Gonna try go for 50 i think - depending on what i have planned in the finalised time-slot. I'd like to see this one exceed the total number from last time - at least.

If it's the week that Sean proposed I'm definitely up for that, if it's the last week of May I don't think I'll be able to participate much.. kinda like my vacation week almost. Either way I'll hopefully be able to put a solid showing as I do every challenge with a minimum of 10 reviews.

Count me in, I'll put in a few as usual. Not many though. Sean's schedule sounds very good for me.

I kinda think we should stick with tradition and keep it in May.. Makes no major difference to me, though.

even though the consensus seems to prefer the June dates?

I agree with this, but then again I'm not a major contributer anyway so...

Surgery's June 14th, anything before that is fine with me.

June would suit me better, but since we have eager, passionate new blood at the controls (=derigin, let's use him before he burns out...), it's hardly up to me to make the call.


What are they going to remove, if you don't mind me asking?

The doctor iiiissss... a butcher!

I'm all set up for the stats now.

Maybe could we state the definitive date on Sunday evening? So that more people could read the thread during the weekend and give their disponibilities, though June seems to be the majority so far.

sisters_of_merciless, will your program just be counting the virgins or is it possible to make a fully automated list (I mean, like our good ol' traditionnal List, with the name of the albums and reviewers)? The list is like a monument to the M-A reviewers and I think removing it for sticking the mere number of reviews instead would remove some of the "epic" dimension of the Challenge... but perhaps am I the only one.

But if you could generate the list automatically... well in this case I might become unemployed but I wouldn't really complain (only a bit... for fun) as it would save me time to write reviews instead! I'll just have to have my custom title changed to Former Tabulator of Torn Hymens

Are you a Sisters of Mercy fan, btw?

Oh, believe me, I'll drown you in stats. Per reviewer, per artist, per format, per rating, per how many other reviewed things the artist had, per how many other reviews the artist already had, per how many other reviews the reviewer already had, per artist average rating, per reviewer average rating...

See www.needlebase.com if you're curious about the software I work on. We're taking beta signups, even!

^ could you provide the stats for this thing, too:
http://www.metal-archives.com/board/vie ... hp?t=60693
Would be easier than doing it all by hand. All I would need to do is fill the excel sheel and do the calculations.

I don't currently have release-years, but I'm talking to the Dark Powers about that (among other things) at this very moment.

I may, or may not compete. I've lost pretty much all my motivation for reviewing this year and any review I do write is something I force myself to do out of habit. I'll see how I feel closer to the time. Hopefully, the final dates will be in June, giving me more time to work up an appetite for this contest. Having said that, the World Cup starts in June and I've been waiting for that for 4 years, so there's no way I'm missing it.

Aye, the June dates Sean16 set work better for me. Not gonna burrrn out...

I would say it's safe to go ahead with the June week, Sean. You have our support.

Edited the title.

I'm having my big toe nail clipped on one of those days, can we move this thing to july of next year?

I've just blacklisted MystifyXD. He just stole one of my planned unrevieweds.

Great, I'll have plenty of time (outside work).

Can't wait, i need to go compile a new "to review" list as my old one is all unorganised and out of date. I hope we get some new contributors along this time, someone/people should put in their signature to attract some more competitors, it'd be great if we got close to the score from this time last year.

I have a few in mind right now but I'm not sure if I'll be able to write them all.

I compiled a list for myself of albums I own that have no reviews, which is about a couple dozen, so I'll probably contribute to this contest using those albums. I got a couple grab bags from CMdistro, so that gave me a number of virgin albums.

Btw, the week proposed is actually fantastic for me personally, most finals are over by the end of May, so that week would work well for a lot of college students, at least in the United States.

Every single time these things roll around, I convince myself that I am going to contribute and then never do. I'd like to, but I can never summon the will to write my debut review. However, this time around, I feel more comfortable with my metal listening experience and might find myself putting something together. You all just have to promise not to laugh at my writing abilities...

I'm sure you can do it. Besides, the challenge is a great place to start and if your review(s) really do end up causing you shame, there will have been so many submitted during that week that nobody will notice.

Also, a question on the handling of splits within the challenge: there are many split albums which are only partially reviewed (i.e., a reviewer submitted his review on one of the band's pages but was too stupid to do so on the other(s)). Example: The True Kings of Norway split, 5 bands and only the entry on Immortal's page has a review. In such cases, are the splits to be considered valid unreviewed releases (each counting as 1 release within the challenge, of course) or invalid because previously reviewed?

Well, since the guy still reviewed the split as a whole, I doubt it's eligible. The guy just forgot to copy his review for all the pages.

Chronic unemployment?

Surgically?

The Germans are brilliant. Scary as hell, but brilliant.

Yes but such partially reviewed splits can cause annoyance when cruising through bands' discographies to see what's unreviewed (one has to check the split on each band's side). There should:
A) be a rule in this regard within the Challenge
B) be some method of unification of all previously partially done reviews concerning splits (I guess this should go in S&C).

And what about the splits where only one part of the split is reviewed. For example Bestial Devastation/Seculo XX has just 1 review on the Overdose side and 10 on Sepultura's side. Most people have reviewd it as an EP. Sure this split is useless for the challenge but what about those which have no reviews for one side and no mention of the unreviewed side on the reviewed band's page??

Fiar game I hope, I have a couple like that in my list.

I'm going to write one this time, I swear.

I should be able to join in the de-flowering festivities, but that's the week just after Uni ends so I might be a bit drained. Still, see if I can get my usual few out for the Challenge.

A) Splits that have already been reviewed are no virgins, doesn't matter how many parts the reviewer added the review to, a reviewed release is no virgin. Period.
B) Yes, S&C for sure, wanted to suggest fixing the problem for a while myself, reviews for splits should automatically go to every instance of the split, the same way splits appear on the page of each artist when you add them. Shouldn't be too big a deal to implement.

In my opinion reviews which only review one half of a release should be deleted/rejected. For any other form of release it's against the rules to review only half a record, I don't see why splits should be treated any differently. Those ten Sepultura reviews you mentioned should be deleted to keep the rules on reviewing full releases consistent.

No, because Bestial Devastation has been released without the Overdose side quite a bit. I have it as a part of Morbid Visions.

So do I, but it isn't listed on the Archives as a release by itself, only as a split. That the tracks have appeared elsewhere doesn't change that. You can't go and rationalize reviewing only half a listed release by saying you have the tracks on some other release, if you do you should review that other release rather than submitting an incomplete review. How about I submit a review for Cannibal Corpse's "Tomb of the Mutilated" reviewing only the first song because I have it on the "Hammer Smashed Face" EP?

It was also released as an EP completely separately from anything else. As long as the reviewer makes clear exactly what official release version they're reviewing, there's no problem. You know the Cannibal Corpse example isn't applicable.

If it was released seperately as an EP it should have its own entry.

No, it shouldn't.

Yes it should. A split and an EP are two entirely different things. It's not the same thing just with a different tracklist, that one band doesn't appear on it is a major difference, far far more significant than the reissues with new artwork and title that are allowed on the site. It's not like they just cut out some fluff such as live tracks and an outro, at least Overdose would probably think that it isn't comparable to that.

I stand by what I originally said. Reviewing half a release is clearly against the rules, no matter what version you say you are reviewing, the minimum is for any review to cover all material that is listed on the release page, no less.