| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Shiv |
Posted - 07/14/2007 : 04:19:43
I am hoping that this thread will not spark off heated arguments and that everyone could just indicate whether we can come to a census (see last paragraph in post).
My question:
What is your stance on requiring someone to PM you before reporting a review for being inaccurate, similar to another or any other report that may result in the review being removed from the site once the report has been assessed?
Reporting a review does not necessarily mean it will be removed. Also, a fwiffer can resubmit with an explanation, or directly appeal the decision.
My stance:
My personal preference is NOT to know. If someone feels one of my reviews is not accurate (and it has happened) that's fair enough. I will resubmit or appeal if I think it is not a fair report.
I want to be able to report reviews without it being personal. The system is there for us to do this, and I think it's a fair system (in that the report is assessed for it's own accuracy and a review doesn't just get deleted on my word).
Some points to consider:
1. Do you really know how a fwiffer will react if you PM them?
2. There are many fwfrs on this site by fwiffers that appear no longer active
3. Not all fwiffers post on the fourum.
4. 'Knowing' a fwiffer from the fourum and sending a PM to them, but not to a fwiffer you don't 'know' doesn't seem fair
[The only time I have ever PM'd is when after submitting the report I thought I might have been wrong because there was an element to the film itself I hadn't considered. Fortunately the fwiffer concerned was very nice about it. I also know that Benj would have realised my report was inaccurate.]
The reason I am posting this is that I report films. 90% of the time it is something that won't get a review removed - like a spelling mistake. Sometimes, though, it is for a duplicate or inaccurate review. Some recent discussion made me feel like I have been underhand by doing this - even though the majority were reviews by inactive fwiffers.
My proposal:
A protocol whereby reporting a review without PM'ing the fwiffer concerned is not seen as an underhand act, but a fair use of the system set up for reporting.
|
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Ali |
Posted - 07/16/2007 : 07:05:16
quote:
A protocol whereby reporting a review without PM'ing the fwiffer concerned is not seen as an underhand act, but a fair use of the system set up for reporting.
It is an underhand act. In the grand scheme of this site, its egregiousness is only second to providing ludicrously obvious tips to reviews. There is one other pet peeve of mine, but I can't remember what it is just now. It'll come to me soon.
|
| damalc |
Posted - 07/16/2007 : 01:43:30
i've reported a bunch of reviews for a variety of reasons -- mostly innacurate, or similar to another review -- usually saying nothing to the reviewer.
a couple of times i've let reviewers that i'm e-familiar with know that there may be a problem with a review of theirs, but not reported it. had the same thing happen to me.
one changed it, one didn't, we were civil no hard feelings.
i say it depends on how well u think u know the reviewer in question.
|
| bife |
Posted - 07/15/2007 : 08:22:48
quote:
Originally posted by Josh_the_cat
The last person to pm me got a very polite reply and about 40 votes on films as a sign of my appreciation of their tact.
So let me get this straight Josh - if I trawl through your reviews looking for inaccuracies and manage to find five, then PM you about them, I'll be good for about 200 votes?
Sounds like a deal to me  |
| TitanPa |
Posted - 07/15/2007 : 07:52:02
Report me and dont tell me I wont care. I'll not even think twice about it. It wasnt meant to be. Ill just try and correct it.
Meassge me about it, Create a thread about it, or even hint that I have a bad review, I will create such a fuss. I hate when people nit-pick. I just have to argue for my reviews sake. I will defend it up and down. But it its reported and dealt with and nothing is made in public. Im ok with it. There is a Report button that needs to be used. Please use it! |
| Shiv |
Posted - 07/15/2007 : 00:12:48
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
quote:
Originally posted by Shiv
My stance:
My personal preference is NOT to know. .
Not very Australian of you!
 |
| Shiv |
Posted - 07/14/2007 : 21:49:12
quote:
Originally posted by thefoxboy
quote:
Originally posted by Shiv
quote:
Originally posted by wildhartlivie
The reason I became upset in the other thread was that the review in question had been complemented and highly voted during that FYCTH and then a thread was made about it, which left me feeling a bit blindsided.
This seems a different issue. Posting about a review without PM'ing the fwiffer first is not a nice way to 'report' a review. (I didn't actually pick up on this, by the way).
I didn't post about a review, wildhartlivie wasn't the only one that had a review that was wrong. I posted about the documentary so that reviewers and MERPs would be reminded of the events that took place months ago. Many people lost reviews and high voted ones too.
So if I had PMed the reviewers with wrong reviews, what would have been achieved? Nothing. More reviewers would have started writing joke reviews about the ear and more reviews would have had to be deleted, as they were months ago. I lost reviews that day and it wasn't me that pointed it out back then.
EDIT: Sorry, I probably should not have commented. I wasn't referring to anything in particular when I responded to Wildhartlivie - I was making a general comment about using the fourum as a 'reporting' method for a particular review.
I have checked out that thread. I see there is a different point of discussion there. I feel that this is a bit more complicated because it was more than one review and fwiffer.
|
| thefoxboy |
Posted - 07/14/2007 : 21:32:40
quote:
Originally posted by Shiv
quote:
Originally posted by wildhartlivie
The reason I became upset in the other thread was that the review in question had been complemented and highly voted during that FYCTH and then a thread was made about it, which left me feeling a bit blindsided.
This seems a different issue. Posting about a review without PM'ing the fwiffer first is not a nice way to 'report' a review. (I didn't actually pick up on this, by the way).
I didn't post about a review, wildhartlivie wasn't the only one that had a review that was wrong. I posted about the documentary so that reviewers and MERPs would be reminded of the events that took place months ago. Many people lost reviews and high voted ones too.
So if I had PMed the reviewers with wrong reviews, what would have been achieved? Nothing. More reviewers would have started writing joke reviews about the ear and more reviews would have had to be deleted, as they were months ago. I lost reviews that day and it wasn't me that pointed it out back then.
|
| Salopian |
Posted - 07/14/2007 : 20:26:05
I agree with Shiv (and others).
If a review is wrong (wrong spelling, definitely inaccurate, a duplicate etc.) - I will just report it. This is the same as I would want to happen to me. I don't want to receive P.M.s about such things. If a review is borderline, then I would not report it (for real reviewers) - I would only comment on it if it came up in the Fourum - in which case (i) someone else has chosen to focus on it so it is fair game and (ii) it can be discussed.
As far as I recall, no review of mine, apart from the recent Troy case and duplicates also mentioned in the Fourum, has ever been reported successfully.
|
| Whippersnapper. |
Posted - 07/14/2007 : 12:08:48
quote:
Originally posted by Shiv
My stance:
My personal preference is NOT to know. .
Not very Australian of you!
Personally I think those people who see reporting as underhand are wrong but they will probably go on thinking that whatever you tell them.
If some people can't understand that reporting a review without any malice is a perfectly reasonable thing to do, helping to keep the site tidy, then I'm afraid that's their problem, not mine.
The report function exists because Benj, who runs this site, put it there and he wants us, on appropriate occasions, to use it if we want to.
|
| Shiv |
Posted - 07/14/2007 : 11:36:58
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
Agreed. It it probably best if people report reviews that are truly inaccurate without the person knowing about it.
If there's just a simple spelling mistake - or one that's assumed a spelling mistake, then I think you should PM the person. For instance, Sal's pointing out that my Eggs! review had 'albumen' incorrectly spelled for the joke I was trying to make, certainly helped me, and I appreciated it being pointed out to me instead of being reported, since 'albumin' could also work (but not as well).
Interesting. I honestly wouldn't be able to remember if I reported a spelling mistake that could actually be an intended one! |
| Josh the cat |
Posted - 07/14/2007 : 11:03:31
I would prefer you to either
report it anonymously {spelling is bad sorry!}
or
pm me and I will respond - not angry or mad but grateful for your grace
The last person to pm me got a very polite reply and about 40 votes on films as a sign of my appreciation of their tact.
Josh the cat
p.s. if you do pm me I will be away 'till august so I may be a bit random in accessing the site |
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 07/14/2007 : 10:25:00
Agreed. It it probably best if people report reviews that are truly inaccurate without the person knowing about it.
If there's just a simple spelling mistake - or one that's assumed a spelling mistake, then I think you should PM the person. For instance, Sal's pointing out that my Eggs! review had 'albumen' incorrectly spelled for the joke I was trying to make, certainly helped me, and I appreciated it being pointed out to me instead of being reported, since 'albumin' could also work (but not as well). |
| GHcool |
Posted - 07/14/2007 : 07:18:55
quote:
Originally posted by Shiv
My proposal:
A protocol whereby reporting a review without PM'ing the fwiffer concerned is not seen as an underhand act, but a fair use of the system set up for reporting.
100% Agree. I've reported reviews several times mostly against newbies/non-FOURum posters, but I've also reported some FOURum regulars that I admire and respect a great deal. I assume one or more of my reviews have been reported as well, and quite frankly, I don't care who reported them. In fact, I'll even go so far as to say that I would be insulted if a fwfr'er that reports one of my reviews went out of his/her way to PM me to tell me so. The Report button should be like the MERPs: anonymous judgements on reviews. |
| Shiv |
Posted - 07/14/2007 : 07:10:53
quote:
Originally posted by wildhartlivie
The reason I became upset in the other thread was that the review in question had been complemented and highly voted during that FYCTH and then a thread was made about it, which left me feeling a bit blindsided.
This seems a different issue. Posting about a review without PM'ing the fwiffer first is not a nice way to 'report' a review. (I didn't actually pick up on this, by the way). |
| Shiv |
Posted - 07/14/2007 : 07:08:52
quote:
Originally posted by wildhartlivie
Personally, I would much prefer if the person sent me a note about it so at least I have a heads-up on what is going on. That is a personal preference. I have sent notes to fwiffers who I know from fourum about reviews in the past. Sometimes it has meant that I may not go ahead and report it because in most cases, I've gotten a response and had a dialogue about it, outside of fourum.
I realise there is a grey area here.
I can understand there are cases where a review may be ambiguous and where there may be an error in reporting.
If I see the ambiguity, I would absolutely inititate a discussion with the fwiffer. In many cases like this I have actually just let it be.
|
