Reviews reporting thread

^ Done. 

siLLy puPPy wrote: There's probably no rule about this but how do you all feel about someone who saves up 10 or more reviews and then posts them all at once? Personally i find it annoying especially when other newer reviews simply get swept away from the front page. Have the admins considered any rules regarding this? There's no reason these reviews can't be posted as they are written.

I find it inconsiderate, discourteous to other reviewers, and have thought that there should be a rule about this. I don't think there is. People work hard on writing reviews, and of course they want those to have some time in the sun, and so it is not tactful for someone to post a bunch of their own reviews (copy-pasted, often from another site or saved up) quickly. And it does seem very spammy. I feel much the same with forums when people posting a whole bunch of topics in quick order, or bump a whole lot and drowning out others new ones and obscuring recent discussion.

I will PM a reviewer later about this to request that the reviews be spaced out so that they don't drown out recent reviews by other reviewers on the front page, and will bring up with admin amending the rules.

EDIT: I wrote and sent a PM. Thanks for bringing this issue up.

Edited by Logan - April 03 2023 at 10:41

It could be worse... Check out the "Last 50 Reviewed Releases" at ProGGnosis. A reviewer named ZapNiles is flooding their page with reviews that were written decades ago! 48 of the 50 reviews on that page are by them. Example: Their Starcastle review was written in 2002 and just now posted. I'm guessing they are copy/pasting from another, perhaps defunct, site. Inconsiderate, indeed!

Normally i don't care about such things but the band Amoeba Split was kind enough to let me review the new album before its release and it was literally bumped off the entire last 50 reviews in less than a 24 hour period. Now that this reviewer is literally wiping out the front page every day, i question if anyone else will bother posting reviews. I've had up to five reviews a day but my protocol is no more than three a day (as a general rule) and wait a day and add more if no new reviews have appeared. I've never knocked out the top 10 on the front page even at my most prolific moments! The one thing i CAN say positive is that at least they are REAL reviews and not just silly rants about nothing.

^ yeah why is Facebook necessary for social reviews? Not like that on MMA or JMA. Seems like a standard function of most sites regardless of age.

^ I agree about the advertising. He was quite honest about that in a topic before , which had made me a little worried, and I wish I had said something when I saw his message. "Now I gotta figure out a way to give myself credit, per the review posting guidelines (and my own desire to hopefully see more traffic at my site)."

I think his updates might be rather too frequent and too copious for my tastes. Some restraint is in order, otherwise a restraining order might do. You're a different case, you've earned some site promotion. I've long wanted to make my own site -- music and film maybe. I used to have a little "comedy" site of the Onion variety but not nearly as good. I've visited your site and enjoyed it.

I asked him to limit to two reviews a day and space those if he is to continue posting reviews. He can of course make a topic in Get the Word Out.

Edited by Logan - April 04 2023 at 10:34

AlanB wrote: The review currently on the front page of a live Camel DVD is actually a review of the Mirage album.

Fixed as you say. 

Nogbad_The_Bad wrote: Do we know if its the same person? I know Zap, he's a DJ on progrock.com, the same station I DJ on.