| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
SixFourian 
"Four ever European"
The European Union
|
 Posted - 10/06/2009 : 03:44:45
|
The large number of blank rejections has always been quite frustrating. Worse is when one resubmits, proving the rejection reason wrong, and just gets a blank one in its place. However, worst of all is when one can think of no decline reason, resubmits asking for the reason, and gets another silent rejection.
I realise that typing a reason uses up a few seconds. Please could my reviews be processed more slowly so that I can get reasons without taking up any additional MERP time?
(N.B. I often have to word the question very abruptly, i.e. "Why reject this?", as there are too few characters available alongside whatever explanation I had already added. However, I'm sure that the MERPs appreciate that the situation is not at all equal, that while they can see the history of the review and write as long a comment as they like, we cannot.) |
|
|
demonic
"Cinemaniac"
United Kingdom
|
Posted - 10/06/2009 : 18:09:02
|
| I agree. I recently had a review that I thought pretty decent for the new Sherlock Holmes declined on a second pass without explanation for the second time after trying it again with a minor variation. I'd like an idea of where I'm going wrong with it, because it makes sense to me and think would do well. |
 |
|
|
SixFourian
"Four ever European"
The European Union
|
Posted - 28/06/2009 : 20:10:17
|
| I have just been into my rejected list and seen a lot of <Click for details>es. I haven't read the reasons yet, as I find that frustrating when I don't have space to resubmit if apt, but I am grateful that there seems to have been a response to my request here (or a coincident improvement, of course). |
|
|
|
SixFourian
"Four ever European"
The European Union
|
Posted - 12/07/2009 : 19:14:21
|
I have just looked at my rejected list for the first time since posting the above. Unfortunately, it is back to being almost all blank declines.
I must emphasise that there are certainly cases where I see the reviews as being quite borderline despite not contravening any of the standard reasons, for example by being too oblique. I don't really mind blank rejections in those instances (although the ideal would still be to have specific details). In objecting to blanks here, I really am talking about cases where the reviews really seem straightforwardly acceptable to me (intrinsically and/or in comparison to reviews already approved for the film). Some of them are also for previously declined reviews which I had resubmitted with requests for reasons.
Anyway, nothing can be done about the blanks received so far. I'm posting again just in order to request that those I resubmit (i.e. the ones I consider especially suitable out of the many I have to choose from) receive an explanation if they really have to be rejected again. Thanks. |
Edited by - SixFourian on 12/07/2009 19:25:07 |
|
|
|
SixFourian
"Four ever European"
The European Union
|
Posted - 02/08/2009 : 23:53:40
|
| I've now had at least two declines consisting solely of "Bad." I do not consider that up to scratch at all. |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper. 
"A fourword thinking guy."
United Kingdom
|
Posted - 03/08/2009 : 01:18:15
|
Gotta love those MERPs!
|
|
|
|
demonic
"Cinemaniac"
United Kingdom
|
Posted - 03/08/2009 : 11:55:21
|
| Sounds like they are going through a Michael Jackson memorial tribute phase. Next they be saying your reviews are 'off the wall'. |
|
|
|
SixFourian
"Four ever European"
The European Union
|
Posted - 13/09/2009 : 22:39:55
|
I'm still getting blank rejections of reviews that I have specially resubmitted asking why they were rejected the first time. Given the quota, I really feel that we deserve reasons when we resubmit and explicitly ask for them.
If the MERPs cannot think of reasons, then maybe they should consider the possibility that the reviews are valid... |
|
|
|
SixFourian
"Four ever European"
The European Union
|
Posted - 04/11/2009 : 23:56:09
|
I'm reiterating my request for REJECTION REASONS PLEASE. Benj and/or the MERPs have been racing through the submissions but this means that I have had loads of blank rejections, many of which are totally inexplicable.
I'm especially annoyed that my review was blankly rejected for which demonic has had a later duplicate approved. I wrote "Older than..." in the box, and reported it -- what more am I supposed to do?! |
|
|
|
SixFourian
"Four ever European"
The European Union
|
Posted - 02/08/2010 : 10:34:24
|
| I've now tallied up my rejections and the results are as follows: 279 More than 30 submissions (so these don't really count other than in that I would have been able to submit them properly if most of my reviews didn't have to go through twice; N.B. they include many that were over 20 submissions, so it would be better if the wording were just Over quota of submissions and then the explanation went into more detail); 41 Similar to another submission (mostly similar to my own reviews); 22 Not a film (some of which films have since been re-added without the reviews returning to them, which is rather annoying); 104 Too generic (some fair, some not); 2 Over four words (one fair, one not); 331 <click for details> (most of these are inaccurate or say helpful things like "BAD", but at least they're using the feature); 50 Factually inaccurate (not usually factual); 5 Title play only (not at all true/no more than numerous other reviews); 35 Don't understand (this is normally because they're trying to find something more complicated than is, or at least than needs to be, there); 692 blank. The last figure is on top of the fact that a large proportion of my approved reviews and other rejections have had blank declines on the first pass. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Rejection reasons *please*
