Who does this kid think he is?!!??!

Snow Dog wrote: Like Ivan I have been arguing for all ratings having reviews for a while. At present though the Admin doesn't agree!

Well i think atleast 1 and 5 stars rating should have proper reviews with a somewhat stricter guideline than 2-4 star ratings

I think that 1 and 5 star reviews should be following stricter guidelines and that you would need to post an actual review then...

I deleted the reviews, which is why the links no longer work.

It's hard to do something about stupid reviews, I've been a member of many forums and always some troll manages to post several threads before someone acting, it's natural and almost impossible to avoid.

Checking all the reviews is not practicall, unless you manage a site as GEPR where you make your contribution and it's only added after 2 or 3 months. This wouldn't work here, because the great thing of this place is the speed and thetraffic of reviews.

But we can do something that I've been asking for a lot of time, do not allow ratings without reviews.

1. If you can't take the time o make a review, how can we guess if yopur opinion is reliable?
2. If someone is incapable of making a review, and I'm not talking of a literary work, just a couple of parragraphs telling us why has he reached that qualificatoion, I can't trust in those ratings.

Have you ever noticed that ratings without reviews are usually over or under the average of ratings made by reviewers?

Take for example Kansas (The album to make it easy):

1. 24 ratings
2. 13 reviews with rating that give a total  of 53 stars
3. NO average bellow 3 (only 1 person rates it with 3)
4. 2 reviews with 5 stars
5. 10 reviews with 4 stars

          4.10 stars average

 

1. 11 ratings without review
2. 2 ratings give 5 stars
3. 3 rating give 4 stars
4. 3 ratings give 3 stars
5. 1 rating gives 2 stars
6. 2 ratings give 1 star

         3.25 stars average

What are the fundaments or arguments oif this two guys to rate this album with one star?

In this case the desviation is rather small due to the short number of ratings, but with more unexplained 1 or 2 stars ratings, the difference will be really higher.

Take FOXTROT, a 5 stars album according to the average no rating with review under 4 stars (Most are 5 stars) except for Imogen Reid's which according to my perspective is inconsistent, because praise the album and gives 2 stars ???? (At least I know what to expect and how Imogen reached that conclusion) and a guy who said he hates keyboards and that's why he rated Foxtrot with two stars (I know this guy doesn't know what the hell he's talking about).

But in the non reviewers section we find 6 one star ratings??? and 4 two stars ratings? How this guys/gals reached those rating? I can't even giuess.

I don't care if somebody gives a contradictory rating (As Imogen)  if he/she gives a valid reason, not even valid, I just need an honest reason. In that case I will read the review and know if the rating is justified or the guy is a lunatic.

But without review, it's easy to bash or to praise in an undeserved way and alter the average.

Please put an end to this chaos, no rating without review!!!!!!!!!!!

Iván

 

 

Edited by ivan_2068

Atkingani wrote: The Ryan wrote: If a non-preposition word is being repeated in a review, the review should never be seen by us, the readers, and should be deleted from the website. Also these people who rate albums without reviewing... pitiful! This new guy is just an example of such idiocy. Most are not fit to review anyways, in fact I stopped out of respect for the bands and artists. I believe that rating without reviewing is allowed for non-English speakers, Ryan   In some cases they send their reviews in their mother language but only the ratings are maintained by the administrators...

That's fine - and I wasn't sure about the 'mother language' comment but I guess when you're right you're right. What I don't understand is the "limit" of words needed for a review. Nobody has to apply to such a thing as of last time I checked. Also perhaps if you cannot type English there shouldn't be a rating that has an effect. These non-English speaking peoples never justified their case. I don't want a star rating, I want information. Typing reviews in English is a rule;

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 should be a MINIMUM 50 words preferably substantially more, no maximum."

 

I'm just following THIS^ rule - wanting some substantial and valid information when I read reviews. It's just the way I see it, even though nobody has to write a review and can rate an album.

Edited by The Ryan

Ahh... true, you have a point.

I just saw the Genesis review of SEBTP thats up on the main page now, and I am MAD!!!

 

WHAT AN IDIOT!!!!!!!

Is there any way for him to be banned from the site?

His arguments are clear. Now I know why he hates those albums.

I agree with you, The Ryan. I don't know anything about the technical side on this problem, but I suppose it is possible to prevent such "reviews" to appear on this site in the future, using your method.
On the psychological side, I suggest that we totally ignore this person. Let's not get to talk with this pitiful subhuman. I think all he wants to do is to get into a verbal fight. He (I suppose only men can go that low, generally speaking) only wants us to react and if we don't, that pisses him off most and he will leave us for good. The troublemaker's nightmare is being totally ignored, I believe.

Don Quito wrote: Someone should get rid of those reviews by this moron...

Someone will