Stop flagging non-abusive reviews

[Rage]

It seems that many of you people are having problems with understanding what constitutes a review as abusive.

READ THE REVIEW GUIDELINES

Many people flag the review just because the reviwer says they don't like the submission, even though they aren't insulting the author, saying it should be blammed, etc.

Also it's really annoying to come across reviews like this

Title: !!Osama Bin Dumbshit!!!
Overall Rating: 10/10

Summary: I know what you feel like
Review: My uncle was a block away from the trade towers when they fell. I feel your pain, and I salute your uncle and you.

# of abusive flags: 17.64

I'm going to start clearing flags and penalizing the users who flag non-abusive reviews OFTEN. I hope other review mods do the same. Doing this will eventually reduce the number of reviews flooding in the abusive list and help us have a cleaner, more efficient list of abusive reviews to process.

Before you flag a review as ABUSIVE, ask yourself some questions. Some, based on the review guidelines, can be:

Is the reviewer not within the topic of the submission? Does it not concern the subject matter or respond to it in some sort of way?

Is the purpose of this review to insult the author? This doesn't mean the reviewer can't dislike their work. However, if they start saying things like "You suck" or "Kill yourself", this is indeed over the lines and justification for being flagged as abusive. Remember, a good review could contain reasons why the reviewer didn't like the work. This is something that could actually be useful to the author.

Is the reviewer PROMOTING an outside website? A simple link to an outside website in the review doesn't mean it's abusive. It could be a link to a tutorial to help the artist, for example. Note that the review guidelines state that UNRELATED links are prohibited. Consider the context in which the link is placed.

Even as I wrote this topic, I came across heavily flagged non-abusive reviews. (Such as "OMFG, wow this is hot!"). Do some of you people honestly think that the user who left this review should be banned or have their review deleted? Think about what the implications of flagging a review as abusive are.

People are a little too zealous when it comes to racking up whistle points. Don't let this hurt you. Comments? Discuss what the problem is!

[Rucklo]

A little off topic here;
I´d like to know if you still serve as an audio moderator, RageVI. If so, there area quite a few issues to deal with around there... I´ve asked around to find out who the audio moderators are, except from Denvish... Wade hasn´t replied to my PM´s, and it seem noone really knows who they are (or who are active...) :-/

[Spectacle]

At 10/10/06 05:01 PM, RageVI wrote:

Title: !!Osama Bin Dumbshit!!!
Overall Rating: 10/10

Summary: I know what you feel like
Review: My uncle was a block away from the trade towers when they fell. I feel your pain, and I salute your uncle and you.

# of abusive flags: 17.64

Although the guy is being nice to the author he still hasn't actually reviewed the flash so I would flag that if I saw that. You don't use the review button to talk to someone you use it to give your comments on it and maybe give some advice to make it better. Does this mean I can make a review for that flash and put "yeah I remember hearing about the trade towers when they fell I'm glad you made this flash" in it and it's ok?

[CreampieSuprise]

You know I'm not shocked that the second this new system came into effect people would start abusing it...

[Rucklo]

At 10/10/06 05:06 PM, Rucklo wrote: A little off topic here;
I´d like to know if you still serve as an audio moderator, RageVI. If so, there area quite a few issues to deal with around there...

Well duh, if i read your sig, i´d find my answer to that :)

Anyway, the rest of the question still stands. In case you didn´t know this thread was used for a while for the cause of mainly stolen audio... Dont think it have been used for a while, thoug. If you like it it could be a good idea to revive it...

[johnfn]

Rage, right on the Review Etiquette it says

If you are giving this submission a low score, please offer constructive criticism that will be useful to the artist.

That's a perfectly legitimate reason to flag low scoring reviews.

[Rage]

At 10/10/06 05:06 PM, Rucklo wrote: A little off topic here;
I´d like to know if you still serve as an audio moderator, RageVI. If so, there area quite a few issues to deal with around there... I´ve asked around to find out who the audio moderators are, except from Denvish... Wade hasn´t replied to my PM´s, and it seem noone really knows who they are (or who are active...) :-/

I have a list of audio moderators, but it's over a year old. I'll try to get it from Wade/James and I'll PM you the list once I get it.

But yes, I do still serve as an audio mod. If there are some issues with audio portal submissions, we probably can't help you. You can PM me what the issues are, though, and I'll see what I can do.

[Peregrinus]

Usually if I'm not sure about the abusiveness of the review, I just leave it be. Plenty of blatatly abusive stuff out there to flag.

Also, Rage I had no Idea you were still active :/

[Another-Ryan]

Yeah, sometimes its hard to tell...

[Charged]

I agree. Another thing that anoys me is that people flag reviews that are like:

Sucked

This sucks.

------

Which is fair enough, but nobody flags:

Good

I liked it.

Just because it's a positive review doesen't mean it's not abusive >:(

[Spectacle]

At 10/10/06 05:12 PM, AllReligiousDrunk wrote:

At 10/10/06 05:11 PM, gunthix wrote: Although the guy is being nice to the author he still hasn't actually reviewed the flash so I would flag that if I saw that. You don't use the review button to talk to someone you use it to give your comments on it and maybe give some advice to make it better. Does this mean I can make a review for that flash and put "yeah I remember hearing about the trade towers when they fell I'm glad you made this flash" in it and it's ok?

Well you see, if you encounter any review that isn't helpful, but isn't breaking against the rules of reviewing, you should just click 'no' at 'was this helpful?'.

well you should be able to mark stuff like that as abusive if they don't even comment on the flash. Maybe they should add that to the rules.

[Rage]

At 10/10/06 05:13 PM, johnfn wrote: Rage, right on the Review Etiquette it says

If you are giving this submission a low score, please offer constructive criticism that will be useful to the artist.

That's a perfectly legitimate reason to flag low scoring reviews.

Yes, as I have stated here

At 10/10/06 05:01 PM, RageVI wrote:

Remember, a good review could contain reasons why the reviewer didn't like the work. This is something that could actually be useful to the author.

However, people are even flagging reviews with constructive criticism. If it wasn't a problem I wouldn't have posted about it =)

At 10/10/06 05:14 PM, Peregrinus wrote:

Also, Rage I had no Idea you were still active :/

I boosted up my activity with the recent revamping of the review system. But hey, you remembered I exist, and that's cool enough for me =)

[pepeatumi]

Its not that difficult... Just read the damn rules!

[Andersson]

At 10/10/06 05:01 PM, RageVI wrote: Even as I wrote this topic, I came across heavily flagged non-abusive reviews. (Such as "OMFG, wow this is hot!"). Do some of you people honestly think that the user who left this review should be banned or have their review deleted?

Yeah, I actually think so. Anyone can put more effort into a review than that, and if people write many short reviews like that one, it'd be a shame if the person's reviews weren't deleted.

One liners like "Awesome dude!" aren't exactly contributing much. Review banning someone who writes many reviews like that will most likely make the person put some more thoughts and effort into his/her future reivews.

[CreampieSuprise]

Yeah speaking of which why did I have a review removed for a comment I made 7 months ago?

I mean this is ridiculous, we shouldn't be getting shit for reviews we've made years ago cause some 13 year old with alot of time on his hands are going thru reviews trying to flag them all.

[Rucklo]

At 10/10/06 05:14 PM, RageVI wrote:

I have a list of audio moderators, but it's over a year old. I'll try to get it from Wade/James and I'll PM you the list once I get it.

That´d be really good and helpfull, we (AF regs.) have been trying to structure up the AF for a long time, but have had difficulties in knowing where to turn, to be honest.

But yes, I do still serve as an audio mod. If there are some issues with audio portal submissions, we probably can't help you. You can PM me what the issues are, though, and I'll see what I can do.

Awsome, I don´t think that many AF regulars are aware of that. Personally I think there should be a list in the Audio Sticky of whom to turn when there´s an audio-issue... I´ll gather up some ideas and see if we can get something done about this...

Why you not submitting music anymore btw?

[Rage]

At 10/10/06 05:19 PM, Andersson wrote:

Yeah, I actually think so. Anyone can put more effort into a review than that, and if people write many short reviews like that one, it'd be a shame if the person's reviews weren't deleted.

That is true. I could just be ranting, but if a person simply says they liked their work, the artist would at least have some sort of idea why. However, if someone just said "it sucks", it doesn't do any good at all, since there is an infinite number of things the reviewer could have preferred.

One liners like "Awesome dude!" aren't exactly contributing much. Review banning someone who writes many reviews like that will most likely make the person put some more thoughts and effort into his/her future reivews.

You're right about that. That goes in to another review rule that I didn't really touch on.

Do not post TONS and TONS of crappy reviews just to get high in the rankings. If we catch someone doing this we will delete all their reviews- wouldn't that be a pain in the ass? Take your time and write a sincere review for every movie you wish to critique. Make sure your review is relative to the submission. Reviews that are found to offer no benefit to the author maybe deleted.

I personally haven't ran across too many people who do only "one-liners" like that.

[CreampieSuprise]

I still think these rules should be going forward from the date the system was made... I mean I could go back in time and dig up dirt on anyone... get them banned but it hardly taught them anything they stopped acting like that all by themselves.

[CreampieSuprise]

For example Rucklo posted this way back when...

...hahahahahahaha dis shitt w0s hilarijos!!1!!!1!11

/Ruckl0o0o0o0o

I mean it's completely pointless, added nothing to the reviews, wasn't even in the same language... should he be banned under new rules even if he follows them now?

[AshfordGivens]

damn star syndicate bastards are always flagging legit reviews on foamy movies. if the stars hated foamy so much.

why don't they make better movies? because they can't.

Star fighters-10 Syndicate scum- 0

The battle shall continue and i will flag all syndicate scum's ass hat reviews.

[Andersson]

At 10/10/06 05:24 PM, RageVI wrote: I personally haven't ran across too many people who do only "one-liners" like that.

Hm, I believe you see those every now and then, and ofcourse, by some coincidence one member seem to miss what another one sees. And vice versa.

Actually, I mostly tend to find those kind of reviews to be honest. XD

[Rage]

At 10/10/06 05:20 PM, Brandon53 wrote: Yeah speaking of which why did I have a review removed for a comment I made 7 months ago?

I mean this is ridiculous, we shouldn't be getting shit for reviews we've made years ago cause some 13 year old with alot of time on his hands are going thru reviews trying to flag them all.

It is possible for a review mod to delete old reviews if they have been flagged as abusive enough. That could be considered proper justification for deleting the review, especially since the reviewer doesn't really get penalized. However, we don't (or try not to) ban users who left abusive reviews a long time ago. Personally, I have been deleting reviews that are around 30 days or older rather than deleting and banning the user. However, that could change when most of the old reviews have been gone through and only new reviews populate the list =)

At 10/10/06 05:20 PM, Rucklo wrote:

Why you not submitting music anymore btw?

I have spent these years becoming better and better at audio. I'm simply not submitting it yet. I'd rather wait until the Audio Portal has a system overhaul before I start submitting again. I have been put off several times at the contraband voting that occasionally takes place there.

[FlippyWataa]

i think you should get rid of all of the crappy flagging going on.

[Doobie]

At 10/10/06 05:29 PM, AshfordGivens wrote: damn star syndicate bastards are always flagging legit reviews on foamy movies. if the stars hated foamy so much.

why don't they make better movies? because they can't.

Star fighters-10 Syndicate scum- 0

The battle shall continue and i will flag all syndicate scum's ass hat reviews.

Nobody gives a shit about what you think about the star syndicate. Anyways, my older reviews that were related to hating Sonic the Hedgehog were made by my younger brother after he got into my account. :P

[Paradox]

Good topic here, if everyone who tried to make an intellectual post, made one as intellectual as this topic, then I think the message would be got across better.

Good job.

[freelance-fancypants]

Okay, thanks. Now that I read through it, I will know what constitutes an acceptable review from an abusive review. Thanks.

[Black-Flame]

Isnt one of the rules that short, unhelpful reviews that are like comments are classified as abusive?
I think its an unspoken rule.

[Rage]

At 10/10/06 05:40 PM, Black-Flame wrote: Isnt one of the rules that short, unhelpful reviews that are like comments are classified as abusive?
I think its an unspoken rule.

This is the closest that the review guidelines seem to come to that:

Take your time and write a sincere review for every movie you wish to critique. Make sure your review is relative to the submission. Reviews that are found to offer no benefit to the author maybe deleted.

Unhelpful reviews can definitely be against the rules, but it does not list any requirement for review length. This makes sense, since a short rewiew could be useful to the author.

[bifgis]

At 10/10/06 05:17 PM, gunthix wrote:

At 10/10/06 05:12 PM, AllReligiousDrunk wrote:

At 10/10/06 05:11 PM, gunthix wrote: Although the guy is being nice to the author he still hasn't actually reviewed the flash so I would flag that if I saw that. You don't use the review button to talk to someone you use it to give your comments on it and maybe give some advice to make it better. Does this mean I can make a review for that flash and put "yeah I remember hearing about the trade towers when they fell I'm glad you made this flash" in it and it's ok?

Well you see, if you encounter any review that isn't helpful, but isn't breaking against the rules of reviewing, you should just click 'no' at 'was this helpful?'.

well you should be able to mark stuff like that as abusive if they don't even comment on the flash. Maybe they should add that to the rules.

Then it's abusive of the review system, but not the user. What are we actually flagging when you flag a review as abusive? Only negative comments towards the author, promoting of unrelated websites etc. or abuse of the whole review system?

[ViceFullbuster]

There are 8 simple rules that you have to follow by,it's not that hard to find out if one or two of the eight rules have been broken in a review,come on people.