originally posted by Guldbamsen Guldbamsen wrote:


Yeah happy retirement.

Thanx for that ! Good retirement to you too when that time comes. 



Edited by toroddfuglesteg - March 28 2012 at 14:41
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 28 2012 at 14:40
Originally posted by toroddfuglesteg toroddfuglesteg wrote:

Yes, but if you want to have a reasonable transparent system, issue a reviewers guideline like everyone else is doing. Just copy and paste from other websides, in short. Easy. Simple.

 
Or did you have something else in mind?
 
Originally posted by toroddfuglesteg toroddfuglesteg wrote:

In any case; PA's system is harmless and all artists are happy about it. But someone started this thread and I replied with some sober thoughts. 
No, I don't think you did.
What?
Back to Top
toroddfuglesteg View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
Retired

Joined: March 04 2008
Location: Retirement Home
Status: Offline
Points: 3658
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 28 2012 at 14:50

No, Dean. Both links are perfect and explains the scope of PA. Clap  What is not entirely perfect is your fellow Admin's Tony R not posting the same links as his post is # 2 here to answer the treadstarter's question. Smile

Actually, I should had done it myself Head on wall  if I did not fall for the temptation of posting a short summary of War & Peace instead. Ouch


 




Edited by toroddfuglesteg - March 28 2012 at 14:54
Back to Top
Guldbamsen View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin

Joined: January 22 2009
Location: Magic Theatre
Status: Offline
Points: 23104
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 28 2012 at 14:56
Ok my bad Torodd. So all that about freemasonry, collabs non-collabs was just a giggle? Bollocks as you put it? I know what you ended that sentence with, but that still doesn't take away from what is suggested ie the whole bollocks thing. Harmless fun eh...

Anyway you are right and I was wrong. You don't say anything about any games you don't like. Sorry for the misrepresentation.
“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”

- Douglas Adams
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 28 2012 at 14:56
Originally posted by toroddfuglesteg toroddfuglesteg wrote:

No, Dean. Both links are perfect and explains the scope of PA. What is not entirely perfect is your fellow Admin's Tony R not posting the same links as his post is # 2 here. Smile

I should had done it myself Head on wall  if I did not fall for the temptation of posting a short summary of War & Peace instead. Ouch 


Not (just) for the sake of being contrary - that isn't answering or even addressing Tamijo's point, whereas Tony's reply does so quite adequately. The question was not "how do I become a PR?" or" what makes a good review?" but "why are the non-collab reviews shown squashed into 40% of the page-width while the PR reviews occupy the remaining 60%?" and there the answer is short and sweet: "because".
What?
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.343 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.