At 6/19/03 09:01 PM, mortalcoil wrote:
Ummm....if *you* know it's stolen and know the link to
the site it was stolen from, why don't *you* blow the
whistle? It only takes one flag on the movie to have
the administrators review it. Or so i'm told.
He DID whistle it. Blowing the whistle (if you're the first person) only brings up a message saying the admins will review the submission.
But they don't necessarily review it right away. Hell, they might not even be online.
After just one whistle, the movie is still on the portal, and it's still viewable and you can vote on it and etc. etc. As though it hadn't been whistled, IOW.
It takes more than one user blowing the whistle to IMMEDIATELY take down the movie (so that a page that says the movie has been removed pops up instead of the movie info).
That is what Joe is complaining about. Quite often, one whistle may happen on a movie, but the movie is still there, no one else whistles it, and it gets protected.
In a way, this is in place so that one idiot whistle-blower cannot take a movie offline, or else one stupid idiot could blow the whistle on every single under judgement movie on the portal with impunity (well, until he gets his account deleted).
At 6/19/03 09:09 PM, mortalcoil wrote:
At 6/19/03 08:52 PM, Newgrundling wrote:
- but how is a "helpful" review established?My guess is that a "helpful" review makes suggestions
as to how to make a better movie- things to do
differently- and that it would not have any
ad hominem attacks in it.
Does this sound reasonable?
Newgrundling knows what a helpful review is. He was asking how helpful review votes factor into this whistle level.
My guess is they don't.