Reviews discussion

Oh well. Personally I have yet to see anything that convinces me of any Phideaux campaign - at least run by him personally - but I'll be sure to contact codd to find out. Judging from his MySpace page he'll be an interesting person to get to know anyhow ;-)

Indeed. Pretty much knew that this was the case...especially after seeing his MySpace page.

This was probably his first encounter with a 'masterpiece', can you imagine the epiphany.

Easy Money wrote: This was probably his first encounter with a 'masterpiece', can you imagine the epiphany.

Now where did you get that one from? Sure never said so in his review, nor on his website.

As I see it, someone is a tad too obsessed about certain matters here - and need to chill out a bit...

Marty McFly wrote:

But Marty, you've already written such a lovely review!  ;-)

Continuing from comments in the reviews reporting thread: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=28343&PN=120

LiquidEternity wrote: This really isn't the place, I guess. But where I'm from, the word is completionists.

Yeah, not uncommon for there to be alternate spellings, and regional spellings, so either is acceptable.  I prefer completist partially because it's simpler, but then I prefer some longer spellings of words because I'm used to them (for instance, I prefer colour to color).  I remember being corrected by a teacher at PA for using an "ise" spelling instead of "ize" when I know full-well that both are correct. 

Windhawk wrote: What about: An overall weak effort, might be of interest to fans Avoid. At best for completists

I like it!


Edited by Logan - November 27 2009 at 09:53

Bonnek posted four Can reviews in 4 minutes (of course, that does prove that he wrote all of them in advance), between 14:07 and 14:10 EST (I'm sorry if the timeline is confusing, or it shows different to you)

Right now, they're halfway gone. It has only been an hour and a half since , and no new review appeared for almost an hour after Bonnek's series.

An hour prior to Bonnek's series, only 2 reviews were written. Prior to that, 11 reviews were written within less than an hour. "Rune2000" reviewed Hackett's Bay Of Kings at 12:03, 53 minutes later it was front page history. No riot? Maybe Rune2000's heart was crushed, too. Psarros's Sithonia review stayed on the front page for 3 hours, even with Bonnek's devastating intrusion. Bonnek's reviews themselves could dissappear much sooner (they'll start dissapearing with the next new review, as I write: 2 hours and a half so far)

This is pretty much bicker to my ears. It's the recent 10 reviews listing, nothing stays on it for half a day if the traffic goes even moderately. I'd be more interested how many people click on "last 50 reviews", because that's what I do everyday, after a night's sleep. That's close to how many reviews are written in a matter of 6-7 hours, if it's a good day.

I didn't imagine hopes were so high, for recent reviews (given such fruitful reviewing activity) to be treasured. I don't understand what's obliterated either. The reviews stay forever on the album's page (where people, excluding the roughly half a day it takes for the front page to be fully refreshed, go anyway in search of reading, recommendations or informations), plus also on the highly-esteemed reviewers (if viewed that way by their faithful readers)  own personal reviews' page.


Also what Moris said, from a different, better point of view.



Edited by Ricochet - December 09 2009 at 18:08

LiquidEternity wrote: This really isn't the place, I guess. But where I'm from, the word is completionists.

from where I'm from, which is here, the word is obsessive

^that's really helpful

I never start PA with the "last 10 reviews" homepage. I've bookmarked the "last 50 reviews" homepage and that's how I start my daily visit to PA