Forum Home Forum Home > Site News, Newbies, Help and Improvements > Report abuse here
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - fake 5-star reviews on progarchives.com
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic Closedfake 5-star reviews on progarchives.com
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
Message
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Easy Livin View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: February 21 2004
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
Points: 15585 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 04 2007 at 09:21
There's nothing to stop a member of a band reviewing his own album. There is no reason to call such a review a "fake".
 
In any event, the fact that the reviewer has chosen to use the name of one of the band members by no means guarantees that it is indeed that person.
 
We should not be too precious about the reviews, this site is open to all. As long as the reviews comply with the guidelines, they are as valid as any other. 
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 04 2007 at 13:17
I have seen some nicknames with names of legandary band members or something related... does that mean that those persons are indeed those represented in the nickname? Man! There's a guy called Dream Theater! Maybe it's the whole band that decided to post in PA as just one member! I think this is ridiculous. If there are persons out there who write such 5-star "fake" reviews, well, shame on them but in order to do that they at least had to support their arguments somehow, so the review, if it is coherent, isn't that FAKE after all. And if it's a band member, is is so preposterous? I really don't think any band will see PA as the one-and-only medium to get to sell thousands, if not millions of records. Besides, if the review was by a band member and it was well-written, do we lose anything with that? I prefer that review to those hate-driven reviews with no arguments and so poorly written that it seems a 8-year old was the author.
Back to Top
laplace View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: October 06 2005
Location: popupControl();
Status: Offline
Points: 7606 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 04 2007 at 13:19
it was well-written? it's just a list of superlatives that a script could generate.

but I agree that there's no need to remove it.
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 04 2007 at 13:22
Originally posted by laplace laplace wrote:

it was well-written? it's just a list of superlatives that a script could generate.

but I agree that there's no need to remove it.
 
Haven't read it really, I'm just giving my opinion based on the topic creator's original post. That's why I say "if it was a well-written review".... If it's just superlatives, it's a bad review and then it would't hurt to erase it, but because of the quality, not of the name of the writer.
 
 
EDIT: Now I have read it. Yes, it's a superlative-filled review, no question about that. But it IS decently written. It has coherence, good syntax, it doesn't look like the work of someone who failed the english course (many reviews do look like that). It has some rhythm, I think it's not a great review, but a competent one. I see the nickname is not Todd Plant but the original name. Maybe it IS him after all. But what's the crime? At least he wrote a good-sized review. He could've very well written a 51 word review and got away with it. And at least he's decent enough as to show his name in the review, so everybody that knows this band (like me) knows maybe it's the singer who's writing. I actually find that decent. What if there's more band-member reviews in PA, but we don't have a clue because the nicknames and original names are concealed? I actually applaud him for putting his name in front.


Edited by The T - February 04 2007 at 13:30
Back to Top
kirklott View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 01 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 623 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 24 2007 at 23:39
Originally posted by Easy Livin Easy Livin wrote:

There's nothing to stop a member of a band reviewing his own album. There is no reason to call such a review a "fake".
 
In any event, the fact that the reviewer has chosen to use the name of one of the band members by no means guarantees that it is indeed that person.
 
We should not be too precious about the reviews, this site is open to all. As long as the reviews comply with the guidelines, they are as valid as any other. 


Well, yes and no.

The only reason we know he's the lead singer is because I pointed it out. It's not like he's Jon Anderson or Peter Gabriel and everyone knows his name.

And he did not state who he is, so it's clearly a conflict of interests

And as pointed out by others, there were other fake reviews under other names.
"Progressive rock is the key to the continuance of human evolution." - Charles Darwin
Back to Top
Chris H View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: October 08 2006
Location: Charlotte, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 8191 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 24 2007 at 23:44
Who says its the same Todd Plant? Plant isnt really an uncommon surname in English speaking countries and Todd is quite a popular first name. And as long as the review meets the guidelines there should be no question about whether or not it should stay in the archives.
 
I think this discussion should be over now, right?
Beauty will save the world.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.215 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.