Soul Dreamer wrote: I was looking for Riverside's ADHD album which is due to be released somewhere in June (don't know the exact date...) but I see that there are already 12 ratings without review...now I don't doubt that some of these have a legit preview copy but why post only a rating then? What is this...I think ratings without a decent review should not be allowed before the release date...

Totally agree. 19. June is the release date and there is twelve reviews already..... 

I actually got a promo CD and I am witholding my review until that date or later just to make sure that I, M@X and PA does not get into any sort of trouble. 

 

toroddfuglesteg wrote: Soul Dreamer wrote: I was looking for Riverside's ADHD album which is due to be released somewhere in June (don't know the exact date...) but I see that there are already 12 ratings without review...now I don't doubt that some of these have a legit preview copy but why post only a rating then? What is this...I think ratings without a decent review should not be allowed before the release date... Totally agree. 19. June is the release date and there is twelve reviews already.....  I actually got a promo CD and I am witholding my review until that date or later just to make sure that I, M@X and PA does not get into any sort of trouble.

Floyd919 wrote: http://www.progarchives.com/album-reviews.asp?id=23343 The guy Yorkie X reviews Stargazer as if it's a dream theater song, when it is actually a cover song. It's fun that he guesses Dio-style vocals and overall 70-s feel) Seems like DT did their job on this cover anyway. :)

http://www.progarchives.com/album.asp?id=23268
so this guy has only listened to 4 tracks of 8 in the album, I think that ain't enough to make a review, especially giving it 4 stars

dude, wtf, Riverside's, Dream Theater's and The Mars Volta's albums already have ratings, and the first one to be released is the Riverside one on June 19th.

Edited by CCVP - May 19 2009 at 17:08

Yesterday, Infamous filled the home page by reposting his non-flower kings original reviews with apparently no changes. So, he has two identical reviews and ratings for many albums.

Isn't it a bit peculiar when someone almost systematically rewards 1 star to the top-rated albums of the last years?

http://www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=23555

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: JTP88 wrote: http://www.progarchives.com/album.asp?id=23268 so this guy has only listened to 4 tracks of 8 in the album, I think that ain't enough to make a review, especially giving it 4 stars   When will we learn not to add albums previous to it's release?   The guy admits having heard only 4 songs and listened them by an illegal channel, enough to delete both rating and review.   If you want the album to be posted before the release, block the reviews and ratings, in this case we don't have the total time, the songs time, the cover art is only rumored to be the original, I believe the album must also go.   Iván

I support Ivan on this 100%. I understand that allowing early reviews (that in most cases are self-admittedly based on pirated copies) generates traffic for the site, but at what cost? I believe this reduces the credibility of the site significantly. It makes PA appear to support illegal downloading. More importantly, the quality of most of the reviews does nothing to help us with our purchasing decision. When the time comes. In. A. Month.

If these people can't exercise self-restraint, can't we assist them by limiting reviews to Collaborators before release date?

Edit: sorry, this should be in the reviews discussion thread.


Edited by russellk - May 22 2009 at 04:59

Troshmi wrote: http://www.progarchives.com/Review.asp?id=50947 As this is an review made by an (official?) reviewer, I think it's just shameful to see such flaming of an album which is supposed to be inspired by Dream Theater's role models. Calling it plagiarism is just plain ignorant.

Diaby wrote: These are the same old arguments against that album. The review itself is a plagiarism.