Okay guys, I'm normally a guy who accepts criticism on what I do, and I've received PLENTY of rude comments toward me on many different aspects (including the ambitions of what I want to do with my life), but I'm tired of the following.

I have been submitting reviews to bands that I like, such as Edguy, Avantasia, Circus Maximus, etc. While I accept most of the reasons why my reviews are being rejected, what I DON'T like is how rude the mods who accept or reject them are being toward me. My first review for Edguy's The Savage Poetry was rejected because of being a track-by-track style, which I didn't pick up on my first time reviewing the submission rules. So fine - that one, I definitely understand, and the mod was being a legitimate critic, and had no rude comments in their reasoning.

My second review, which was for Edguy's Age of the Joker, was rejected for a similar reason, and the mod still didn't put any rude comments in. Once again - this was fine, and I might just end up rewriting this one and the one before.

Now, when I created my third review, it was for the Avantasia Lost in Space single (not the EP). The same mod that rejected my past two reviews started becoming rude. I gave the single a full 100% score for two reasons: one, I felt that the single did NOT deserve a low rating, AND, I wanted to counter the single 0% score of the current review that was by a reviewer that I've noticed probably has some sort of grudge against Tobias. But here's the exact quote of the mod's rejection notice.



Criticism is very welcome - it helps me improve. Yet, it did NOT have to be done so rudely. I mean, really. Calling me childish for giving an album a good review? Really? And if they're too lazy and stupid to check, maybe they shouldn't be managing reviews. And not approving the review because of a score I give it? Giving a single a full 100% makes me not an adult? It makes me dishonest? I think NOT.

Okay, so for the last review that I've done so far (and probably the last review I'll ever do here due to the rudeness of this mod who keeps rejecting my reviews). I reviewed Circus Maximus' new album, Nine. I improved upon my whole "track-by-track" review basis (which I think is a dumb rule in the first place, but we won't go into that), and made it more like the other reviews on this site. Yet it still gets rejected, and I get an earful of insults. Again. Here's the quote of the message:



The first part - about removing the first line about me actually being the first reviewer for an album (which is exciting for me as I'm new to reviewing albums), I understand where the reasoning came from. But rejecting a review because of smileys? That is STUPIDITY. And even if it had to be rejected because of such a stupid reason, there was no need to say "this is not a facebook post on you last night's puking on the neighbor's kittens or an illuminated tweet on the fact that cows have huge boobs". No need at all. Also, "it's better to have none, IMO". Isn't the accepting/rejecting of reviews supposed to be un-biased? Isn't it supposed to be based upon the guidelines?

Anyways, the point of this post is... I REALLY don't want to leave the site, as I like the sources available such as lyrics, lineups, all of the known albums and releases, etc. I also get enjoyment from reading different reviews, especially a certain member who reviews Edguy/Avantasia stuff (at least the newer stuff) really negatively like they have some sort of grudge against Tobias. It's funny! But still. I am NOT going to deal with crap like this. I get enough of this from naysayers who claim my plans for life won't turn out or anything like that. I understand, it's life, and that I'll deal with it no matter what. However, whenever I see something that is wrong, I've recently not been sitting around doing nothing and letting the wrongs continue. I've had enough of wrongs in this world, and I'm going to do everything I can to STOP those wrongs from existing. In this case, it's rudeness on behalf of an admin/mod who approves or rejects reviews. Like I said - criticism is fine, as it helps me improve upon what I've been doing incorrectly; but I don't like the fact that the criticism just can't be passed without rudeness it seems...

If it continues, I'll unfortunately be leaving the site. If it can be changed, I'll be staying. I don't want to leave, but then again, I don't want to put up with the crap that I CAN avoid. I'm frustrated and hurt at the same time - I legitimately have had enough with the garbage in this world, and the stuff going on now is NOT helping. :\

I don't think you know what's an insult. The feedback was nothing but good, the last one you quoted said what to fixed in a funny way.



Smileys are the opposite of formality... Get a thicker skin and improve your reviews if you want them to be approved. Without any rudeness, I don't think anyone cares if you leave the site...

It wasn't so much of an insult as it was rude. Rudeness is just wrong.

There's no need to be UBER formal on these reviews. And besides - I've seen reviews which DEFINITELY don't follow guidelines, and they were approved, yet my article for Circus Maximus' Nine wasn't approved because of smileys. One guy wrote a letter to Tobias Sammet in a "review", and it was approved. Great way to stay consistent with the site's own rules... -_-

I just, recently in life, have been targeted and attacked so many times. I don't think all of it is intentional, but it seems that my optimism and wish to be in between formality and fun is always causing issues. I don't get it, really.

Hey buddy,

I can't speak for the other mods who evaluate reviews (as I'm not the one who takes care of that part of the site), but I can honestly tell you that processing reviews can be a time-consuming and gruelling job. It's very, very difficult to maintain a polite and formal demeanour when you get all sorts of idiots chucking illiterate, bombastic and/or Engrish-ridden shit at you that you're forced to read through.

I'm sure the mods didn't mean any offence to you personally. As for smileys in accepted reviews, well... any instance of those is obviously an oversight on the moderator's behalf, and the authors should be asked to reformat their reviews appropriately.

FINALLY someone who isn't rude. I was beginning to lose hope in the staff of this site.

I understand it's a long and hard process, and I sympathise with them as I own many forums, I'm a staff member on many more, and I work for a forum hosting business. I know how dumb people can be. But I still think that if a person is going to take on the position of a moderator, they also have the responsibility to act fairly, and to be unbiased and impersonal in their judgements. I have no problem with voicing opinions, as I do it often on the sites I moderate. I just don't delete posts, issue warnings, ban users based upon opinion however. I try to be as fair as possible, taking into account multiple sources.

It just seems that this specific mod was being unfair and using their opinions to base their judgement. :\ Thank you, however, for being understanding.

Yo,

Let's be open and honest here, and call Uncle Nappy out as the bastard who did this. Damn him!

While we can't help you with your life situation generally, I can at least explain the reasoning behind the rejection messages, and maybe ask for your forgiveness. I don't believe the latter is necessary, TBH, but let's see how this turns out.

The first rejection is a for a good and valid reason, and I believe it's at least been in the rules in the past. Too busy to check that now, the 5 years old is eating her breakfast and needs to be taken to daycare in 5 minutes. In any case, any reviews I check that seem like they've only been submitted to influence the average rating and/or have inflated or really deflated scores will get rejected. Working for years on the Opeth reviews has taught me that much. Every review needs to be able to stand on it own, and the score must be based on the review text, and I personally consider attempts at influencing the average rating a big no-no. You even expressly stated in the beginning of the review that it is the purpose of the 100% (?) rating to tweak the average. Which is not nice. While I don't really believe in the slippery slope argument, it's easy to see the "benefits" of using the extremes, 0...5% and 95...100%, on bands people either want to "support" (= fanboy, as in this case) or downplay (= be butthurt/participate in The Grand Tr00ness Olympics/jump a bandwagon). I stand by that ruling, and unless the owners of this site wish to revoke it, I believe the others most agree. Would you be kind enough to post the first paragraph in its unedited form? That way we could take a good public look at it, the way you intended it to be seen. Or maybe we could ask Morrigan to knife the database and show us the sentences?

The second rejection is perhaps a bit badly formatted and does not take into account the recipient's personal skin thickness, but that's exactly the feeling I get when someone sprinkles a shortish review with 5 or so smileys: it seems like the reviewer himself does not take the review seriously, and it indeed looks like a "teh funnay" posting of FB or Twitter. Also, the first sentence, IIRC was something along the lines of "yay, an unreviewed album, finally, I get to review something " or sumthin'. Which, once again, has nothing to do with the review, really, and does not, or should not, interest the potential readers. Had it not been for the prodigious amount of smileys and the trouble associated with them, and the fact that I rather reject such things with an explanation to avoid the same situation with the same reviewer in the future, I would have edited out the first sentence and approved it. In this case, I believe the cumulative edits warranted a rejection. Sorry for using crappy comedy in it, I'll either wear silk gloves or use the standard replies next time. Which essentially means "didn't follow guidelines, rewrite", which would lead to you posting questions about the reasons, but that's another matter...

In the second case, at least, I believe you edited out the next sentence of the rejection, which was "clean and resubmit", if I recall correctly. Remove a needless sentence that only distracts the readers, and kill a few smileys, and your review is acceptable... now, that does not sound quite that bad, does it? It's wonderful what a bit of clipping can do to a message.

And finally: the processing of reviews is, obviously, the most subjective part of moderating this site, and does unavoidably involve judging other people's opinions and personal ways of voicing them. I have received surprisingly few complaints over the years, especially considering the thousands of reviews I've processed, using the same kind of language as on your works. Reviewing is personal business, and just as the artists being reviewed, the reviewer will unfortunately be ready to get some negative feedback occasionally. I try to offer constructive feedback in my rejections, and if you read those with a different mindset, you'll no doubt notice that I also gave you reasons for the rejections, with the idea that you could, if you wish, edit them and get the approved.

Anyway, resubmit the works in the way the rejections suggest, and I believe they will be approved. As I seem to have offended you, I'll leave judging them to others, which I feel is a matter of due process in these cases, to make sure your rights get the respect they deserve. Lucifer himself knows there's enough to do in the queue even without risking insulting you.

Funny... the posting I did doesn't appear to change the last poster in the thread... Here's another post to fix that...

I didn't state that you were being completely unreasonable, and I have no problem with people joking around. It's just that sometimes it's hard to understand when a person really IS joking around. I believe that smileys help show emotion, as it's really hard to express your thoughts in words. I mean, that's a common forum-known issue. It's hard to communicate in text without smileys.

I even commended you for giving me constructive criticism, but the rudeness and non-constructive criticism was unnecessary in my opinion. :-\

As a rule thumb, never take Napero very seriously. Unless he bans you, which didn't happen. Obviously.

I believe that smileys are today's linguistic crutches, and anyone with a pair of healthy verbal legs can do much better without them. Unfortunately, a discussion on the net requires two sides with functional locomotion to work smoothly.

I am the site owner, and I approve of this message. Napero was correct in rejecting such a review, he was correct in calling the score-rigging attitude childish, and I will certainly not "revoke" his ruling.

And OP, learn to Internet. The messages were not rude unless you cannot stand any form of mild humour and have preciously thin skin. They were constructive and completely correct. You know what's rude? Saying "this pure STUPIDITY" (and actually, no, it wasn't, one single occasional smiley might not ruin an otherwise good review, but a review peppered with them is insta-rejection, this isn't a formal magazine but it's not a Youtube comment either y'know).

Lastly:
Sigh... How do you suggest any moderator stays 100% objective when making what is obviously a judgment call? Of course they use the rules as a baseline, and they must be unbiased as far as the rules can go (e.g. no favouritism or negative biase towards a user, an album/band/genre reviewed, etc.), but at the end of the day, it's still a subjective process and the mod will decide, in his/her opinion, that the review does not meet the site's criteria for acceptance.

The fact that you cannot grasp something so obvious, that you can't figure out why track-by-track reviews are frowned upon, and that you think Napero's curt but polite rejection notices are "rude", leads me to believe that you probably shouldn't be reviewing in the first place. You'll only get hurt. But, hey, that's just my opinion... good luck. *shrugs*