TallonKarrde23 said: bloggbigg said: [Retarded shit that literally makes no sense.] You're not able to follow, but you can try to insult? That's pretty awe inspiring. You win at internet. TallonKarrde23 said: You're asking for episode summaries and first impressions - both of which are available in an easily found link on the same page you'd get from searching for reviews on google, but more importantly; both of which are not fucking reviews. You're clearly on the internet. You can look these words up. You even mentioned google...For the love of all that's English- actually look up the word 'review'. Yes, you can review one episode of a 600 part saga. You want to name it other things so 'the process is invalid'- whatever, but if you can't add to the argument- parroting what's been said doesn't really help. Nothing original to say? 3 lines of arrogance & profanity clear things right up, thanks! (sigh). Also, 'literally' isn't used that way either. |
If you aren't watching Zetsuen no Tempest (Civilization Blaster), you should be. Brilliant writing with legit plot twists. Just finished blog entry 'Japanese Authors Take Heed' Series (JATH)! Entry 03: Proactive Villains, Reactionary Heroes'. |
bloggbigg said: I love how people love to 'win' arguments by making their own 'facts'. Yes I know it's 'not supposed to happen'- I just think there are reasons why the concept should be given consideration. There's nothing to win here, either we keep discussing or not the guidelines are already in use. What I'm trying to say is that you're pressing the wrong button. Reviews sections shouldn't be used as first impression section. It would be way more constructive for you to go in the suggestions board and give your thoughts to create a space where people can share their first impressions. bloggbigg said: Actually, I covered that. Believe what you want- then look up the word 'review' so you can see what the rest of the world mistakenly thinks. Hm, sounds like I could search for enlightenment. I would be thankful if you did that for me instead since I'm about to go to bed. bloggbigg said: I probably a similar reason as to why 'improper' reviews aren't allowed to be pushed down for later weeding out by the peer ranking system. Or maybe because if you want a site feature to be popular, you want it to be at a glance & easy to use. Unfortunately, that's a problem with the way MAL works with the review system. In my thread we had countless discussions on how to take it into a better position and some mods already took some suggestions in mind. We'll just have to wait for them to implement it sooner or later. |
 |
| The current discussion is providing more than enough arguments for disbaling reviews/recommendations for newly released anime/manga. I sincerely hope the mods do take notice from these developments and try to implement such a feature. |
| Steel Ball Run anime when? |
Niyawa said: bloggbigg said: Actually, I covered that. Believe what you want- then look up the word 'review' so you can see what the rest of the world mistakenly thinks. Hm, sounds like I could search for enlightenment. I would be thankful if you did that for me instead since I'm about to go to bed. Fine, We'll get this out of the way first: re·view v. re·viewed, re·view·ing, re·views v.tr. - 1. To look over, study, or examine again. - 2. To consider retrospectively; look back on. - 3. To examine with an eye to criticism or correction: reviewed the research findings. - 4. To write or give a critical report on (a new work or performance, for example). v.intr. - 2. To write critical reviews, especially for a newspaper or magazine. n. - 1. A reexamination or reconsideration. - 2. A retrospective view or survey. - 3. - - a. A restudying of subject matter. - - b. An exercise for use in restudying material. - 4. An inspection or examination for the purpose of evaluation. - 5. - - a. A report or essay giving a critical estimate of a work or performance. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/review You'll notice none of this says anything about 'minimum size of asset for consideration' or 'percentage of work to be considered'. It is neither explicit nor implied. If you are really focused on the use of 'retrospective'... oh jees, here: ret·ro·spec·tive adj. 1. Looking back on, contemplating, or directed to the past. 2. Looking or directed backward. 3. Applying to or influencing the past; retroactive. 4. Of, relating to, or being a retrospective: a retrospective art exhibition. you'll see that doesn't care about any implicit 'body of work', or completion- but this variant is probably more to your liking: ret•ro•spec•tive adj. - 1. directed to the past; contemplative of past situations, events, etc. - 2. looking or directed backward. - 3. retroactive, as a statute. n. - 4. an exhibit showing an entire phase or representative examples of an artist's lifework. - 5. an exhibit or series of performances representing the lifework of a composer, performer, etc. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/retrospective so you'd probably want to use 4 & 5 to talk about the entire body of the series-- except even this would be a misapplication- note the focus on 'an artist' & their 'lifework' So- what you guys call 'early episode commentaries', 'first impressions' and whatever else _are_ reviews. All they have to do is look back on, look over, study, or examine again in a form of a written or given a critical report on (a new work or performance). That's what the word means. Niyawa said: bloggbigg said: I love how people love to 'win' arguments by making their own 'facts'. Yes I know it's 'not supposed to happen'- I just think there are reasons why the concept should be given consideration. There's nothing to win here, either we keep discussing or not the guidelines are already in use. What I'm trying to say is that you're pressing the wrong button. Reviews sections shouldn't be used as first impression section. It would be way more constructive for you to go in the suggestions board and give your thoughts to create a space where people can share their first impressions. 'Review sections' are for 'reviews'. Supposedly. (Artificial constraints on applicability by redefining the word notwithstanding.) I'm not saying the rules or guidelines don't have merit- I'm saying that redefining the word doesn't make anything right, and other points may be worth considering- ie calling 'early reviews' 'impressions' or whatever. All this 'jurisprudence' seems to be in effect because it's too hard for them to get someone to actually alter the site code. Niyawa said: bloggbigg said: I probably a similar reason as to why 'improper' reviews aren't allowed to be pushed down for later weeding out by the peer ranking system. Or maybe because if you want a site feature to be popular, you want it to be at a glance & easy to use. Unfortunately, that's a problem with the way MAL works with the review system. In my thread we had countless discussions on how to take it into a better position and some mods already took some suggestions in mind. We'll just have to wait for them to implement it sooner or later. Later I'd guess. Here, let me redirect: I'm not saying that the existing system isn't subject to generate a quantity of erroneous/useless content. I'm also not against that being corrected. In case you haven't noticed, I'm lobbying FOR MAL retaining (or having) a useful feature- if you want to call the 'early reviews/first impressions' whatever- but the point is there should be some sort of top level form of this info/feedback available. Another 'problem' with this implementation is it doesn't actually take the type of anime (like 'slice of life' as I mentioned before would not be hurt at all by early reviews), or the quality of the review into account. Then there is redefining words to suit your own purposes. I don't know who did it- but somehow there are a bunch of people here who now don't know what the word 'review' means, because they've been given this episodic completion bs- a noble goal, but not truthful or informative. Mis-educating people to get your way is always a bad thing. |
| If you aren't watching Zetsuen no Tempest (Civilization Blaster), you should be. Brilliant writing with legit plot twists. Just finished blog entry 'Japanese Authors Take Heed' Series (JATH)! Entry 03: Proactive Villains, Reactionary Heroes'. |
harmony73 said: iofmfxsfm I give up here. Then why waste your time? harmony73 said: Okay, let's start this. Uh-huh. harmony73 said: Do you know what reviews even are? Yes, see: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/review or any dictionary in the world on why you don't. harmony73 said: People can already check if a new anime is decent by the rankings of MAL, episode discussion polls, general discussion on boards, forums and seasonal clubs. Even ask other people if the new anime you're looking for is decent or not, you don't need the review sections to check if it's good already because it's already discussed in many other places in MAL, let alone the internet itself. Your clever 'if you want it so bad just work for it' argument is very compelling. harmony73 said: You're complaining that you don't want first impressions, but reviews of airing shows. Aren't they practically the same thing though? The reviews are stating about how the first episode is, but it's practically the SAME THING. You've clearly misunderstood something here. I think you're accidentally agreeing with me. harmony73 said: bloggbigg said: Yes, I understand that 'more episodes' will come, and that in most cases a story will build and grow- but that had nothing to do with 'looking back' on what you actually saw in episode one. (or 1-3, or 1-120 in a 300 episode saga, right?) The show's gonna change in the future. If the reviews are founded helpful in the first episodes, and the show takes a dramatic turn of quality, then it'll be inaccurate. What's the point of writing a review for a show, only to find out it's much better/worse the very next week? So ALL reviews should be blanked disallowed, because SOME shows may have a plot development later? That's an interesting way to solve a 'problem'. harmony73 said: bloggbigg said: Letting an anime go a full 12 (or whatever) episodes has nothing at all to do with: - 'slice of life' anime - quality of voice acting - quality of animation - type of art style used - anime tone Historically, over all episodes, anime unlikely to change: -unmotivated/stupid main character - ridiculous premise/plot - lack of or over-abundance of fan service - lack of attention to detail/nonsensical plot execution You can call these 'impressions' if you want to- but they are core aspects of any anime- and people actually choose/avoid anime based on these (and other) points. Are you kidding about the 2nd section? Have you ever heard of character development? Judging a show from episode one by ridiculous premise and plot? I don't seem to get your point either. Most of these may not change but that doesn't change the fact that there's a lot of other things that are important but cannot be judged in a mere one episode (and yes, that includes SoL shows). A review should include everything, preferably the most important things. And those things aren't listed in your lists. I noticed you didn't challenge the first section, which is good enough for me. I'm not trying to say an anime can be judged in one episode. I'm arguing the many can be described well enough to give some people the info they need to add/ignore. if this info changes- OH NOES! wait. This is the internet- update- crisis averted. Attempting to be perfect is a waste of everyone's time. 'Guarding others' from that imperfection? Whatever. harmony73 said: bloggbigg said: Look, let's be hones here. The review scoring system... well, to be nice- it could use some work. Everyone knows that 'helpful/not helpful' seems to be read more as 'agree/don't agree'- which is not at all the point- (is it?) This might be a cue to actually develop a _good_ review system, so moderation is unnecessary because the system will actually 'correct' itself with user interaction. Of course, as mentioned above, you could just disable allowing posting reviews 'till you're ready.' and none of this would matter- but you'd still be 'not providing' information based on 'the dream of a complete series', in defiance of 'the reality of people who want info now.' I didn't get the last sentence, explain. If I find a interesting synopsis (airing), find that the rankings are high and has good impressions on the internet, I'd pick it up. We don't need reviews, and just disabling reviews won't hurt in knowing if a show is good or not, isn't it? Raw rankings are just numbers. A synopsis and genre list are not the same as a description of execution factor (animation/sound), style, character likability, etc. You and what is important to you is not a good judge for 'all the internet'. You really somehow don't see that denying an appraisal of 'what actually happened' having merit is a loosing battle, do you? I mean, read that over an over till you get it- not in application to anime, because they have evolving stories and characters and whatnot- just in application to everything else in life. Funny thing life- you want to know what really happened at times, but you're never going to know what's happening next, and how it all fits together. Find the parallel there if you can. |
| If you aren't watching Zetsuen no Tempest (Civilization Blaster), you should be. Brilliant writing with legit plot twists. Just finished blog entry 'Japanese Authors Take Heed' Series (JATH)! Entry 03: Proactive Villains, Reactionary Heroes'. |
Nidhoeggr said: The current discussion is providing more than enough arguments for disbaling reviews/recommendations for newly released anime/manga. I sincerely hope the mods do take notice from these developments and try to implement such a feature. I would really like to see this happen, even though I know it's unlikely. Or at least, remove or modify that text "There have been no reviews submitted for this anime yet. Be the first and write one." It basically invites people to write first episode reviews, especially since many people seem not to even be aware of the new guidelines regarding pre/reviews. |
 |
bloggbigg said: So- what you guys call 'early episode commentaries', 'first impressions' and whatever else _are_ reviews. All they have to do is look back on, look over, study, or examine again in a form of a written or given a critical report on (a new work or performance). That's what the word means. Thanks for taking your time doing that. Now I understand more clearly the point you're trying to make, to some extent, I even support you. But it comes back to what MAL applies the word reviews for, as the guidelines states: "be written in their entirety and final form when posting. They are not meant to be updated as you make your way through the work." bloggbigg said: Then there is redefining words to suit your own purposes. I don't know who did it- but somehow there are a bunch of people here who now don't know what the word 'review' means, because they've been given this episodic completion bs- a noble goal, but not truthful or informative. Mis-educating people to get your way is always a bad thing. Remember that you mentioned the concepts should be given consideration? We did, and we simply rejected that (which you are trying to take it back). It might not have been the best idea (because of the lack of that space you want to share your thoughts or "early reviews") but that was a necessary step to follow the guidelines rules. The meaning of the word "review" has not changed, it can't be, what did was the application of it. We believe reviews should be written based on the final form of the work or if the work is too long (more than 26 episodes), about 1/3 of it. If the mods had not set the application of the word, just imagine the mess of a website this would be. From one side: people giving reviews of shows while watching all episodes; from the other people giving reviews while watching only 1 or 2. Since there's 'no problem' with that because there's no set rule to follow, things would very fragmented. bloggbigg said: Review sections' are for 'reviews'. Supposedly. (Artificial constraints on applicability by redefining the word notwithstanding.) I'm not saying the rules or guidelines don't have merit- I'm saying that redefining the word doesn't make anything right, and other points may be worth considering- ie calling 'early reviews' 'impressions' or whatever. All this 'jurisprudence' seems to be in effect because it's too hard for them to get someone to actually alter the site code. If I were to take the concepts of review seriously (by what the word actually means, like you want us to) we could review a movie of 2 hours by watching only 30 minutes. It would be still a review right? "You'll notice none of this says anything about 'minimum size of asset for consideration' or 'percentage of work to be considered'. It is neither explicit nor implied." If you still don't want to change your mindset, then we'll just leave at this. It's not like any of us are completely wrong, it just comes back to what we had to do to make things more convenient in the future (when the mods finally update the code of this website). |
|
Niyawa said: bloggbigg said: So- what you guys call 'early episode commentaries', 'first impressions' and whatever else _are_ reviews. All they have to do is look back on, look over, study, or examine again in a form of a written or given a critical report on (a new work or performance). That's what the word means. Thanks for taking your time doing that. Now I understand more clearly the point you're trying to make, to some extent, I even support you. But it comes back to what MAL applies the word reviews for, as the guidelines states: "be written in their entirety and final form when posting. They are not meant to be updated as you make your way through the work." Again, by defining rules, and specifying parameters, you create a self-fulfilling dynamic. Ok- fine. Whatever. Unfortunately, this parameter in particular is clearly bs. Either you refuse to allow reviews to be made UNTIL a work is complete, or you pretend reviews will be posted in some form inaccurately OR you quietly assume reviewers will update-- but 'those aren't the guys we're worried about'. So, welcome to active hypocrisy- or are you fine with moderating out all reviews for Fairy tale, Bleach, One Piece, etc.? Of course not- so you're just left with biased enforcement. Congrats. Niyawa said: bloggbigg said: Then there is redefining words to suit your own purposes. I don't know who did it- but somehow there are a bunch of people here who now don't know what the word 'review' means, because they've been given this episodic completion bs- a noble goal, but not truthful or informative. Mis-educating people to get your way is always a bad thing. Remember that you mentioned the concepts should be given consideration? We did, and we simply rejected that (which you are trying to take it back). I honestly have no idea what you're talking about here. Use some definitive terms in place of some pronouns. Niyawa said: It might not have been the best idea (because of the lack of that space you want to share your thoughts or "early reviews") but that was a necessary step to follow the guidelines rules. The meaning of the word "review" has not changed, it can't be, what did was the application of it. Um. Whatever. Look, without getting into a semantics debate, words both have meaning and application. If you deny or constrain the application, you deny the original meaning. That is what has happened here. Niyawa said: We believe reviews should be written based on the final form of the work or if the work is too long (more than 26 episodes), about 1/3 of it. So based on the number 26, plot, character, or other changes are accepted as dismissible, or considered worth 'protecting'? Hm. I've seen crazier religions. Niyawa said: If the mods had not set the application of the word, just imagine the mess of a website this would be. From one side: people giving reviews of shows while watching all episodes; from the other people giving reviews while watching only 1 or 2. Since there's 'no problem' with that because there's no set rule to follow, things would very fragmented. I'm not going to get into moderation technique, because 'why would you care what I think' and 'I don't have to do the job'. What I will say is you present a worst case scenario in clear defiance of the possibility of a good and profitable option. Niyawa said: bloggbigg said: Review sections' are for 'reviews'. Supposedly. (Artificial constraints on applicability by redefining the word notwithstanding.) I'm not saying the rules or guidelines don't have merit- I'm saying that redefining the word doesn't make anything right, and other points may be worth considering- ie calling 'early reviews' 'impressions' or whatever. All this 'jurisprudence' seems to be in effect because it's too hard for them to get someone to actually alter the site code. If I were to take the concepts of review seriously (by what the word actually means, like you want us to) we could review a movie of 2 hours by watching only 30 minutes. It would be still a review right? "You'll notice none of this says anything about 'minimum size of asset for consideration' or 'percentage of work to be considered'. It is neither explicit nor implied." Clever. Why not review just the first 8 word spoken? Look- garbage reviews will exist within the normal 'legal' constraint you've applied anyway. This is hardly a deal-breaker for the idea. I'm sure if I tried I could find dozens of outdated Fairy Tale reviews that are 'valid' despite major plot changes. In theory people will have started ranking them 'not helpful'- unless despite being inaccurate by being outdated they are still somehow helpful- a concept we'll pretend can't possibly apply. Again- trying for perfection will only make your site less open and encouraging. Niyawa said: If you still don't want to change your mindset, then we'll just leave at this. It's not like any of us are completely wrong, it just comes back to what we had to do to make things more convenient in the future (when the mods finally update the code of this website). My mindset has nothing to do with the actual definition of the word 'review', and more importantly the still skirted issue of whether people who want info on new anime should have to troll for details instead of getting 'top shelf' 'impressions' (or whatever you want to label them). I'm already open to the idea of 'early reviews' (or whatever) being treated differently- it's just you think blind disposal is acceptable, whereas I see value there. Why your mindset is so quick to dismiss others hard work without even having seen it is probably more of a mindset issue than my desire to use your site productively in a manner you don't see as relevant. To each their own I guess. Kineta said: If you disagree with something in one of the guidelines, please also post in this thread. However, please keep in mind that you must present solid arguments for us to reconsider these rules. I've done my due diligence. Go ahead and do what you intended in the first place. :) |
| If you aren't watching Zetsuen no Tempest (Civilization Blaster), you should be. Brilliant writing with legit plot twists. Just finished blog entry 'Japanese Authors Take Heed' Series (JATH)! Entry 03: Proactive Villains, Reactionary Heroes'. |
bloggbigg said: I'm already open to the idea of 'early reviews' (or whatever) being treated differently- it's just you think blind disposal is acceptable, whereas I see value there. That's why I'm saying you already missed the point, silly. If you really were open to the idea, you would have already done what I recommended. Creating a suggestion in the forum to give us a space to talk about our first impressions of a show, that doesn't go in the review section, but also doesn't collapse with the episode discussion. You don't seem satisfied with that for some reason. |
|
weakwithwords said: I actually had gone ahead and created a club around the beginning of your exchanges. I'm not sure though if I should go ask for official support/blessing or something. (Meanwhile, more than a day has passed and I have zero members. Yup, zero.) The notion might not be appealing enough. People probably want "fame" which might be the major motivational factor for posting early reviews in the first place. I believe making a suggestion thread instead so MAL can create it's own space for that section would be way more effective than a club. But you are on the right road. |
|
Niyawa said: bloggbigg said: I'm already open to the idea of 'early reviews' (or whatever) being treated differently- it's just you think blind disposal is acceptable, whereas I see value there. That's why I'm saying you already missed the point, silly. If you really were open to the idea, you would have already done what I recommended. Creating a suggestion in the forum to give us a space to talk about our first impressions of a show, that doesn't go in the review section, but also doesn't collapse with the episode discussion. You don't seem satisfied with that for some reason. I missed the point... Ok. Again: Kineta said: If you disagree with something in one of the guidelines, please also post in this thread. However, please keep in mind that you must present solid arguments for us to reconsider these rules. We won't go into how you cherry-picked this one point, neglecting anything else and again skirting the issue of whether people who want info on new anime should have to troll for details instead of getting 'top shelf' 'impressions' (or whatever you want to label them), but whatever. See, the consequences of _this_ affect the pointlessness of _that_- but you know that. Look. You want to pretend you really don't follow the whole argument about the validity of a review as it relates to the layout of any random anime page, fine. Why are you even talking about forum threads? Do you somehow think that the review section of an anime page and the link to one of the forum discussion areas are equivalent? Is scraping forums for compatible insights actually equivalent to seeing a top-voted review somehow? I don't even see how a special forum thread wouldn't be redundant anyway. There will already be an episode discussion going. My 'satisfaction' isn't the point here. The 'point' will be that an anime page 'ideally' will have an empty review section till it's gone 1/3 through or 26 episodes or whatever. For some reason, your mindset is 'that info' should only be 'in forums' (for reasons of predetermined perfection in the 'review' section). You'd rather have an empty review section than let people use that information. Now- why you want a site that basically says 'go elsewhere for new reviews' instead of 'these are 'first impressions'(or whatever word you like)' is confusing to me- but it's not my site. I've made as persuasive an argument someone can to people who've made up their minds otherwise- and the results are not surprising at all- fine by me. You are embarking on a course of skewed definitions, more 'legislated' enforcement actions by mods, more blind deletions, and overall offering less value at the trade-off of later 'pure' reviews- apparently because just deleting the 'early ones' is not a consideration. You ignore the 'paradox' of your 'post as complete' rule, and actually don't get that people in your community _like_ helping & informing each other-- and you're stifling that. But I missed the point. Sure. It's just me. I'm the one guy who'd like to see review info in the review area so he can pick new anime. I'm so selfish. No other person on the net could want that. Get rid of it. Good? Good. Now find some coders so you can actually change things the way you want, instead of... metamorphius said: Or at least, remove or modify that text "There have been no reviews submitted for this anime yet. Be the first and write one." It basically invites people to write first episode reviews, especially since many people seem not to even be aware of the new guidelines regarding pre/reviews. Yep. No one else notices anything silly but me. |
| If you aren't watching Zetsuen no Tempest (Civilization Blaster), you should be. Brilliant writing with legit plot twists. Just finished blog entry 'Japanese Authors Take Heed' Series (JATH)! Entry 03: Proactive Villains, Reactionary Heroes'. |
bloggbigg said: I missed the point... You missed the point about missing the point, lol. If that makes any sense. Let's just recap a little so I can explain and level up with you. When I first replied I did say that I wasn't against your idea (which for some reason you still don't get it, is it my english?), I support that. It's cool to read a reaction from someone that watched the 1-2 episodes and has their thoughts to share. This also helps if someone is in doubt to watch something and want to know if they should or not pick it up. The 'problem' relies with the method of that idea - that would be spamming the Reviews section with first impressions when the guidelines already state that it's not for that. You still with me? I like the idea, just don't support the method. Thus I made the recommendation, that you should make a thread in the suggestion board instead and propose to admins to make a section in the anime page solely for that first impressions. This way, the reviews section are free from "this is my first review so bear with me" and we put all of that in a more organized place instead. If you want we can keep going merry-round because I like you, but that wouldn't help anyone I guess. |
|
Niyawa said: bloggbigg said: I missed the point... You missed the point about missing the point, lol. If that makes any sense. Let's just recap a little so I can explain and level up with you. When I first replied I did say that I wasn't against your idea (which for some reason you still don't get it, is it my english?), I support that. It's cool to read a reaction from someone that watched the 1-2 episodes and has their thoughts to share. This also helps if someone is in doubt to watch something and want to know if they should or not pick it up. The 'problem' relies with the method of that idea - that would be spamming the Reviews section with first impressions when the guidelines already state that it's not for that. You still with me? I like the idea, just don't support the method. Thus I made the recommendation, that you should make a thread in the suggestion board instead and propose to admins to make a section in the anime page solely for that first impressions. This way, the reviews section are free from "this is my first review so bear with me" and we put all of that in a more organized place instead. If you want we can keep going merry-round because I like you, but that wouldn't help anyone I guess. Fair enough. My point in this would be- I suppose the difference between a utopian dream, and discussing a plan of action. Our discussion- with you 'agreeing with the ideal dream' has been also a discussion of a plan of action- in conflict with that dream. I also stated a similar agreement- but neither of our opinions is changing this rule- assuming you wanted it changed as I do, which I doubt. I appreciate you walking with me so to speak- but you should realize I don't know your procedures, resources, or personal skills. More importantly I have no power in this discussion except compulsion through logic- and that can be rendered worthless through hierarchy or ignorance- and of course people have their own passions. So in explaining my perspective. Then re-explaining. Then trying to re-iterate the overlooked point... well, you can head- butt a wall- but even if the wall didn't win, did you? I don't need to be agreed with- but to have my perspective acknowledged would be a step in a normal dialog towards understanding. I could go at length into programming, webdesign, interfaces and psychology- and why keeping thing simple and clean for users with all they could want at a glance is a good thing. That doesn't change the practice of curtailing abuse or whatever it is that bugs you guys so much, so do what you gotta. I just put in my 2 cents. We have different jobs. Mine is to enjoy your site. Anything beyond that is a bonus. I personally think you take for granted the users who enrich your site for free- but that's my opinion- You know better than me how that really pans out. The job of MAL staff? I dunno- but in general I'd think someone should listen to schlubs like me & try to determine if that's one lone voice, or representative of a larger percentage. The sad thing is I doubt your site can generate the metrics it would take to validate the popularity of any decision either way- but though you've said quite a bit, and may have understood all my points- I couldn't possibly get that from your dialog. Look, let's cut to the chase- we both no on one is coding in better features- so you guys are stuck legislating and shoehorning within the existing structure. Although apparently auto-propagating forum threads is a thing. So really this is a 'no win' situation because I know your point has some merit, and I know mine does- but it would take recoding to make it right- or someone has to lose- and we know how that played out... Btw- anytime someone takes the time to go out of their way to tell you things, and you tell them 'do more work'-- You're doing it wrong. Anyway. I think that's as much as can be said. Off the Merry-go-round. Thanks for your time and consideration. |
| If you aren't watching Zetsuen no Tempest (Civilization Blaster), you should be. Brilliant writing with legit plot twists. Just finished blog entry 'Japanese Authors Take Heed' Series (JATH)! Entry 03: Proactive Villains, Reactionary Heroes'. |
bloggbigg said: Thanks for your time and consideration. No problem. I understand all your points and they have their merit too, it's just as you said, no one can win this. I also admire the fact that you stood up with good points to give some insight if the admins were doing or not the right thing. In the end, it will depend on "how many people are fine with it", which is sad, but not totally unreasonable. bloggbigg said: Btw- anytime someone takes the time to go out of their way to tell you things, and you tell them 'do more work'-- You're doing it wrong. Hahaha. I'll keep that in mind. Stay well. |
|
| So many people still starting every single recommendation with "Both." There should really be a big and flashy notice somewhere so people have no use not to have read the guidelines. It's also unfortunate that some people are still submitting first-episode "reviews" but at least those are starting to slow down a good bit. |
 |
| Thank you for addressing this. I always try my best otherwise a review isn't helpful to anyone. |
  |
| What about those recommendations? People make recommendations when an episode of the show barely aired, don't think you think that should apply to the recommendations as well? |
 |
| And yet, most reviews are outright baseless, trolling and wasting everyone's time. Most recommendations are plainly idiotic, and feel as if written by a toddler, not to mention the attempts at 'comparison' are laughable at best (classic: Both protagonists are female * NO SHIT, this totally makes these two anime relevant*). To top it off, tons of reviews and recommendations, even those by supposedly good "critics" (don't make me laugh), are just plain trashing full of offensive language and mere re-directions to their preferred anime. That's hardly what a review is expected to be. But hey, I guess that's MAL for you. The acronym is most fitting. |
| Critic. |
| Just a quick observation, my resonably long review for Jormungand wasn't shown on MAL panel because other users "wrote" two paragraph long reviews every 20-30 minutes, I think my review should have stayed at least as the others, I find this very unpleasant >.< |
intSys said: And yet, most reviews are outright baseless, trolling and wasting everyone's time. Most recommendations are plainly idiotic, and feel as if written by a toddler, not to mention the attempts at 'comparison' are laughable at best (classic: Both protagonists are female * NO SHIT, this totally makes these two anime relevant*). To top it off, tons of reviews and recommendations, even those by supposedly good "critics" (don't make me laugh), are just plain trashing full of offensive language and mere re-directions to their preferred anime. That's hardly what a review is expected to be. But hey, I guess that's MAL for you. The acronym is most fitting. Oh really? Then report them. It's that simple. |
intSys said: And yet, most reviews are outright baseless, trolling and wasting everyone's time. Most recommendations are plainly idiotic, and feel as if written by a toddler, not to mention the attempts at 'comparison' are laughable at best (classic: Both protagonists are female * NO SHIT, this totally makes these two anime relevant*). To top it off, tons of reviews and recommendations, even those by supposedly good "critics" (don't make me laugh), are just plain trashing full of offensive language and mere re-directions to their preferred anime. That's hardly what a review is expected to be. But hey, I guess that's MAL for you. The acronym is most fitting. There's a reason the report button is there, and the mods do actually usually take things down when reported. As for things being written by a toddler - you shouldn't start a paragraph with "And", and "but" should only be the start of anything in very specific situations, not as it's own independent sentence off wherever. You also seemed to use periods where there should be a comma or semicolon pretty often in that short post. |
 |
| I agree with most people here. There is a way to build in a simple function to check if a manga or anime series has actually finished, before enabling the review option. I just don't understand why you wouldn't. |
 |
Onyxthegreat said: There is a way to build in a simple function to check if a manga or anime series has actually finished, before enabling the review option. I just don't understand why you wouldn't. There are dozens of titles that won't end in a near future. |
Onyxthegreat said: I agree with most people here. There is a way to build in a simple function to check if a manga or anime series has actually finished, before enabling the review option. I just don't understand why you wouldn't. Because: "Reviews should reach beyond the beginnings of a series and into its core material to critique the work in overall" which isn't saying you can't review a series after like 30 episodes in a 52 episode series - it's saying you can't review a show based on it's first/beginning episodes, as in you need a solid grasp on the core material which in any show that's more than 12 episodes you'll get to before it's nearly over. It's a matter of review quality and moderator discretion based around users simply using common sense. I do agree that reviews shouldn't be allowed until a series is over, unless that series breaks, let's say, 50 episodes total. |
TallonKarrde23Apr 20, 2013 12:51 PM
|
TallonKarrde23 said: 12-13 episodes is a season. They should allow reviews after that and obviously make an exception for anime with less than 12 episodes.Onyxthegreat said: I agree with most people here. There is a way to build in a simple function to check if a manga or anime series has actually finished, before enabling the review option. I just don't understand why you wouldn't. Because: "Reviews should reach beyond the beginnings of a series and into its core material to critique the work in overall" which isn't saying you can't review a series after like 30 episodes in a 52 episode series - it's saying you can't review a show based on it's first/beginning episodes, as in you need a solid grasp on the core material which in any show that's more than 12 episodes you'll get to before it's nearly over. It's a matter of review quality and moderator discretion based around users simply using common sense. I do agree that reviews shouldn't be allowed until a series is over, unless that series breaks, let's say, 50 episodes total. |
| Gravy. It was the unwritten rules like this is why I like to write reviews on this site. Great news, guys! |
[/url] 
| Thank you for this! :D |
 |
Onyxthegreat said: There is a way to build in a simple function to check if a manga or anime series has actually finished, before enabling the review option. I just don't understand why you wouldn't. Related question: Is there a way to add a series to the database and disallow scoring it or setting you status to anything besides "Plan to Watch" when a show hasn't even come out yet. |
nx6 said: Six people even added it to their 'Dropped' list already. How can you be that much of a hater?Onyxthegreat said: There is a way to build in a simple function to check if a manga or anime series has actually finished, before enabling the review option. I just don't understand why you wouldn't. Related question: Is there a way to add a series to the database and disallow scoring it or setting you status to anything besides "Plan to Watch" when a show hasn't even come out yet. And yeah I agree with your point. |
|
| Please make some kind of a vote page for reviews and recommendations. Then the better ones will get into peoples latest review/recommendation on ''My Panel'' page. With current system, some random person can make an account and post spoilers in caps. |
| After reading the near entirety of this subject, why not propose a preview section to the site for people who would like to post first impressions (ie. 1-2 episode reviews) to allow people to offer insight towards a possible new anime to watch. I don't find your recommendation section all that appealing generally due to the fact that most people don't no how to due a serious side by side comparison of two different but similar anime. As a member of this site, I feel that restricting the people that you are intending to inform or gain is ultimately a bad move. As site administrators, the policy you have set forth does nothing to help the situation. It has only created a new problem for the moderators to deal with. By satisfying the few, you loose the masses. The best solution is to create a new avenue for your site members to post their impressions or opinions rather than having to search through the 100's to 1000's of forum posts for good anime to watch. So, I ask, Please consider this option for a future implementation that could solve the dispute that has arisen over the matter. Also, you need to change this line in your policy to reflect a broader audience-- Rather, the review should provide the reader with the tools to decide these things for himself. It should say "readers" and "themselves". After all, women read and watch anime too. |
DemonwyndMay 24, 2013 7:10 PM
| I apologise for not posting in this thread in a long time. While I don't have the time to address every single post (though I have read all of them as they have been posted), I think that the post I'm about to discuss will answer a majority of the questions users have asked. While working through the avalanche of reports you have all been sending my way, I came to a few conclusions: 1. Many of the users with reported reviews are unsure of how to review anime. I spent a lot of time trying to provide users with individualised questions they could use to help expand their reviews and I believe it will be more useful to have this centralised in the review guidelines thread. Thus, the guidelines have been updated to include a "Tips for New Writers" post. 2. Some users were also concerned about the "fairly and objectively" statement, so I have revised the paragraph on "What is a Review?". 3. The guidelines on previews were too ambiguous for many users and they wanted a distinct line for when they could start writing reviews for currently airing series. To address this concern, I have posted a new thread in the Suggestions board: "Review Guidelines: Currently Airing Series". For the next 5 weeks, we will be looking for feedback from the community on this proposed solution. 4. We have implemented a new Review/Recommendation Moderator position and will be adding some new members to the staff team soon. Other comments: |
KinetaMay 27, 2013 11:13 AM
| Thanks for the feedback Kineta. Also, there are two other threads that are very useful imo for anyone who wants to review a series (whether it's an anime or manga): http://myanimelist.net/forum/?topicid=60782 http://myanimelist.net/forum/?topicid=62529 |
Stark700May 27, 2013 11:28 AM
 |
Demonwynd said: After reading the near entirety of this subject, why not propose a preview section to the site for people who would like to post first impressions (ie. 1-2 episode reviews) to allow people to offer insight towards a possible new anime to watch. I don't find your recommendation section all that appealing generally due to the fact that most people don't no how to due a serious side by side comparison of two different but similar anime. As a member of this site, I feel that restricting the people that you are intending to inform or gain is ultimately a bad move. As site administrators, the policy you have set forth does nothing to help the situation. It has only created a new problem for the moderators to deal with. By satisfying the few, you loose the masses. The best solution is to create a new avenue for your site members to post their impressions or opinions rather than having to search through the 100's to 1000's of forum posts for good anime to watch. So, I ask, Please consider this option for a future implementation that could solve the dispute that has arisen over the matter. Also, you need to change this line in your policy to reflect a broader audience-- Rather, the review should provide the reader with the tools to decide these things for himself. It should say "readers" and "themselves". After all, women read and watch anime too. That can just be done with the episode discussion section in the specific anime's forum. People just refuse to use it for some reason. I think this has been gone over many times when the new review system was being implemented. Those specific forums were MADE for these episodic impressions. You can always title the thread "First impressions." |
ZephysMay 28, 2013 6:33 PM
Kineta said: Truthfully, I stopped stalking your thread a while ago due to time constraints. Seems there was a bit of a misinterpretation somewhere though... we haven't been working on a new review system (coding-wise) but we were focusing on writing guidelines and are now implementing the Review Moderator position. I figured it would be something like that a few months ago. With only one coder and no one else to work on it we'll never get anywhere it seems. It will be possible to give applications for the moderator/recommendation post? I'd like to apply one day. |
|
ZiharkXVI said: I would just caution whomever moderates reviews that spoilers sometimes go part and parcel with any critique of any medium. The purpose of a review is not necessarily to provide a reader the tools so he or she can come to their own opinion. That is what a preview or recommendation is for. The purpose of a review is to analyze what you have seen. I don't think you can do that without being specific. The vague reviews are those that can be misconstrued and entirely uninformative. Think back to your college literature class. If you reviewed something and did so without explaining exactly how you came to that opinion, right down to citing page and verse, you would find a request for more specifics. In a lot of ways, reviews are meant to be read after you have experienced a work of literature or movie. The caution should be to the reader that reviews may contain spoilers. And while reviews may keep out enough spoilers to avoid becoming a full commentary, if the specifics of certain plots are the cause of a poor review, or positive one, it should be encouraged. I definitely agree with this. I think the new rules take an overly narrow view of what a review is - I honestly don't know where this idea of people ONLY reading reviews for the sake of deciding what to watch come from, and certainly virtually everyone I know who read reviews would often read them as opinion/analysis pieces AFTER they've watched the anime. In fact, I would argue that those type of reviews are often the more interesting ones to read. The restrictions for spoilers policy is also the harshest I've come across: not only does the rules not allow spoilers at all, they also consider ANY plot specifics - not just major plot points/twists - as spoilers, which doesn't really conform to the most common use of the word as far as I understand it. Just look at the other sites that the MAL review guidelines are based on: imdb bans UNANNOUNCED spoilers (which seems sensible to me), while anidb discourages spoilers but doesn't ban it outright. The only other site that hard bans spoilers is ANN (and even there, it doesn't specify spoilers as being any more than the usual meaning), and considering it's a commercial site with reviews on DVDs and stuff, their reviews have a lot in common with product reviews on say, Amazon, so the "no spoilers" rule makes more sense there. As a user-contribution review site, MAL should be embracing its strength in providing reviews not only containing a variety of opinions, but also written with a variety of style and purpose, and the new rules seem to be trying too hard to stifle that variety. |
| Take off every SIG!! |
| There are far more people who hate getting spoilers in a review AND a lot of users do use the reviews to see if the anime is worth picking up - I certainly do. Believe it or not the level of irritation some users have at being spoiled is enough for them to write in caps lock. It might be a good thing for your review but please refrain from taking away the enjoyment for the other users. I have to say that I find it hard to believe that one cannot make a decent review without using spoilers. The good reviewers here on MAL have done so without spoiling it for others. You could try to do the same. ...this is the official TR opinion on the matter. It might not jibe with others. |
| You seem to be attacking a point I did not make. I do not deny that a lot of people use reviews to see if an anime is worth picking up, I'm simply saying that it's far from the ONLY purpose reviews serve. And I completely agree that it's bad getting spoiled when reading a review ... which is why I favour imdb's approach of banning unannounced spoilers. I don't see how their rule would do a worse job at solving the problem than the zero tolerance rules that MAL is using. While it's certainly possible to write decent reviews without using spoilers, not being able to use spoilers can limit the scope of a review: there are times when a reviewer might want to focus on an interesting point which requires a spoiler to explain, or use specific details to backup their opinion, details that are insignificant enough that they wouldn't even be considered a spoiler on any of the other sites. |
kekekeKajMay 29, 2013 7:55 AM
| Take off every SIG!! |
| Ahh...I was talking about spoilers in a review. Was I too far off in my post? In any case, I still hold the same opinion. |
| Finally, thank you. Now these fools can stop with their early "reviews" just so they can have the top one. |
TsukikageRan said: Ahh...I was talking about spoilers in a review. Was I too far off in my post? In any case, I still hold the same opinion. I'm curious to know why you think we need to take such extremes measure in order to get the job done. Why wouldn't a rule only banning unannounced spoilers work just as well? @ZiharkXVI: I think there are generally two different types of reviews: the analytical kind that you talk about, and the ones you often find on popular entertainment that you come across in newspapers/magazines etc. I wouldn't say the former is the ONLY true review, otherwise you're essentially claiming that all those professional reviewers who do the latter for a living are doing it wrong. I'm in favour of a compromise that would allow both type of reviews to exist on MAL. |
| Take off every SIG!! |
| i have a feeling people mix up reviews and recommendations and spoilers is not the biggest problem in a review but i got to agree they should try to avoid spoiling which is sometime pretty hard. in my eyes the biggest problem is people who are only talking trash about a anime/manga while they did not even finish it or for a worse case scenario not even start it. but oh well for me nothing will change i don't write reviews only to my friends i sometimes sent one and it is spoiler free but some shows are hard to review with out spoiling as the longest one took me 3 hours to write and think how not to spoil it and still let it make sense and i don't listen to much to what others say about a show and just check it out and decide for my self if they where right or not. |
| "When a flat-chested loli hugs you, she holds you closer to her heart" "--I am a single bullet. It has no heart. Therefore, it does not think. It just flies straight towards its target."  |
| i appreciate all the thought that is being given to the subject by the administration of this site. i think there are a lot of good ideas in the guidelines, even for seasoned reviewers. a small point regarding "grammatical correctness" -- if one can avoid making people feel left out for something as profound as their gender, IMO one should. if one doesn't want to use pronouns in ways differing from what's been indoctrinated by one's teachers, one can rewrite the sentence. it's not an easy task to develop solid guidelines, and one of the reasons is clear right here: people use the review system for different, equally legitimate purposes. personal datapoint: BEFORE watching a new show i shun reviews, primarily because i prefer to encounter a show without any bias from anyone else, but also because no site has ever managed to protect me from things i consider spoilers (i don't think it's possible). i am with those who use reviews AFTER i have seen a show, to check what people might have noticed that i've missed, or where their viewpoints differ from my own, and to read their critique and analysis, because that is what interests me. spoilers are not as easy to keep out as some might expect, because different things spoil different people. heck, sometimes the synopsis manages to spoil a show, or the displayed art does. there are often spoilers on people's profiles. i'm in general a "journey is more important than the destination" person and i am fairly unconcerned with plot spoilers (unless it's a mystery), but i get teed off about character spoilers, which for many people don't seem to register as spoilers at all. if you seriously want to remove all spoilers here, you'll be left with a lot of vague fluff, and many of the most interesting reviews will hit the bitbucket. sure, reviews can be carefully crafted without spoilers, and in many cases it won't matter. but in some it will, and were one to write about what most matters in those cases, one would need to mention important plot or character elements. for example, if the ending pretty much negated the message of the show, that's an important thing to talk about, but it becomes wishy-washy vagueness without specifics. if somebody wants to take issue with a character's development, it becomes useless without references. what i call "product reviews" such as what ANN provides, are fairly useless to me past the first one, and i don't care to read more of them either there or here, before or after watching a show. they're a dime a dozen, and i think this policy will promote more of that type of review. i'd want this site to set itself apart from commercial sites by offering more substantive reviews. which means reviews that offer analysis -- we have the community and the brain power to do that here, without commercial interests pushing their own agenda. it could be incredibly worthwhile. as for putting analytical reviews into forums -- the forums seem to be very episode-centric, while analysis might not be. there is also a lot of squeeing (and hating) in the forums, and posts are not anywhere as thought-out as reviews are. which is fine; there should definitely be a place like that. but it's why i don't go to the forums to look for such articles. to me reviews are the natural place for in-depth analysis of an entire show. i acknowledge that many people hate plot spoilers, and i think it's important to respect that. but isn't the spoiler code good enough for those? if i start the details of a review with "there will be MASSIVE SPOILERS here", considering that the reviews are not even fully displayed at first, isn't any reader warned sufficiently? |
More topics from this board
» Related Anime/Manga Section Changes ( 1 2 )Kineta - May 23 |
67 |
by MysticalMagic
»»
42 minutes ago |
|
» List Title Toggle: Main Title, English, and more ( 1 2 3 )Kineta - Nov 10, 2021 |
110 |
by emmalilly
»»
3 hours ago |
|
» [Challenge] You Should Read This Manga 2024 ( 1 2 3 4 5 )Kineta - Feb 23 |
243 |
by Baldo_zz
»»
10 hours ago |
|
» Try MAL's New Mobile Site! ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Xinil - Feb 15, 2015 |
424 |
by nothing_ness
»»
May 5, 8:51 PM |
|
» Moderators Wanted! Accepting applications for all positionsKineta - Apr 26 |
0 |
by Kineta
»»
Apr 26, 6:46 PM |