| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| benj clews |
Posted - 02/25/2007 : 23:08:43
Okay, this one hopefully shouldn't be such a tough sell...
For many years there has been debate that the Generic rule is too rigid. A lot of great reviews are being declined on the grounds they could apply to many other films and so instead of having a few repeats, these reviews instead never see the light of day. I've finally come around to feeling I should loosen the rules to allow for such reviews.
Reviews that are clearly referencing a film or element of it (regardless of if they may fit a large number of other films) will now be more readily considered for acceptance. The hard rule that reviews of the type 'Boy, girl meet, marry' are declined will still stand however- there must be at least some effort to tie the review to the film beyond bog standard film elements.
The downside, of course, will be that review filching potential will be increased considerably, but I hope everyone here can be trusted to not go that route just for the sake of their stats.
The upside, I hope, will be more creative review ideas and a less formiddable wall of rejection for newbies to the site.
Obviously, the rollout of this change of stance will not be as immediate as the previous announcement since the management of it is not code-based but means a considerable thought shift by the MERPs so please bear with us as the new ruling settles in.
I expect there will be questions and concerns and I'll try and answer as best I can  |
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| ragingfluff |
Posted - 04/09/2007 : 18:47:19
I'm resubmitting every review right now!!! |
| MM0rkeleb |
Posted - 04/07/2007 : 17:57:38
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
May I suggest that people post in this thread any approvals that they previously would have thought likely to be declined as too 'generic'? That may help us to gauge what the new parameters are.
Don't know if anyone else wants to do this, but ...
I recently resubmitted 'Pall in the Family' for The Addams Family, which I'm pretty sure was originally declined as generic. It's been accepted, which is good because it allows me to delete my other review for the same movie, which was a stinker. |
| TitanPa |
Posted - 03/24/2007 : 14:51:55
Since this rule has been in effect, I went back and resubbed. Now my once "Generic" reviews are now gathering votes. |
| TitanPa |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 19:34:57
Great.......now I gotta go through my declined list...which is over 100. Can there be more than 20 resubmitted reviews???
|
| Shiv |
Posted - 03/10/2007 : 01:56:36
quote:
Originally posted by turrell
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
I might vote for that same review if it was added to a zombie movie where the zombies attack.
Good luck finding a movie where zombies attack - like that's gonna happen.
Try this |
| Yukon |
Posted - 03/08/2007 : 02:19:25
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
May I suggest that people post in this thread any approvals that they previously would have thought likely to be declined as too 'generic'? That may help us to gauge what the new parameters are.
How about "Sum of all fears" for The Number 23. I just had it declined recently (before the generic rule change) for being too generic.
I thought it perfectly describe the film, although, yes, it is generic.
I tried to resubmit it but it was autometically ejected.
Does it pass now? Benji? Any body? |
| turrell |
Posted - 03/07/2007 : 17:50:52
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
I might vote for that same review if it was added to a zombie movie where the zombies attack.
Good luck finding a movie where zombies attack - like that's gonna happen. |
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 03/07/2007 : 06:50:49
quote:
Originally posted by Shiv
What about 'Icy Dead People' for Titanic - this has been discussed before I think? I just saw 'Feisty Dead People' for Death Becomes Her, which I think is even more generic than the Titanic one - although I'm thinking of zombie movies and people might argue zombies aren't particularly fiesty
I wouldn't vote for "Feisty Dead People" for Death Becomes Her because they aren't dead. The whole point of the movie is that they are given eternal life and cannot die. But I might vote for that same review if it was added to a zombie movie where the zombies attack.
|
| Shiv |
Posted - 03/06/2007 : 22:26:12
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
May I suggest that people post in this thread any approvals that they previously would have thought likely to be declined as too 'generic'? That may help us to gauge what the new parameters are.
What about 'Icy Dead People' for Titanic - this has been discussed before I think? I just saw 'Feisty Dead People' for Death Becomes Her, which I think is even more generic than the Titanic one - although I'm thinking of zombie movies and people might argue zombies aren't particularly fiesty |
| Sal[Au]pian |
Posted - 03/04/2007 : 18:38:20
May I suggest that people post in this thread any approvals that they previously would have thought likely to be declined as too 'generic'? That may help us to gauge what the new parameters are. |
| Shiv |
Posted - 03/04/2007 : 00:39:19
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
Just remember to try to show them a little more respect than you have shown me.
I feel the same way. There are ways to tell people they have it wrong without making a person feel they shouldn't have posted in the first place. I was offended by the 'end of' after your correction of my Citizen Kane posting. Even with the smiley it suggested to me I should just shut up, instead of giving me the chance to clarify what I was posting about. Starting a post with 'Eh, no Shiv' rather than 'what do you mean by quality controllers' is another example. |
| Whippersnapper. |
Posted - 03/04/2007 : 00:31:31
quote:
Originally posted by Shiv
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
quote:
Originally posted by Shiv
quote:
Originally posted by Rovark
Thoroughly approve.
I think this gets back to the original ideal of this site which is to review or in some way comment about a film. In four words.
Not just think of a pun and slap it on the nearest appropriate film, which it then inhabits regardless, but actually watch a film and try to say something about it in a paltry four words. Yes this means there will some reviews that may be applicable to other films being allowed, but let's face it "Brat Out Of Hell" applies to several films, - it's particularly appropriate to the one I first used it on, but nevertheless, it fits others, so why should it be removed from them. It's a great review. ESPECIALLY MY ONE
I just hope this will also allow some greater personal commenting on films.
Yay for 'Brat Out of Hell' not being a grey area anymore!
I don't think the quality of the reviews will go down as the MERPs and Benj are quality controllers too. I also think the 20 rule will make people be more imaginative.
EH, no Shiv, the MERPs and Benj are in no way "quality" controllers. They check that the review meets the requirements, and if it does it is published, regardless of whether they think its a gem or a waste of space. It is not their job.
WE are the quality controllers, for our own reviews.
I'd appreciate it if you would just ignore any post of mine that gets up your nose. Thank-you
Yes, if any do I will ignore them.
But for now, please read my post without thinking there is any emotion in it. There isn't. I am simply explaining to you that you are wrong in your assumption that the MERPs are a quality control system. They are not. They do not care whether a review is good or bad, only whether it meets the criteria.
My post was simply trying to help you by correcting a mistaken assumption you made, and frankly I could do without the attitude, OK?
If by quality control you meant "giving a reason" then why didn't you say so, because its hardly the most obvious use of the English language is it? Sometimes reasons are given, sometimes they aren't. If it isn't clear to you why it has been refused then you can always post and people will try to help you.
Just remember to try to show them a little more respect than you have shown me.
|
| Shiv |
Posted - 03/04/2007 : 00:19:46
Unless I am being treated differently to everyone else, I have noticed that the MERPs will post a blank reason (no reason) when they are not sure about a review - not even 'don't understand'.
In several cases an explanation has helped get the review accepted (details of a film that may have been forgotten etc). But, I have had many such reviews that I have not been able to 'make better' so have ended up deleting them. This is what I meant by 'quality control'. |
| Shiv |
Posted - 03/04/2007 : 00:13:39
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
quote:
Originally posted by Shiv
quote:
Originally posted by Rovark
Thoroughly approve.
I think this gets back to the original ideal of this site which is to review or in some way comment about a film. In four words.
Not just think of a pun and slap it on the nearest appropriate film, which it then inhabits regardless, but actually watch a film and try to say something about it in a paltry four words. Yes this means there will some reviews that may be applicable to other films being allowed, but let's face it "Brat Out Of Hell" applies to several films, - it's particularly appropriate to the one I first used it on, but nevertheless, it fits others, so why should it be removed from them. It's a great review. ESPECIALLY MY ONE
I just hope this will also allow some greater personal commenting on films.
Yay for 'Brat Out of Hell' not being a grey area anymore!
I don't think the quality of the reviews will go down as the MERPs and Benj are quality controllers too. I also think the 20 rule will make people be more imaginative.
EH, no Shiv, the MERPs and Benj are in no way "quality" controllers. They check that the review meets the requirements, and if it does it is published, regardless of whether they think its a gem or a waste of space. It is not their job.
WE are the quality controllers, for our own reviews.
I'd appreciate it if you would just ignore any post of mine that gets up your nose. Thank-you |
| Whippersnapper. |
Posted - 03/03/2007 : 18:54:20
quote:
Originally posted by Shiv
quote:
Originally posted by Rovark
Thoroughly approve.
I think this gets back to the original ideal of this site which is to review or in some way comment about a film. In four words.
Not just think of a pun and slap it on the nearest appropriate film, which it then inhabits regardless, but actually watch a film and try to say something about it in a paltry four words. Yes this means there will some reviews that may be applicable to other films being allowed, but let's face it "Brat Out Of Hell" applies to several films, - it's particularly appropriate to the one I first used it on, but nevertheless, it fits others, so why should it be removed from them. It's a great review. ESPECIALLY MY ONE
I just hope this will also allow some greater personal commenting on films.
Yay for 'Brat Out of Hell' not being a grey area anymore!
I don't think the quality of the reviews will go down as the MERPs and Benj are quality controllers too. I also think the 20 rule will make people be more imaginative.
EH, no Shiv, the MERPs and Benj are in no way "quality" controllers. They check that the review meets the requirements, and if it does it is published, regardless of whether they think its a gem or a waste of space. It is not their job.
WE are the quality controllers, for our own reviews.
|
|
|
