| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Willy Weasel 
"Look left and right."
England
|
 Posted - 22/08/2006 : 16:06:36
|
Whipper it is a noble thing to defend another, but when that person has already made the point then it can be construed as siding. I didn't respond to Josh's comment because I had simply made a neutral comment pointing out a duplicate. These Site Maintenance threads are surely intended to be used to highlight omissions and errors without blame rather than to name and shame. As far as I see it they help keep the standard of submissions up. Anyone who takes pride in their fwiffing will check for factual accuracy, spelling and duplicates - things which MERPS cannot be expected to do in addition to their acceptance requirements. It is unnecessary to play jury as to whether a duplicate is due to slack checking or blatent ripping. For the record I know that Josh submits many reviews so statistically more are going to slip through the checking net if time is not allowed for. I wouldn't suspect you of a word for word duplicate any more than deliberately misspelling Josh.
Anyway, I navigated here to report some more dupes. This raises the question of whether a dupe has to be exact, and whether posting two 'similars' for a film with only 79 reviews is coincidental. I have lost several votes before on another film where my review has been 'genetically modified', so I conceed that my opinion is biased in this case.
For Snakes on a Plane my review was "Inflight 'snakebites' available."
CJD later submitted "Stewardesses serve snakebite." No votes at sntake here.
CJD also submitted "Ana-concorde-a." after Warzonkey's "Anaconcorde." which has votes.
When I thought up my reviews for this film I had 'Monty Pythons Flying' and 'Boeing Constrictor.' both of which were similar to high vote getters. I didn't attempt to modify either one and submit, despite independently writing them before reading existing reviews. At least I am aware of how easy it is to reach identical destinations, so all the more reason to be vigilant, and in effect, self policing. |
 |
|
|
Sludge 
"Charlie Don't Serf!"
United States
|
Posted - 22/08/2006 : 18:25:06
|
Bill Clinton
"RockaBilly" and "Rocker Billy" are substantially the same.
While I think I prefer StaLean's, it appears Bife got there first.
(voted for each on different occasions) |
Edited by - Sludge on 22/08/2006 22:20:52 |
|
|
|
Stalean 
"Back...OMG"
United States
|
Posted - 22/08/2006 : 23:23:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sludge
Bill Clinton
"RockaBilly" and "Rocker Billy" are substantially the same.
While I think I prefer StaLean's, it appears Bife got there first.
(voted for each on different occasions)
I appreciate where you are coming from, Sludge, but Rocker is distinctly (as in hugely) different than Rockabilly. |
|
|
|
Sludge
"Charlie Don't Serf!"
United States
|
Posted - 22/08/2006 : 23:30:02
|
| If "Rocker Billy" wasn't meant to sound like "Rockabilly", I'll agree - but why else put those two words together? |
|
|
|
Warzonkey 
"Seriously Lo-Res"
Littleborough, UK
|
Posted - 23/08/2006 : 00:10:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by Willy Weasel
CJD also submitted "Ana-concorde-a." after Warzonkey's "Anaconcorde." which has votes.
Thanks Willy. I had actually spotted that myself, but didn't want to say anything for fear of coming across as petulant or self-important or causing a kerfuffle. I guess I'm too British.
(My private thoughts on the matter however aren't publishable where children potentially browse  .) |
|
|
|
bife 
"Winners never quit ... fwfr ... "
Singapore
|
Posted - 23/08/2006 : 01:05:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sludge
If "Rocker Billy" wasn't meant to sound like "Rockabilly", I'll agree - but why else put those two words together?
Yep - mine was definitely a pun on Rockabilly, but i felt that presenting it as 'Rocker Billy' rather than 'RockaBilly' was a more accurate review of the film
Sorry Sta - I do think it's a dupe |
|
|
|
SixFourian
"Four ever European"
The European Union
|
|
|
Stalean
"Back...OMG"
United States
|
Posted - 23/08/2006 : 13:42:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sludge
If "Rocker Billy" wasn't meant to sound like "Rockabilly", I'll agree - but why else put those two words together?
When I think of "Rocker Billy," as in the way bife used it in his review, I think of the way rocker Billy Idol is referred to in almost every article or news report about him. He is definitely not a "hillbilly" who does "rock." It is not just Billy Idol that is referred to as "Rocker so-and-so." Alice Cooper to Sting have "Rocker" in front of their names, but they aren't "hillbillies" from Alabama. (I can say hillbilly without derogation because I was born in Kentucky).  This is why I submitted my review, it doesn't mean the same thing to me.
Here is an article headline from 1999:
ROCKER BILLY; THE PRESIDENT ROCKS, AS TOMMY HILFIGER LINKS MUSIC AND FASHION, WASHINGTON AND HOLLYWOOD.(the Concert of the Century for Save the Music)
Daily News Record, October, 1999 by LOHRER, ROBERT
It doesn't really matter what I think, anyway, it's benj's call.
|
|
|
|
SixFourian
"Four ever European"
The European Union
|
Posted - 24/08/2006 : 15:50:40
|
It seems to me that "Rocker Billy" has three elements - there is someone called Bill, who plays popular music and has some kind of connection (only a geographical one, I would think) with 'rockabilly' music. "RockaBilly" only has two of these elements - it does not cover that Bill plays (or is even into) music himself.
If Bill Clinton is actually into rockabilly music, then things are slightly different, although the first review is still stronger.
This reminds me of my review and another for Fly Away Home.
|
Edited by - SixFourian on 24/08/2006 15:53:09 |
|
|
|
SixFourian
"Four ever European"
The European Union
|
Posted - 24/08/2006 : 15:51:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
"B&W, red all over(?)"
Since I posted this, the later of the two reviews has gained two votes.  |
Edited by - SixFourian on 30/08/2006 14:56:25 |
|
|
|
zulu
"Resisting the Bay lobotomy"
UK
|
Posted - 31/08/2006 : 23:37:20
|
Hi all, can somebody clarify something please? I have recently seen some duplicate reviews for different films. Is that OK under the site rules or should each review be unique on the whole site?
Cheers,
Zulu |
|
|
|
Josh the cat
"ice wouldn't melt, you'd think ....."
East Yorkshire, England.
|
Posted - 31/08/2006 : 23:59:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by zulu
Hi all, can somebody clarify something please? I have recently seen some duplicate reviews for different films. Is that OK under the site rules or should each review be unique on the whole site?
Cheers,
Zulu
I believe that so long as the review is appropriate for both or all films then it can be acceptable to have multiple copies of a review.
The issue is that you cannot have the same review for different versions of the same film.
e.g.
12 angry men 1957
12 angry men 1997
can't have same review for each film.
Hope this is correct and helpful.
Josh the cat |
|
|
|
zulu
"Resisting the Bay lobotomy"
UK
|
Posted - 01/09/2006 : 17:52:46
|
| Thanks Josh. |
|
|
|
Warzonkey
"Seriously Lo-Res"
Littleborough, UK
|
Posted - 13/09/2006 : 00:36:54
|
http://www.fwfr.com/display.asp?ID=15191
A couple here...
One is a virtual duplicate.
The other is very similar to a previous review (my own), though not exactly the same, but frankly I don't understand it in the latter form. It doesn't make sense to me. Any ideas? |
|
|
|
chazbo 
"Outta This Fuckin' Place"
|
Posted - 15/09/2006 : 17:33:10
|
Came across these for "Judge Dredd" (don't ask why I was reading reviews for that film):
"Stallone is Judged Dreddful" and "Sly Judged Dreddful"
http://www.fwfr.com/display.asp?ID=1557
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Duplicate Reviews
