bad reviews section

[Guest lespagnol]

I don t think that this new password and login fonctions are good for the site.For example choose the review of the 3point turn album or element album.Only 3 reviews here!!!thats so ridiculous!this new system is killing the site.....This was much much better before.

[Guest Flying Kundalini]

I agree totally the amount of reviews being posted now is next to nothing which can only be bad news for the site.. of course i'm a hypocrite because i haven't used my password yet... but wouldn't a system that banned certain words be a better idea

[Guest mad]

i m agree with lespagnol

 

i understand that we want to stop stuff like 3 month

but the site is dying i hope people gonna be motivated:)

[Guest stringtheory]

I am sick of people whinning about how bad the review section has become. Well..maybe people should have thought about that when they were littering the section with worthless shit. The reality of life is that there are consequences for peoples actions. People abused the review section...and they had their privaleges taken away. Maybe in time if people can show come semblance of maturity and respect...the login/password thing might go away. But don't blame mars and children...blame the ignorent idiots who decided to liter the review section with piles of shit.

[Guest mad]

mars and children are my friend and we have talk about that with mars :

 

 

it is two side of the probleme :

-security vs -the fear about the log

 

 

we dont blame mars or chil....we are afraid that people gonna be shy

 

that s all

[Guest bugbread]

Hmm...Y'all seem to think the reviews section is dying, while I think it's getting better. I used to avoid the review section because it didn't have any reviews. Now instead of 99 crappy flames and trolls and 1 real review, there are 0 crappy flames and trolls and 1 real review.

 

Some people say "But the review section is only 1/100 of what it used to be!", but I think "The review section is now 100 times better than what it used to be".

 

Then again, I have such a strong opinion on the issue that I became an editor, so what I say may not count so much.

 

By the way, the "A" section is finished with editting. The last few may not have been posted by Children yet, but I'm working through in alphabetical order.

[Guest stringtheory]

Bugbread...I agree 210% !

 

BTW...Thanks for editing the review section my friend. You are doing us all a great service ! Peace !

[Guest Ktrance]

I have to agree with bugbread on this one. I never really used the review section before, since there was so much talk that belonged in the forum not in the reviews section.

 

But I checked it out the other day and I must admit I think it has wastly improved. And I must admit also that I prefer quality over quantity.

 

I can understand that alot of people dont want to be logged, but consider that most of the people here write their email addresses on the general forum, so it wouldnt be so hard to track you down anyway.

 

Anyway that only my 2 cents.

 

-Ktrance

[Guest Mijis]

the review section is better than before .

[Guest ppl]

ppl bitch, but still don't review them self.. so who is to blame?

[soem aeld]

Hey Buggie, I've aldready cleaned 'C' and will clean X-Z soon

So stay out of my territorries will ya!

[Guest bugbread]

DOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!

 

You'll never guess what I just spent the last 2 hours or so doing.

 

And here I was thinking, "Hot damn, the C section is clear of junk. There's almost nothing to edit!"

[Guest Mike D]

I think the new method is great, though haven't used it yet. I also think that it is great the bugbread is editing the old ones so it reads more easily. I hated the way some people insulted the artist/label/co-reviewers like they had the right to say such garbage. I think it is much more important to have 1 or 2 great reviews rather 10+ angst filled shite and 1 good review, just makes this site what it is supposed to be, about music.

I can undertsand whny pople write short reviews etc., because it does take a long time and effort to writ a track by track review of an album, I"ve been slowly doing this for my cd collection/web site and sometimes it takes over an hour to get it right, but it does make better eading for everybody.

 

*ahem* will shaddup now, got my 2 cents wortt hehe.

[khogg]

Um wow, I just checked the "edited" part of the review section and that really sucks. And you wonder why people don't post reviews anymore? The all new review judging clique is in the house and they will decide who gets to reveiw and who doesn't. You cut so much out there's almost nothing left. That really sucks, I can't say that enough. You didn't just cut the nasty off topic ones, you cut almost everything out. Holy shit the Astral Projection reviews sections are down to like 10 reviews. Boooo....

 

I understand registering to place a review, but all that editing is shit.

[Guest bugbread]

Khogg:

 

Like I've said about a bijillion friggin times, I cut out:

• Flames

• Off topic (not about the album)

• Posts that consisted of merely "good" or "great" or "I love it" and no description of what the album sounds like, etc.

 

Unfortunately, the only stuff people wrote on the AP reviews was "Great!"

"1000/10!"

"Yes!"

 

If an author put a single adjective in their review, I kept it. A. SINGLE. ADJECTIVE! If the entire review was "Great melodic trance!", the review stayed. If the entire review was "Happy goa!" it stayed. I was as disappointed as you were by the Astral Projection section. 5000 reviews and no one can find even ONE word to describe the music?

 

Heck, even if it didn't have adjectives, if it said ANYTHING about the music, it stayed. "Sounds good in the morning". "Makes the crowd move". ANYTHING.

 

If you feel disappointed with the Astral Projection editting, feel disenchanted that 5000 (ok, I'm exaggerating, but what-have-you) people with "expanded minds" couldn't find a SINGLE DAMN THING to say about the album besides that they liked it. C'mon, "I love AP!!!!!!!" is not a review of an album. It isn't even a review of a band. "I love APs melodic trance" is all it took to stay, and yet there barely any reviews even that "deep".

 

Here's an example of what was kept:

 

- Best album of AP : every tracks are excellent, melodies are wonderful. Very uplifting music.

 

It said "uplifting". That's all it took to stay. That means that EVERY REVIEW THAT WAS DELETED WAS LESS DETAILED THAN THIS, WHICH ONLY SAYS ONE THING!

 

As for "who gets to review and who doesn't": if you honestly think that I took the time to read the name of each reviewer and decide if I liked or remembered them, you have no concept of time. I have no idea who I kept and who got editted for writing non-reviews.

 

I understand that you dislike the concept of editting and would prefer a completely anarchic review section filled with cooking recipes and arguments about Israel and artists sexual preferences. You've made that clear since BEFORE the editting even started. But limiting the review section to reviews does not seem a draconian measure.

 

And, for reference, I'm not the only editor, though I seem to be the only one stupid enough to admit that they're editing and thereby get the brunt of accolades and catcalls.

 

As for "and you wonder why people don't post reviews anymore?" Please. That post has been there since about 1 week after the login process started. Which was BEFORE ANY REVIEWS GOT EDITED. That's right, people didn't slow down on reviews because of the editing, that all happened before the first backspace key was pressed.

 

Ok...sorry...rant done.

[Guest bugbread]

Oh, and just to forstall some possible misconceptions: there are some reviews with, for some reason, no review in them. That has nothing to do with me (or I presume the other editors). They were blank before we even looked at them. (By the way, Children, why ARE they blank?)

 

Also, if there are any reviews that hae gone completely missing (not even a link), that seems to have been a problem when Mars redid the link page. The reviews are still there, but the link is gone. I know Ubar Tmar's Macrometasomakosmos seems to have pseudo-disappeared like that, so I suspect a few others have as well.

[Guest Ibotenic]

Hey bubread, you twisted Absolum: Wild track 1.. it says:

Bol?EBol?E/b>

[Guest bugbread]

Whoops! Good call, Ibotenic, my html software saved it in ANSII, not Unicode, so the accented "e" threw it. I just mailed Children the corrected version.

[Guest Mike D]

Yo Bugbread,

 

I noticed some of the years for albums and compilations are way, just an exampl:

 

Mechanism compilation (Spiral Trax International) says 2001 on the cover, not 2002.

 

Can we please have any other inputs on messed up dates coz it makes it hard to find reviews sometimes.

[Guest bugbread]

Hmm...You're gonna have to check with the review author or Mars or Children about stuff like that. All I fiddled with was the review responses (all the reviews except for the first). Keep in mind, I'm just paring out old stuff, I'm not the "review manager" or anything like that.

 

Still, if you send Children or Mars an e-mail with the info, they'll probably change it for you. I had to do that when I misspelled the name of the album (!!!) on the only review I've written so far.

 

-bug

Okay, so I wrote Macrosomametacosmos instead of Macrometasomacosmos. It's a long name

[khogg]

Well Bugbread, it took me a while to reply, but here goes. I'll start by saying that I admit my post was a little harsh. I apologize for that, and I'm sure you mean well; furthermore, I can't really do anything about this, but I stand by the underlying point I made in my first post. I personally don't like to see all that editing.

 

You said (I'm assuming to me): " I understand that you dislike the concept of editting and would prefer a completely anarchic review section filled with cooking recipes and arguments about Israel and artists sexual preferences. You've made that clear since BEFORE the editting even started." I'm not sure what you're referring to there? But it's not important.

 

Bottom line is: I don't like to see "cooking recipes and arguments about Israel and artists sexual preferences" any more than you do. Nor is it nice to see flame wars or people turning the reviews into a forum, but I think anything else goes (or should go).

 

You seem to have this idea that there is some standard of review that is required from a truely "open/expanded minded" listener, and according to your standards, that must include adjectives. According to you, it's not enough to say "10/10" or "yes" or whatever. But that's my point. Those are your standards, and I personally liked to read everything in a reveiw and get a feel about the album from everything there, including the overall number of positive versus negative comments, even if some of them were simple. Hell, just the fact that a CD had 5000 comments made it at least worth checking out!! Furthermore, the freedom that accompied the site's review sections before (that was admittedly and unfortunately abused by some) also led to a just plain cooler feeling about the reviews (in my opinion). Now you read, and it seems all that is left is mostly (not always, just mostly) a few long long book reviews that sometimes border on pretentious and tedious. Well fine, that's the way it's gonna be, but I don't have to like it, and I'm sure lots of others don't like it either. When I say that, I'm not saying it to start a fight. I'm just saying to state a fact. We'll have to agree to disagree on this one; I think.

[Guest bugbread]

Khogg:

 

Excellent reply. In fact, I agree. I realized I was being overzealous at the start, so I started leaving more and more in. The deal about removing reviews that only said "yes" stemmed from previous discussions in the phorum about taking out "non-review" type reviews (i.e. statements of like and dislike, versus description). However, after the AP section I started thinking about review "weight". I.E. if an album had 100 reviews, all by different people, and all they said was "YES!!!", then even though little had actually been said, the quantity had made up for the quality. So in the later B section there are more short short reviews. Unfortunately, I don't have the originals of the "A" section. I presume Mars or Children have them backed up, so if enough people agree, I think it would be fair to get the reviews reinstated and reeditted to take out only flames and off-topic stuff.

 

So, basically, I apologize, and put it to the phorum:

 

Should the "A" reviews be redone? I will leave the decision to Mars or Children, but please let them know either way. For reference, "put them exactly like they were, there should be no editting" will probably be ignored, as many people here, but most importantly Mars and Children, think some degree of editting is necessary. However, if they say the editting was too drastic, I will reedit (or someone else can, if you don't trust me for the rework) and keep a much tighter rein on myself.

 

So, folks, get convincing (not arguing).

 

And, khogg, sorry about the "I understand that you...would prefer a completely anarchic review section". That was quite a bit over the top.

[Guest space^madness]

i agree with khogg here.

 

"Hell, just the fact that a CD had 5000 comments made it at least worth checking out!! Furthermore, the freedom that accompied the site's review sections before (that was admittedly and unfortunately abused by some) also led to a just plain cooler feeling about the reviews (in my opinion). Now you read, and it seems all that is left is mostly (not always, just mostly) a few long long book reviews that sometimes border on pretentious and tedious."

 

yup, the review-section truly sucks and swallows right now. i don't like it.

why can't we just bring it back to the good old system? better to have something to read than nothing.