How about including a function where we allow users to make comments on each single review? The reviews are a pillar for the site, and this would increase their relevance even more, and make the site even more dynamic, also to the users outside the forum. It would make reviews more like blog-posts - in the spirit of social media.

 

Granted, there would have to be a system for editing and reporting inappropriate comments, but there isn't exactly a lack of people to do this job, is there?

 

The sad reality is that man is still a primitive being, and individuals of both sexes still find it worthwhile to roar and beat their chest with their fist - although in this day and age most people do so allegorically on the internet.

 

Comment field where everybody could comment on reviews would end up like a roar-fest, with people roaring out their preferences and beating on their own chests to show their power; inbetween trying to knock the competition to the ground with their allegorical fists.

 

Could quite clearly have entertainment value, the sites traffic would increase manyfold - but the overall cause of the site would be ruined forever methinks.

 

I have a more positive view, and believe that when are people are given responsibility, they take responsibility. If Ricochet's and Raff's reservations were valid, then Wikipedia and just about every kind of social media would be a desolate wasteland of barbarians. We know they are not. That's the core of how the Internet is evolving these days.

 

I believe that making the reviews interactive could be the single most effective way of taking this site up one league, inspiring creative interactions that would make us way more appelling to new users.

 

The reviews are not made in a vacuum and should not be kept in a vacuum. Discussing them is the best way to achieve better understanding of the subject of which they are written. Hardly anybody gets so agitated about a review that they care to post a thread in the forum, and only a few get so inspired that they write a review of their own (and in my opinion, reviews should first and foremost be inspired by albums, not by other reviews). Creating interaction is a democratic way of making the content of the review more interesting, and thus the focus on the album is intact.

 

We're not afraid of discussion, are we? We're still devoted to democracy in our respective locations in the world?

 

Of course, some people will always step out of line and focus their critisism or comments on the reviewer rather than the review. So there should be a way of reporting discussions that go too far. But there's no evidence to support that this would be a problem with the majority, or even a large minority. I say again: Look at other social media. And there's no evidence to support that the mods' workload would "increase a hundredfold" or even close. Unless they aim to read every single discussion, which I really don't see why they would want to.

 

Open your eyes, people. And ask yourselves: Are you better off today than your grandparents were? The answer - even if you're living in Africa - is yes with a probability rate of close to one. See through the vandals and watch the people making things grow and prosper. That's us. Who is the dominant force - here and elsewhere in society? Is the glass half-empty or half-full?

 

Well, that was off-topic rant if there ever was such a thing. But in sum: Yes to humanity. Yes to human creativity and freedom to prosper, challenge and evolve. Yes to dynamic reviews!

 

Good idea from Raff with a trial period!

 

Because usually the people that granted us that music was egomaniac people who didn't give a damn about anything else but the crazy ideas they had in their mind and put them in records....

 

Music is actually a symptom of the illness of man's eternal individualism. And thank somebody for that! But really... musicians seldom create their art for altruistic purposes....

 

After such a devation, please... continue with this good idea that I support.... I'm all for people being allowed to comment on reviews....

How can people on the internet be misanthropic!? It's almost as if there is a reason they are on the internet...and not outside. ;-)

 

After such a devation, please... continue with this good idea that I support.... I'm all for people being allowed to comment on reviews....

-------------
if you own a sodastream i hate you

 

 

Desoc wrote: Ricochet wrote: "The reviews are not made in a vacuum and should not be kept in a vacuum", indeed, but they're still the most direct way to focus on an album - and to make it the important subject of all. Blog-like interaction usually works ideally on the same thing - a subject initially discussed by someone, but ultimately discussed by all who replied. In this case, it's the reviewer who stands (I'm almost tempted to say trialed) regarded by the commenters. So what are we down to? You not being fond of the idea of getting challenged by an imbecile on your well-crafted reviews?

I wasn't talking about myself in any of the comments I made.
And we already established that the case of "an imbecile challenging well-crafted reviews" is a form of agressiveness, abuse. (And that there's a good chance more than half of the comments to be in this style).

I'm still talking about the fact that the attention is drawn from the album towards the review that was written and/or towards how that person wrote the review. The ideal situation is when both the reviewer and the commenter keep focusing on the album, sharing ideas, infos, expressing opinions. But this kind of sharing already happens on the forum, in every appreciation thread, as well as in various polls and threads, opened to discuss albums, music etc. 

Desoc wrote: Ricochet wrote: Further on, like Windhawk implied, there are arguments and arguments. Personally, I'm not enchanted by the "nice writing" short-like positive comments as much as I hate to predict thousand of "you suck" nasty comments. And replies such as " X is my favorite rather than this one" are of almost no worth. I wish moreover for these comments' utility to consist out of valuable corrections, extra info offered or...intrinsic commenting into the details with which the original reviewer approched the subject. That could work, yet it just won't happen in everybody's case. The profit of this function will, thus, be slimmer than we'd hope.   But if there's indeed a profit, why not try?   After all, you don't have to read all the short replies that you don't fancy? Why not simply enjoy the valuable corrections and extra info offered or intrinsic commenting into details that we apparently agree will be offered, and ignore the fill?    ^ This is exactly what creates content. And ideas, and music, when it comes down to it.

[/QUOTE]

Those valuable things will be offered by 1 out of 10 people. Is this a good profit?


-------------

My question was not "do you think that 50 comments multipled by 600 reviews would be a bit too much", but "do you really think it's realistic that every single Close to the Edge-review would get 60 comments" I'd be surprised if people care enough to pull that off. (But I can't understand why it would pose a problem to anyone. Necessary? Depends on your aim. To protect and preserve? Perhaps not. To make a community growing and appealing? Then perhaps.)

Ricochet wrote: And we already established that the case of "an imbecile challenging well-crafted reviews" is a form of agressiveness, abuse.

Did we? To me, that's democracy (change the word "reviews" to "regime"). Now, if he/she was attacking you, and not challenging your review, then I'd agree we were talking about agressiveness and abuse. But we shouldn't restrict challenges out of fear of attacks, neither in society nor in small communities [/philosophy mode].

Ricochet wrote: I'm still talking about the fact that the attention is drawn from the album towards the review that was written and/or towards how that person wrote the review. The ideal situation is when both the reviewer and the commenter keep focusing on the album, sharing ideas, infos, expressing opinions. But this kind of sharing already happens on the forum, in every appreciation thread, as well as in various polls and threads, opened to discuss albums, music etc.

I don't know if the "fact" you're talking about is a concern or a conclusion, but I suspect the latter. And then I disagree with you, because I believe that the discussions will take place because of opinions about the album. This is not a zero-sum game, why should it be? And because I believe the benefits to way outweigh whatever problems there might be with abuse. But none of us can prove our predictions, because nothing has bee tried.

Furthermore, I maintain my case that the Forum has a high threshold for people to enter. And that it significantly more work lurking into a forum, looking through all the lounges, finding the appropriate thread, being yelled at by experienced forum participants for posting in the wrong thread, etc, etc, than it is to simply post your thoughts and reactions underneath the review.

Ricochet wrote: (And that there's a good chance more than half of the comments to be in this style) <snip> Those valuable things will be offered by 1 out of 10 people. Is this a good profit?

Hm. I'm tempted to ask you where you get these numbers. As far as I know, no trial or experiment has been carried out. I could easily post the opposite numbers with just as little evidence to back it up...

Raff wrote: Just for the record: I don't particularly like being called 'dystopian'.

Sorry, my comment was more aimed at MrProgFreak, whose comment was dystopian no matter how you view it 

 

Sorry mailto:M@X - M@X for having unintentionally ignored this. I'm glad to hear that you're thinking in this direction. I believe this would take this site a long step in the direction of a social, interactive site not only in the forum for in the site at large. That would be vital improvement for an already vital site.

 

I think your ideas are largely good. Only members should be allowed to post, definitely - also to avoid spam. I'm a little hesitant toward allowing reviewers to delete comments, though. Imagine a reviewer having written highly controversial or inaccurate statements in his review, and systematically deleting every comment that points this out. Everybody should be allowed to report inappropriate comments to a moderator, but perhaps reviewers should be given special priority?

Discuss the album, not the review- this is really simple to do- you write a review.

 

One positive aside would be that if the possibility of a direct discussion remained closed, it could get people to wite their own reviews as a reaction.

 

I don't think very positively of human nature, and a discussion as suggested would inevitably lead to trouble, as mentioned above.

 

The Wikipedia example only works because of a very strictly enforced admin- and editing policy, and I very much doubt that those responsibilities could be kept to a humane level here, when debating such volatile matters as taste.