[quote=planewreq]Praising him for a first review when it shouldn't be praised is kind of against the point. He's supposed to get better, and not telling him why his review isn't good just because it's expected of a first reviewer isn't going to make him better.[/quote]
Well I've seen a lot worse 1st reviews
[quote=jungler]Yeah because a shitty, negative review of a well-liked album is going to get you respect.[/quote]
I was kidding there. Hence the ":p"This Message Edited On 09.09.07
|
| |
Well I've seen a lot worse 1st reviews
That's not the point. The point is, it doesn't matter review number a person is on, if it's bad in any way, it should be addressed at least so that a person can move on. He could use all of this knowledge he could gain from comments left on his very first review and apply it to an even better second one.This Message Edited On 04.18.07
|
| |
I know, I know.
And the open-minded thing: I didn't think you'd take it that seriously so I am sorryThis Message Edited On 04.18.07
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.5
So i hear this album is pretty good.
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.0
Do really need 7 reviews with a five star rating?
Ok, I'm going to be working on one, just not promising anything.
|
| |
Radiohead's electronic stuff is quite nice but this review was a beast anyway
|
| |
Album Rating: 5.0
It took me a while to appreciate this album, as Thom York's voice used to get on my nerves, but now i recognize the genius of this album,..
|
| |
Album Rating: 5.0 | Sound Off
I don't need to say, yet again, how much I like this album, but I will say that they made a huge turnaround after The Bends to put this one out. They don't even compare to each other.
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0
for FUCK sake neil, you're a complete cunt. A PRETENTIOUS one at that. i stopped reading at like paragraph 5, ARGH at you
|
| |
Album Rating: 5.0
this is my favorite ok computer review
Digging: Owel - Owel |
| |
|
|
