Sputnik Ideas & Suggestion thread

[Damrod]

The old thread has been closed, in an attempt to clean up a bit :)
Just like in the old thread, post your ideas and suggestions on how to improve Sputnik here.

The list of suggestions so far:

Pending, not yet judged

Style buttons (italic, bold etc)
Band discography sorted by release date
Display of "Useful Review" voters for Mods
Release date change (only year necessary)
Force to use 'review helpful' link before postinf of comments


Undergoing changes/Under construction

Change to the genre system -> more/less genres


Implemented requested changes

copyright situation
edit comments
last comments of submitted reviews in User CP
increased review title length
new chart system
special indication of hyperlinks in reviews
parsing of style tags (italic, bold etc) in preview of review
Average user rating on main page (in addition to reviewers rating)
Release date on main page
Change to display of 'number bands'. Change from '1' to '1-9' or '#'
Mod: Approval of first reviews by mods
Mod: Delete all posts by user
'Last page' link also at the top of comments pages
Prohibit voting on your own reviews
Rename 'Alt Pop' to 'Soul'
Maybe a change to the "Useful Review" thing (different name?)
Include Sub-Genres in all time charts


Dismissed requested changes

Different coloring for 5 star reviews
'Approval sign' for mods to underline good reviewers
Alternate views for Top15 list (sorted by review count/weighted rating)
Name of reviewer below album on main page (Too crowded)
Different solution for chosing "Similar Artists" and "Recommended Albums" (Obsolete with new system)
Genre for albums instead of artists (Too subjective)

Status Explanation
pending - no decision yet
under const. - it's being worked on
implemented - suggestion that has been integrated into the Sputnik site
dismissed - like it say, the idea has been dismissed

[Jom]

Damrod, nice job organizing this new thread.

There are a couple things that I've brought up in the past that can be removed if you deem it necessary:

special indication of hyperlinks in reviews

If you take a look at a review I wrote earlier here (http://www.sputnikmusic.com/album.php?albumid=2709), I put in some hypertext, and it's pretty clear where it's located. Now grant it, it's aided by the fact that I "set up" the hypertext with a short preamble, but the text is still noticeably different than I thought.

Originally, I thought that the text remained the same shade of grey as the reviewed text, and that it wasn't underlined. Additionally, I didn't recognize that when you hovered over the hypertext, that the link would darken.

This was my fault for not noticing this earlier.

Increase comment character limit

This is another mistake I made, mostly because I talk too much.

No, but honestly, I can understand why comments are so short. If people like me feel the need to ramble on and on about something, they can always just make another comment in addition to what was already said.

///

Also, I like Nick's idea (discussed earlier in old thread, I wasn't able to respond because I was out of town for a few days) about Damrod and Med being able to read reviews and deciding whether or not to submit them.

While I do agree that this would limit "fanboy"-esque reviews and such, this would be a lot of additional work that you guys already have to do.

Forgive me if I'm mistaken, but I interpreted it as you two having to review every single review that comes into Sputnikmusic, not just a first-time reviewer's.

But again, I would be all for that type of moderation of all incoming reviews.

///

I would also like to propose a "delete comment" function to go along with the "edit post" function. Since the comments from the old forum on MX carried over to Sputnikmusic, a lot of these comments (read: opinions of the music) might be a bit outdated/off-base/not in character.

///

Either way, you and Med are doing a great job at running things as smoothly as you guys are. Good job, you two.

///

A quick question: why are a vast majority of the featured albums (save for the last two, which are br3ad_man's RATM review and Nick's album review) either the two moderators' or Jeremy's? If you click on the "More >>" tab, you're taken to about twenty-ish (or so) albums, but 95% of them are from "the big three." :(

Talk about a drop-kick to a reviewer's ego :p

Note: this last paragraph was said in jest, just so you know :)

[Damrod]

If you take a look at a review I wrote earlier here (http://www.sputnikmusic.com/album.php?albumid=2709), I put in some hypertext, and it's pretty clear where it's located. Now grant it, it's aided by the fact that I "set up" the hypertext with a short preamble, but the text is still noticeably different than I thought.

Originally, I thought that the text remained the same shade of grey as the reviewed text, and that it wasn't underlined. Additionally, I didn't recognize that when you hovered over the hypertext, that the link would darken.

This was my fault for not noticing this earlier.

This is another mistake I made, mostly because I talk too much.

No, but honestly, I can understand why comments are so short. If people like me feel the need to ramble on and on about something, they can always just make another comment in addition to what was already said.


I moved/deleted those points. Thanks for letting me know :)


Also, I like Nick's idea (discussed earlier in old thread, I wasn't able to respond because I was out of town for a few days) about Damrod and Med being able to read reviews and deciding whether or not to submit them.

While I do agree that this would limit "fanboy"-esque reviews and such, this would be a lot of additional work that you guys already have to do.

Forgive me if I'm mistaken, but I interpreted it as you two having to review every single review that comes into Sputnikmusic, not just a first-time reviewer's.

But again, I would be all for that type of moderation of all incoming reviews.


It would mean more work, but at the moment it would be quite possible to manage, as only about... 6 or 7 reviews are coming in a day.

But pondering the thing, it gave me quite an idea. I have to think about it a bit more, if it really makes sense or not. I think the reviews that are probably (compared to the given rating) making the most trouble, are 5-star ones. Usually the users do not give enough info to back the score up, or it's just 'fanboy-ism' in a short paragraph like "review". If those would be filtered out, and only those would go to approval... Or maybe real low star (1-2 star) ratings as well...

Thoughts on this?


I would also like to propose a "delete comment" function to go along with the "edit post" function. Since the comments from the old forum on MX carried over to Sputnikmusic, a lot of these comments (read: opinions of the music) might be a bit outdated/off-base/not in character.


Do you mean a delete-function for the users, like it is available here in the forums? :confused:


Either way, you and Med are doing a great job at running things as smoothly as you guys are. Good job, you two.

Thanks :)


A quick question: why are a vast majority of the featured albums (save for the last two, which are br3ad_man's RATM review and Nick's album review) either the two moderators' or Jeremy's? If you click on the "More >>" tab, you're taken to about twenty-ish (or so) albums, but 95% of them are from "the big three." :(

Talk about a drop-kick to a reviewer's ego :p

Note: this last paragraph was said in jest, just so you know :)

You're jealous? :p

[Jom]

1. I moved/deleted those points. Thanks for letting me know :)

2. It would mean more work, but at the moment it would be quite possible to manage, as only about... 6 or 7 reviews are coming in a day.

3. But pondering the thing, it gave me quite an idea. I have to think about it a bit more, if it really makes sense or not. I think the reviews that are probably (compared to the given rating) making the most trouble, are 5-star ones. Usually the users do not give enough info to back the score up, or it's just 'fanboy-ism' in a short paragraph like "review". If those would be filtered out, and only those would go to approval... Or maybe real low star (1-2 star) ratings as well...

Thoughts on this?

4. Do you mean a delete-function for the users, like it is available here in the forums? :confused:

5. Thanks :)

6. You're jealous? :p

1. Sure, I wanted to make sure that you guys didn't waste time deliberating over something pointless. I would have rather caught my error than having you guys go, "What the hell is he talking about?"

2. I've noticed that Sputnikmusic has been getting a bit more traffic as of late, so I thought it was more than six or seven. My fault.

3. Nah, you raise a good point. My favorites are when people give songs 3s and 4s but then turn around and give the album a 5. Or, similarly, when someone thinks a ten-song album with scores of 2+4+3+4+2+3+3+3+5+3 = 50 for 5 stars instead of being equal to 32, or a 3-star album.

I'm not sure how you guys would go about doing this (other than monitoring the reviews, obviously), but it's a good idea.

4. Yes, exactly. I thought I was being reasonably clear there :p

5/6. You're welcome/Yes :mad: [sarcastic mad smiley++]

///

Heh...you're a bit confused about the featured albums buddy.

:mad:

I absolutely forbid you to use such informal diction around me!

/is kidding again

The featured albums are picked by me, Damrod and Jeremy based solely on how good we think the album is. For example, someone could write the best review ever of eMotive by A Perfect Circle, but it would never be featured as the CD completely sucks. From memory we've had one review by me featured (Endtroducing), and several by other people...Kaden's had more than one, as has Iai as I remember.

Uhh, hang on a second. I was talking about:

If you click on the "More >>" tab [for the featured albums list on the main page], you're taken to about twenty-ish (or so) albums, but 95% of them are from "the big three."

... in a sarcastic way. Yes, I do realize that other reviewers have had featured albums.

What I wanted to clarify was the review/biography thing: those are all featured albums with biographies that only you three have written, or are they reviews from other reviewers that just have your biographies?

Yeah, that question is kind of circular, but I trust you know what I mean.

Besides, you're not supposed to look into it that deeply, heh. :p

With reading new reviews, I read every new review submitted to the site, whenever I log on. It's the first thing that I do. So although we don't have a formal review moderation system, it effectively exists. As I said to DFelon earlier, although I'm more than happy to delete bad reviews, and I have been deleting bad ones from the old forum, I'm trying to be more lenient than I naturally am, as the site's still young, and was in trouble a few months ago, in my opinion. As it grows I'll become harsher on submitted reviews. I think that's all I need to respond to...

Were my questions really that poorly worded?

Maybe it was one of those things where what I was thinking made sense in my head, but when I typed it out, it makes no sense to others except me.

Anyway: I'm not saying that the method of moderating that you guys are doing currently is balls. I honestly didn't want to give that impression; however, if for some odd reason that's how you saw it, then I apologize.

While I understand that your "be[ing] more lenient" is a reasonable argument, I really don't think Sputnik was in as much trouble as you claimed it was.

I am willing to admit that people are making an effort in reviewing, unlike previously, where people wrote a couple sentences and gave an album a 5/5.

And yeah yeah yeah, I understand that opinions are opinions.

But still:

Sputnik is a couple weeks removed from its first half-birthday (I'm saying that January 14th was the "launch" of the site [horrible pun intended]), it hasn't been around as much as MX.

Eventually, I would like to think that it'll gain more traffic, especially from currently active users. But maybe that's me being overly optimistic, yet I'm still confident that Sputnikmusic will get more traffic. It won't have 70,000+ users like MX does, but it'll get there.

[Damrod]

3. Nah, you raise a good point. My favorites are when people give songs 3s and 4s but then turn around and give the album a 5. Or, similarly, when someone thinks a ten-song album with scores of 2+4+3+4+2+3+3+3+5+3 = 50 for 5 stars instead of being equal to 32, or a 3-star album.

I'm not sure how you guys would go about doing this (other than monitoring the reviews, obviously), but it's a good idea.


Hm, maybe I should really work it out a bit more, and then propose it to mx. :)

[DFelon204409]

Also, I like Nick's idea (discussed earlier in old thread, I wasn't able to respond because I was out of town for a few days) about Damrod and Med being able to read reviews and deciding whether or not to submit them.

While I do agree that this would limit "fanboy"-esque reviews and such, this would be a lot of additional work that you guys already have to do.

Forgive me if I'm mistaken, but I interpreted it as you two having to review every single review that comes into Sputnikmusic, not just a first-time reviewer's.

But again, I would be all for that type of moderation of all incoming reviews.

I volunteer to take part in that moderation. I really think it's important.

I would also like to propose a "delete comment" function to go along with the "edit post" function. Since the comments from the old forum on MX carried over to Sputnikmusic, a lot of these comments (read: opinions of the music) might be a bit outdated/off-base/not in character.


I think that's dumb because then fanboy reviewers could delete any posts that undermine their wack opinions. I think comments should only be able to be deleted by approved mods so that all grounded opinions could be allowed and only obvious spam or bigotry and stuff would be deleted.

[Jom]

Your suggestion is dumb.

Nick: I meant that a user can delete his/her own posts, not delete other users'. Not everyone is a mod like you and has the power to delete any post he/she wishes, heh. What I meant is something similar to what we have on MX.

[mx]

I'll be unable to sort albums by releasedate until more albums get releasedates to begin with

Perhaps at least the year should be made mandatory?

[DFelon204409]

Well gee okay.

[DFelon204409]

Oooooo Idea Train!!! Woo Woooo! Check it. Forbid track by track reviews. 1) They're less professional and 2) It'll eliminate the people who just describe a few tracks and then call it a review. A review should bring to the table a voice and opinion that validates the reviewer's opinion. I don't see many reviews like that these days.

[Damrod]

I'll be unable to sort albums by releasedate until more albums get releasedates to begin with

Perhaps at least the year should be made mandatory?

Shouldn't be too much work for the reviewer to add the year. After all, the year is noted on the back of the album/CD case or somewhere on the booklet. And if that does not help, theres always services like Amazon to check the release year. I think it's a good idea.

Oooooo Idea Train!!! Woo Woooo! Check it. Forbid track by track reviews. 1) They're less professional and 2) It'll eliminate the people who just describe a few tracks and then call it a review. A review should bring to the table a voice and opinion that validates the reviewer's opinion. I don't see many reviews like that these days.

Well, I would not really miss them. I like overall-reviews better anyway. The quite good ones amon track-by-track reviews could be transformed by the reviewer to overall quite easy I think.

[Arrakakaka]

I think that you guys should add grindcore as a sub-genre.

[masada]

I was thinking.. wouldn't it look better if the album cover was placed at the top left section, with the title and band name to the right, and the review under it? The way it is now, the box disrupts the paragraphs, and looks rather clumsy/ugly.

[mx]

Meh, the box is a second generation thing. It was done before with nothing interrupted and looked strange. I can fiddle, but I like the way it is now

[Damrod]

Meh, the box is a second generation thing. It was done before with nothing interrupted and looked strange. I can fiddle, but I like the way it is now

I do as well. Top right is good IMO

[Iai]

Oooooo Idea Train!!! Woo Woooo! Check it. Forbid track by track reviews. 1) They're less professional and 2) It'll eliminate the people who just describe a few tracks and then call it a review. A review should bring to the table a voice and opinion that validates the reviewer's opinion. I don't see many reviews like that these days.
What about compilations? Track by track is the best way to review those.

[Iai]

Pending, not yet judged

Search for comments like last posts
Style buttons (italic, bold etc)
Approval of first reviews by mods
'Approval sign' for mods to underline good reviewers
Band discography sorted by release date

Throwing my weight behind all those ideas. Although not the style buttons so much. They'd be nice, but it's not exactly a priority.

Undergoing changes/Under construction

Change to the genre system -> more/less genres

Are we getting a soul genre? :)

I'll go add release dates to all my albums now, I guess.

[mx]

Search for comments like last posts

What exactly does this mean?

[Iai]

I assumed it just meant a function to search posts. *shrug*

Any chance we can have a feature that lets us change the user rating of an album once we've rated it? I mean, tastes do change.

[Damrod]

Search for comments like last posts

What exactly does this mean?


I think it was meant as a similar system like it is here in the forums. Like 'View other posts by this user'. I would really appreciate it for us mods, as it is hard sometimes to find all posts by a malicious spam account.

[DFelon204409]

Shouldn't be too much work for the reviewer to add the year. After all, the year is noted on the back of the album/CD case or somewhere on the booklet. And if that does not help, theres always services like Amazon to check the release year. I think it's a good idea.



Well, I would not really miss them. I like overall-reviews better anyway. The quite good ones amon track-by-track reviews could be transformed by the reviewer to overall quite easy I think.

Well my freakin' massive CTTS review is a track by track in the sense that I dessect every indivudal track but I use elements from each track to include a dialogue that is tangential to "this part of the song rules!!" There's an introduction section to the track by track that is larger than most other reviews on sputnik anyway. I think you should leave most already submitted track by tracks for now but not let in any new ones.

[DFelon204409]

What about compilations? Track by track is the best way to review those.

Who review compilations anyways? Whatever, that'll be the exception.

[DFelon204409]

I think that you guys should add grindcore as a sub-genre.

The way I look at it is if you want to earn grind as a subgenre you should write reviews for it so when the thing actually gets created there will be actual reviews to fill that subgenre. So how about you add to the like...1 by Subtle Dagger. Review Napalm Death or something.

[Iai]

Who review compilations anyways? Whatever, that'll be the exception.
Tons of people. I've done about 8 myself.

[br3ad_man]

Track by tracks should not be forbidden. At all. It shouldn't even be considered.

[morrissey]

Track by tracks shouldn't be forbidden. Everyone has different reviewing styles, track by track is just one of the many ways to approach it. Some albums are also better reviewed track by track. I personally don't like many of the individual song ones that are written, mostly because a lot of writers on Sputnik (especially one trick writers) use it as an easy out to writing a crap review. But they are definitely helpful if done well.

[br3ad_man]

Med does a fantastic job of track by track reviews.

[DFelon204409]

Good reviewers will always do good track by tracks. The thing is there is a whole group of bad reviewers who do track by tracks only, and we'd be cutting out a lot of miserable reviews if didn't allow them. Imagine if we coupled this idea with the certified reviewer one so that only certified reviewers could submit track by tracks. Then all track by tracks would be good and then we'd have to figure out a way to get rid of crappy half paragraph long reviews.

[br3ad_man]

I think the site just needs more of the supers to delete crappy reviews, which pretty much part of what you are suggesting anyway. Your idea would work, it's just that it's something I think that people would rather not resort to. Or maybe it's just me.

[Damrod]

The problem I see with it is that you can not really do a 'half thing'. Not without having discussions all the time. If you allow certain reviewers to do track-by-track, but others not, those will ask all the time why they are not allowed to.

mx stated he wants to implement a system that all first-time reviews must be approved by the moderators, I'm sure that will cut out quite a bunch of crappy ones, as they won't make it to the site.

[Jom]

I have a question that really doesn't have much to do with Sputnik: if I was to get a merge/change on MX, would I still have to be logged in as Antihero on Sputnik, or would my name change on Sputnikmusic as well?

Reason why I ask is that Dancin' Man (MX) is [still] Fast Fingers on Sputnikmusic, but I am unaware if this happened to anyone else.

[Damrod]

I have a question that really doesn't have much to do with Sputnik: if I was to get a merge/change on MX, would I still have to be logged in as Antihero on Sputnik, or would my name change on Sputnikmusic as well?

Reason why I ask is that Dancin' Man (MX) is [still] Fast Fingers on Sputnikmusic, but I am unaware if this happened to anyone else.

Namechange!!!! :eek:

It's the same account as far as I know, it's just that the old name is displayed. The name change does not carry over to Sputnik fast.

Jeremy coul give you a more accourate answer to that, but he won't be in for the next 7 days

[Jom]

Well, here's the thing: it says "Welcome, Jom" on the main page, but the only problem is that Antihero is still the main writer for all the songs.

And I'd imagine it's not easy to merge all the reviews to another name :(

The funny thing is, my User CP remained intact :relief:

[Damrod]

Well, here's the thing: it says "Welcome, Jom" on the main page, but the only problem is that Antihero is still the main writer for all the songs.

And I'd imagine it's not easy to merge all the reviews to another name :(

The funny thing is, my User CP remained intact :relief:

Well, you have the same user ID on mx and Sputnik, so it all goes to your (means the same) account. Interesting would be to see if your reviews are still submitted under the name AntiHero or under Jom...

But I'm sure it should not create any problems at all. The only thing is a different name is displayed, but the rest should work like a charm

[Jom]

Great, thanks Damrod.

I'm going to have a new review up soon. It's going to be interesting to see the reaction it's going to get. It won't be up until after my doubleheader, though, which probably means that you'll be asleep :p

Anyway, carry on. Thanks again.

[Iai]

I thought you were JonM then. I wondered where he'd been spamming.

[morrissey]

None of these threads really fit my question (unless I'm missing something), but it isn't worth its own thread. I just added release dates to my reviews, but it bumped them all to the front page. Is there any way to stop that from happening with for such a minimal change? It's not a big deal, it just seems pointless to have 3 Ryan Adams reviews on the main page when there is no discussion in them.

[Damrod]

As far as I know: No.

Everytime you edit an older review it gets bumped. Not avoidable

[DFelon204409]

Whatever. It just gives reviews more face time.

In other new, AntiHero got flipped a **** because I made fun of him for spending a long time writing a review for John Cena. And then I made of of John Cena. I guess he is sensitive to WWE stuff. Whatever, I'll take him for the Last Ride.

[Jom]

No, that's not it.

Say you just post that As the Roots Undo review of yours. Say you spent an hour or two working on it.

Then, have someone come in not even ten minutes after you publish it and say, "I think on principle that this review should be deleted because screamo is a pathetic genre and shouldn't exist at all."

I told you that I never, ever insulted your reviews, and I've never insulted you because I have a certain level of respect for you due to your vast knowledge of the genres you claim expertise in.

That's not why I'm annoyed.

To me, you either talk about the review, or you talk about the album. You didn't do either, other than say that both the review and the album shouldn't exist. What kind of message are you trying to send saying something like that, anyway?

I mean, excuse me for writing on a genre I don't own a lot of albums in. It was a challenge for me to write on the review, but it was worthwhile.

But to have you come in and trash the review? That's ridiculous, Nick.

[DFelon204409]

I didn't trash anything. Is it not humorous that the longest review I've ever read is for a WWE wrestler? Of course. It's amusing that you put so much effort into that review. "Should be deleted on principle" is a way of joking about the record contracts given to wrestler to get a cheap buck. Have you heard Hulk Hogan, Randy Savage, and the Rock's songs? I don't care how much time you spent on a review, and frankly if you made fun of how much time I spent on my CTTS review I would agree, because that did indeed get obsessive to the point that it is humorous. Chill out man. Chill out.

[DFelon204409]

Also, on another note. I've been here a long time. Long enough to know when to pick my fights. I was obviously joking with you and don't give a crap if John Cena is God's only son and gangsta to the Holy Trinity 'n ****. It's just humor. If I came up into your review and actually derided it as illegitimate you could get offended, but not over this.

[Jom]

Heh, I've been calm about it, I was just perturbed that you'd say something like that. I'm saying that originally I felt that you showed a lack of respect of the work I put into it, but if that's how you see it, I'm not going to object, now that you clarified. And also: I touched on former athletes' releases in the review, in my introduction. Part of my entire opening was to try to distinguish this release from those others, and how this particular release is to be more "authentic," I guess you'd say, from the previous releases.

To me, it just looked like you saw the review and thought, "Hell, this artist sucks, so I'm going to make an asinine comment about the review" without even reading the whole post. What, too many words? Sorry, but that's how all my reviews are.

///

And, edit to your second post: yeah, I recognize that you've been here a long time. So what? My plight was, since you're pushing so desperately for a mod position on Sputnik, you would understand why I'd be a bit annoyed if, out of principle, you deleted my thread without giving any reasoning other than you thinking that the album shouldn't exist.

[DFelon204409]

Why would I actually delete your thread when my post is obviously a joke? Answer: I wouldn't.

Hahaha, you called him an "athlete." I call him a fit television personality. And I guess he's a rapper too.

[Damrod]

Why would I actually delete your thread when my post is obviously a joke? Answer: I wouldn't.

Hahaha, you called him an "athlete." I call him a fit television personality. And I guess he's a rapper too.

Though this is not really the place for it (the official threads sure get abused and hijacked here...;)), I'm glad you kinda settled that. :)

A suggestion to you Nick: The problem is IMO, that with just the pure text, a lot of people would have deemed your comment as an 'insult'. Without hearing a sarcastic or joking tone in a voice, or seeing something like :rolleyes: or ;) to underline a joke, it's all up to the interpretation of the reader. Which can result in (obvious) problems/misundertandings. Maybe throw in a smiley every now and then to underline the mood of a post? Maybe something like:

I think on principle this review should be deleted. :rolleyes: Or rather, the CD should never exist in the first place. ;)

Just an idea.

[DFelon204409]

Ya that kills the joke though. For me at least.

I'm also a bad person.

But anyway, whatever. I don't think I've criticized any of Antihero's things before so this would be sort of "out of the blue" wouldn't it?

But seriously...John Cena? I must hear this.

[Jom]

Though this is not really the place for it (the official threads sure get abused and hijacked here...;)), I'm glad you kinda settled that. :)

Look, I apologize for the hijacking, but I had to come defend myself again. Nick was the one who brought the issue back here with the whole "In other news, Antihero **** a brick because of something I said..." comment.

A suggestion to you Nick: The problem is IMO, that with just the pure text, a lot of people would have deemed your comment as an 'insult'. Without hearing a sarcastic or joking tone in a voice, or seeing something like :rolleyes: or ;) to underline a joke, it's all up to the interpretation of the reader. Which can result in (obvious) problems/misundertandings. Maybe throw in a smiley every now and then to underline the mood of a post?

Nah, if that's the way he handles himself when he posts, then whatever. I wouldn't expect him to make a change, based on his past actions and decisions. It's fine now, apparently.

I don't think I've criticized any of Antihero's things before so this would be sort of "out of the blue" wouldn't it?

I can turn around and shoot that right back at you.

Since you've never criticized anything I've written, why would you "out of the blue" open up my review (and, assuming you didn't read it, which I have confidence you didn't do yesterday) and shoot all over it?

You didn't say anything about the review in the slightest, other than it should be deleted based on your principles because, in your opinion, both the review and album shouldn't exist.

To me, it just seems that you saw the review title, did a "What the hell?" sort of deal where you opened the review, scrolled through the review thinking, "Well, I believe this was a waste of time for the reviewer, look how long this review is, what an idiot," and then decided to shoot on the review for kicks.

To me, that's the impression you gave me. Whether or not that's accurate is another story, but at this point, it's no use taking it up with you since you have this notion that you're in the right. That's fine, if that's what you feel, then I'm not going to tell you to change the way you handle yourself.

Look, it's no surprise that you so desperately want to be a Sputnikmusic mod. Okay, whatever. But how would I be supposed to take you seriously in the future when you come into a review without possibly giving it a thorough read and stating that you think that both the review and album shouldn't exist and should be removed?

Like clockwork, I'm assuming you have to get the last word in, but I'm really not going to comment further on this unless you feel the need to blast me again, even though apparently we understand each others' complaints.

Again, my apologies to Damrod for spamming an official thread.

[Iai]

Back on track, then....

Does anyone else feel it'd be a better idea to have genres apply to albums rather than artists? Think of, for instance, Beck, Radiohead, Bjork, Various Artists, and all those tired arguments about bands who used to be punk/screamo/emo/ultra-necro-metal but aren't any more.

[Jom]

Back on track, then....

Does anyone else feel it'd be a better idea to have genres apply to albums rather than artists? Think of, for instance, Beck, Radiohead, Bjork, Various Artists, and all those tired arguments about bands who used to be punk/screamo/emo/ultra-necro-metal but aren't any more.

I dunno, Iai. I definitely like the idea, but I think it'd be a bit hard to implement such a system. I can imagine it being a bit difficult spanning one artist over the course of two or three genres. And then there's the whole business about searching for the artist. If you go to the main page, there would be, say, two or three Radioheads instead of just one. What I mean is that it'd probably be a bit strange to have the main artist page, but then when you get the discography, having to distinguish which albums are which genres. And besides, those arguments would still take place, regardless if this new system was put in place :-\

That looks so awful, but hopefully I mustered enough English to make sense. Sorry.

[Iai]

Heh, I never search by genre anyway.

[Damrod]

Hm, I don't think the idea is bad either. The question really is how genre like search should commence then... Maybe it should all be around albums in that case.

Anyways, I'll set it as a possible change on the list :)

[Neoteric]

As far as I know: No.

Everytime you edit an older review it gets bumped. Not avoidable
Couldn't it be, everytime you edit the actual review?

[Damrod]

Couldn't it be, everytime you edit the actual review?

As a change you mean?

[Killtacular]

I've noticed that when you put the release date for a review, unless you put the whole date, it won't display or even save it. Seems it would be easier to not require the whole thing and just a year to display. Most (nearly all) the time, I can't find an exact date but I know the year.

[Jom]

Well, RYM or CDNow/Amazon usually has a release date on their site, the only problem is what we were talking about earlier: sometimes they'll have the re-release date instead of the original release date.

[Damrod]

I've noticed that when you put the release date for a review, unless you put the whole date, it won't display or even save it. Seems it would be easier to not require the whole thing and just a year to display. Most (nearly all) the time, I can't find an exact date but I know the year.

I know, noticed that as well. I will bring it to the attention of mx once he is back from his holiday :)

[morrissey]

allmusic has release dates too, if by some odd luck it isn't on the other two sites.

[Iai]

Believe me, RYM is definitely the most reliable for release dates, using AMG as a backup if it doesn't have the full date.

[masada]

In my opinion, the stars for the rating at the top of the reviews look cheesy, due to the white line that makes them seem somewhat bubbly. I think they would look a lot better without the white borders. Oh well..

[br3ad_man]

How about getting a 'Similar Artists' section in artist's main pages?

[Iai]

Uh....br3ad, we already do.

[Jom]

People just never elect to fill them out is all, heh.

[br3ad_man]

I meant in actual reviews. Good grief I'm tired and I have no idea why.

[Adam Jones is GOD]

People just never elect to fill them out is all, heh.

Its one area that could do with a more user friendly interface. Having to scroll through the entire artist catalogue and Ctrl select is tedious. Even worse with similar artists

[Iai]

Too true. A little search function, maybe?

[mx]

Yeah, the thing is tedious. It's hard to find a way to do it better though. If people type them in, they could be spelled wrong, etc

[Iai]

It could be organized by letter, like the main page.

That'd require a rethink on the actual interface though.

[Damrod]

Two drop down boxes maybe? One for the letter, and when the letter was chosen, the second one appears with a list of the available bands.

Could be a solution for the albums as well.

[masada]

Damrod's idea sounds functional enough.

[Iai]

I like that thinking.

On another note, could the name of Alt Pop please be changed to Soul? Everything you could reasonably call 'Alt Pop' would easily fit into either 'Indie Pop' or 'Pop Rock', and Med's shoved all the soul albums in there anyway.

The only offshoot is that Soul would then be a sub-genre of Pop (rather than Other), but that doesn't really bother me.

Even without my repeated nagging for a Soul genre :p , I still think it's pretty confusing to have Alt Pop, Indie Pop, AND Pop Rock. There's so much overlap.

[Jom]

I like that thinking.

On another note, could the name of Alt Pop please be changed to Soul? Everything you could reasonably call 'Alt Pop' would easily fit into either 'Indie Pop' or 'Pop Rock', and Med's shoved all the soul albums in there anyway.

The only offshoot is that Soul would then be a sub-genre of Pop (rather than Other), but that doesn't really bother me.

Even without my repeated nagging for a Soul genre :p , I still think it's pretty confusing to have Alt Pop, Indie Pop, AND Pop Rock. There's so much overlap.

I'm only replying to Iai's post due to a) I support it and b) one of the bands I review is under Alt Pop, so I would like to know where they would go in the future, heh.

Barenaked Ladies are listed under Alt Pop, so if Iai's suggestion holds up, they can go to Pop Rock or something.

Of course, this is if a soul genre gets implemented.

[Robert Crumb]

I represent the Coalition of Sputnik Users Named After Comic Book Artists In Favor of the Implementation of a Soul Genre (CSUNACBAIFISG for short.) We are in full support of Iai's last post.

[Damrod]

I represent the Coalition of Sputnik Users Named After Comic Book Artists In Favor of the Implementation of a Soul Genre (CSUNACBAIFISG for short.) We are in full support of Iai's last post.

:lol:

I'll set it on the list, it's up to mx's choice and decision

[Iai]

And in comes Iai with another suggestion....

How about the ability to re-order the Top Reviewers? I'm thinking just a handful of small links underneath the Top Reviewers text, saying Reviews Submitted, Average Rating, or Weighted Rating, and when one is clicked, it re-orders the list accordingly.

[Jom]

I represent the Coalition of Sputnik Users Named After Comic Book Artists In Favor of the Implementation of a Soul Genre (CSUNACBAIFISG for short.) We are in full support of Iai's last post.

This post made me lol.

[Killtacular]

And in comes Iai with another suggestion....
How about the ability to re-order the Top Reviewers? I'm thinking just a handful of small links underneath the Top Reviewers text, saying Reviews Submitted, Average Rating, or Weighted Rating, and when one is clicked, it re-orders the list accordingly.

I like it. You get a thumbs up.

:thumb:

Also, I when I click a review on the main page and it takes me to the front of the thread. That's what it's supposed to do, but when I just want to see the last comment, I have to scroll allllll the way down to the bottom and click 'last.' Now, I'm a lazy, lazy man, so a clicker spot to skip from the main page to the last page would be awesome. I'm lazy, now. Remember that part.

Then there's the part where I miss whole pages of comments. The '..And Justice for All' review, for instance. I can only go to about the 11th page, and there's still at least one more I can't see. It's happened before with the American Idiot review and a few others. It's rather bothersome.

[Damrod]

And in comes Iai with another suggestion....

How about the ability to re-order the Top Reviewers? I'm thinking just a handful of small links underneath the Top Reviewers text, saying Reviews Submitted, Average Rating, or Weighted Rating, and when one is clicked, it re-orders the list accordingly.

Hm... Only for the Top15 that are in the list based on their overall weighted rating, or for all users, so that you see the overall Top15 review submitters? (Asking just that I get your suggestion 100%)

The seperation between average and weighted rating does not make a lot of sense to me, as they are directly linked to each other, and the number of reviews submitted. I think weighted rating is enough for that. :)

[Damrod]

I like it. You get a thumbs up.

:thumb:

Also, I when I click a review on the main page and it takes me to the front of the thread. That's what it's supposed to do, but when I just want to see the last comment, I have to scroll allllll the way down to the bottom and click 'last.' Now, I'm a lazy, lazy man, so a clicker spot to skip from the main page to the last page would be awesome. I'm lazy, now. Remember that part.

Then there's the part where I miss whole pages of comments. The '..And Justice for All' review, for instance. I can only go to about the 11th page, and there's still at least one more I can't see. It's happened before with the American Idiot review and a few others. It's rather bothersome.

I don't know if it is easily possible to programm something like the last post-link here in the forums. What would do however would be a 'last page' link directly under the review (means the links are on the top and the bottom of the comments page). That would help as well

[Iai]

Hm... Only for the Top15 that are in the list based on their overall weighted rating, or for all users, so that you see the overall Top15 review submitters? (Asking just that I get your suggestion 100%)
Either, I guess.

The seperation between average and weighted rating does not make a lot of sense to me, as they are directly linked to each other, and the number of reviews submitted. I think weighted rating is enough for that. :)
There is a distinction, though. For instance, if the list were to be ordered by Average Rating, Robert Crumb would be #1. Weighted Rating just seems to appear as a soft mid-way point between Average Rating and # Of Reviews. Which means, in theory, a guy could submit a ton of mediocre reviews, rate them all himself, and end up in the Top 15, despite having a poor average rating.

[Iai]

Then there's the part where I miss whole pages of comments. The '..And Justice for All' review, for instance. I can only go to about the 11th page, and there's still at least one more I can't see. It's happened before with the American Idiot review and a few others. It's rather bothersome.
It's worst with the Alter Bridge review. It only goes to about page 36, when there's around 60 pages (going by memory).

[Killtacular]

There is a distinction, though. For instance, if the list were to be ordered by Average Rating, Robert Crumb would be #1.[...]
Nowadays, Mr. Antihero is ahead of Mr. Crumb by .01 points. And you yourself are ahead by .02 points.
It's worst with the Alter Bridge review. It only goes to about page 36, when there's around 60 pages (going by memory).
The Nevermind review is doing now. It's so frustrating, seeing as Sputnik seems to be attracting less traffic here lately. The little traffic that is there, I sometimes can't see because it won't show the last page.

[mx]

I'll take a look at that error

[Jom]

Nowadays, Mr. Antihero is ahead of Mr. Crumb by .01 points. And you yourself are ahead by .02 points.

Teehee, you gave me a title :-*

I also do not understand how to calculate average rating and how to calculate weighted rating, heh. I'd be interested to find out, sure, but it's not a high priority, heh.

Also, I had a question, but I seemed to have forgotten it. I'll edit it in if I can remember it :o

[Iai]

A thread where we can suggest Featured Albums. Yay or nay?

[DFelon204409]

Ta da!

http://www.musicianforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=8823720#post8823720

[DFelon204409]

Thank sweet Jesus I can finally go to the last page from outside of the thread. It's a big deal to me.

[br3ad_man]

^^^
Seconded. The worst is when I use sputnik on my school computers. Death.

[Iai]

I think mods should be able to see who voted on a review. Only mods though, not regular users.

(re: issues raised in the Fanboy thread)

[masada]

The color selections make me want to vomit.

[Schyma]

It's nice to see the user name under a reveiw they just posted. Like on the main Sputnik page a person makes a reveiw it's just nice to see who reveiwed it. Hope that made sence.

[br3ad_man]

Which means, in theory, a guy could submit a ton of mediocre reviews, rate them all himself, and end up in the Top 15, despite having a poor average rating.

You're describing me. :lol:

[DFelon204409]

No. Describing beyondtheblueprint. He always gives himself a first post bump to stay on the front page long enough for somebody who likes popcore to wander in and slob his editorial knob a bit.

[br3ad_man]

I sometimes bump if it's an album I know people know or should know and it's gone out of sight without a comment.

[Damrod]

I think mods should be able to see who voted on a review. Only mods though, not regular users.

(re: issues raised in the Fanboy thread)

Wouldn't be sooo bad. Added to list :)

It's nice to see the user name under a reveiw they just posted. Like on the main Sputnik page a person makes a reveiw it's just nice to see who reveiwed it. Hope that made sence.

It made sense. Adding this to the list as well :thumb:

[Damrod]

As I entered it to the list, I just thought:

Wouldn't it make more sense to make it impossible for folks to vote on their own reviews? (Like it is on MXTabs)

[Iai]

Even though I also vote for all my own reviews (:p) I have to agree with that.

[br3ad_man]

I vote on mine as well. When the site started, I said to mx in the thread that I thought users shouldn't vote for their owns reviews. But he said he didn't mind or something like that, so I said "meh" and proceeded to vote for my own reviews. I've done it with all of them except the last 3 or 4.

[Jom]

Heh, but what about back-up accounts?

Example:

Positive votes for Iai's Afghan Whigs review:

br3ad_man
Damrod
Jom
something vague
Iai
Iai2
Iai3
Iai4
Scruples
Iai5
this_is_not_iai
Med57

Haha, just kidding :p

[mx]

lol

[Iai]

My alternate accounts are more wisely named than that.

:shifty:

ps br3ad wouldn't vote for me, he wants to keep that #1 slot. :p

[the2stranger]

I read about Med and Damrod wanting to add little fun facts, abd release dates and stuff to reviews that lack this information.

but I have another idea, wouldn't it be possible to make a personal message for the sputnik mods.

here's how I worked it out:
mods sort out reviews which lack some information, the mods ( and only the mods should be able to PM) PM the author of that review.
then , when the author logs in on Sputnik, sees a PM, so that he knows he or she must can add some info the review.

I assume the authors of the review know more about the particualir album than the mods do ( you can't know every cd from every genre:))
and it would take some work away from the mods.

just an idea:)

[Robert Crumb]

Wouldn't it make more sense to make it impossible for folks to vote on their own reviews? (Like it is on MXTabs)

Honestly, I didn't think it counted when you voted for your own review. I think I did it on one or two but I didn't see any effect so I never bothered. Someone did go through one day and upvote a lot of my stuff though (at least I don't recall doing that, maybe I got wasted.)

But yeah, that proposition makes sense.

/goes and votes on self...

[Damrod]

Well, mx has already disabeled the self-voting, so... no need to further discuss that topic :)

[Iai]

Someone did go through one day and upvote a lot of my stuff though (at least I don't recall doing that, maybe I got wasted.)
I'm pretty sure that was me, actually. I did it for someone else at the same time too (OrbDragon, maybe?)

[br3ad_man]

My alternate accounts are more wisely named than that.

:shifty:

ps br3ad wouldn't vote for me, he wants to keep that #1 slot. :p

I do sometimes :o

Admittedly not on all of them though :p

[DFelon204409]

Heh, but what about back-up accounts?

Example:

Positive votes for Iai's Afghan Whigs review:

br3ad_man
Damrod
Jom
something vague
Iai
Iai2
Iai3
Iai4
Scruples
Iai5
this_is_not_iai
Med57

Haha, just kidding :p

That med. No wonder he's top 15. He has 57 different back-up accounts.

[morrissey]

When I'm not signed in on Sputnik and try to submit a comment, it tells me to "login above". So I return to the previous page (the latter is just a white screen), there is no login button to be found. Please incorporate one either into that warning screen, or on the review screen itself (I'm not sure if I'm being clear, let me know if I'm not).

[morrissey]

Heh, but what about back-up accounts?

Example:

Positive votes for Iai's Afghan Whigs review:

br3ad_man
Damrod
Jom
something vague
Iai
Iai2
Iai3
Iai4
Scruples
Iai5
this_is_not_iai
Med57

Haha, just kidding :p
hmmmmm

>_>

And I'm still like reviewer #734.

[Jom]

hmmmmm

>_>

And I'm still like reviewer #734.

What cracks me up is that I was actually thinking of you while writing that :p

Of course, you're never far from my mind to begin with :grin:

Just kidding.

[Damrod]

Now, let's keep the thread on topic.

[br3ad_man]

When I'm not signed in on Sputnik and try to submit a comment, it tells me to "login above". So I return to the previous page (the latter is just a white screen), there is no login button to be found. Please incorporate one either into that warning screen, or on the review screen itself (I'm not sure if I'm being clear, let me know if I'm not).

Access the page from www.musicianforums.com/sputnik instead.

[Zappa]

Speaking of all this top 15 stuff: I think it's funny that I'm still holding on at #14, and I still stand by my refusal to create any new reviews since sputnik went up.

[br3ad_man]

Show off.

[mx]

The color selections make me want to vomit.

Which colors?

[morrissey]

Access the page from www.musicianforums.com/sputnik instead.
Nope it's still not there.

http://www.musicianforums.com/sputnik/album.php?reviewid=2999&genreid=54

There is no place for me to login in unless I navigate away from this page.

On MX, the login screen appears on every page.

[Iai]

No, he means that you won't have those login problems if you access the page from that URL, so whether the box is there or not is irrelevant.

[morrissey]

No, he means that you won't have those login problems if you access the page from that URL, so whether the box is there or not is irrelevant.
Oh I know that, it's just that I'm on a different computer than usual. And I often switch between computers, but forget to login on the main page.

But I'm realising more and more that it really doesn't matter.

[masada]

Which colors?
The turqouise. Wouldn't it be better if you were able to pick the layout, like on the forums?

[Iai]

Out of interest, does the new swear filter that Trilema put up apply to Sputnik too?

[Jom]

Quick suggestion, low priority:

How much of a pain in the *** would it be so that when you open up a review, you see the album art... say, in the box with the tracklist, other reviews, etc.?

I know it's not a huge deal, but I would like to see the album art when I open up a review somewhere, and have it at only 100 x 100 or so. Or smaller, I guess.

But would that be possible?

Oh, and by the way: I'm not going to feel offended or anything if you say something like "I don't see the point for this." I don't either, except for personal preference.

[Damrod]

Quick suggestion, low priority:

How much of a pain in the *** would it be so that when you open up a review, you see the album art... say, in the box with the tracklist, other reviews, etc.?

I know it's not a huge deal, but I would like to see the album art when I open up a review somewhere, and have it at only 100 x 100 or so. Or smaller, I guess.

But would that be possible?

Oh, and by the way: I'm not going to feel offended or anything if you say something like "I don't see the point for this." I don't either, except for personal preference.

*is puzzled*

Isn't that the way it is now? :confused: I always have the album art in the tracklist box... Do you have some kind of Image blocker for your browser?

And btw: No, I'm not jealous because you made someone special go "lol". ;) You really made me laugh with that comment.

[Kif]

I tried commenting on the Eminem - Encore review earlier, and I have to say it was a little lengthy. I made it, and it said the comment was too long. So I split it into 2 comment posts. They weren't long, about 8 lines each I'd say.

I just came back to see one was deleted, a significant part of my views on both the review and the album. I don't think that was justified considering I wasn't just agreeing with everyone else or the reviewer. I had mixed views, and the deletion of one of my posts has made the other look pretty stupid for me

[Damrod]

I tried commenting on the Eminem - Encore review earlier, and I have to say it was a little lengthy. I made it, and it said the comment was too long. So I split it into 2 comment posts. They weren't long, about 8 lines each I'd say.

I just came back to see one was deleted, a significant part of my views on both the review and the album. I don't think that was justified considering I wasn't just agreeing with everyone else or the reviewer. I had mixed views, and the deletion of one of my posts has made the other look pretty stupid for me

That was my bad then... :upset:

It looked like it was a double post. Sorry.

[Jom]

This whole not being able to rate your own reviews thing sucks :upset:

I'm not saying bring it back, but after spending a good chunk of time on my last review that I just posted, only to have people say, "Good review" or "OMG THIS IS THE LONGEST REVIEW I'VE EVER SEEN" without even bothering to rate is depressing.

[br3ad_man]

Yeah not enough people use the rating system, I try to use it, unless I can't decide whether a review helps me.

[Damrod]

The main probelm IMO is that people do not judge the review on how it is written etc, but only on the opinion it expresses. So if you rate an album a different way then people think it deserves, they rate the review "not helpful"

[br3ad_man]

see: br3ad_man's Coldplay review

[Jom]

see: br3ad_man's Coldplay review

/goes to see

EDIT:

:rolleyes: This just in: saying that you think something is average automatically means that you hate it.

Haha. That does suck, though. I haven't been the victim of that [yet. Knock on wood /knocks]

[masada]

I've gotten that a few times. That's why I stay away from metal albums.

[Iai]

Just taking the time to say -

8/5

- Fixed a bug where a mod or a reviewer editing their review would bump the review to the top of the list, and report that a new comment was made.

- Fixed a bug that messed up the album charts. If a band was added to the favorites list, sometimes this increased the ranking of an unrelated album. Things should make more sense now.

- Alt pop renamed to soul

- Renamed the 'Did You Find this Review Helpful' to 'Was this Review Well Written?' This will help clarify things. The top will still display the 'helpful' link

- Increased the allowed comment size by 300 characters

- deuglified the all-time charts

- Improved the accuracy of the search

- Added support for half-star user ratings. Previously it rounded to the nearest star, now the ratings round to the nearest half star. This change is sitewide.
THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU

I'll get on making the relevant genre switches.

[br3ad_man]

Suggestion:

When I submitted my Carcass review today, I had a look around for the release date and I couldn't find anything more specific than the year. Would it be possible to have the option of only using the year as the release date?

[Damrod]

Suggestion:

When I submitted my Carcass review today, I had a look around for the release date and I couldn't find anything more specific than the year. Would it be possible to have the option of only using the year as the release date?

I guess basically: yes.

It would affect the feature box for new releases though. If everyone only sticks to the year, the function for the new releases can not grip.

Anyways, I'll set it on the list

[br3ad_man]

ooo yeah, I didn't think of that.

[DFelon204409]

The punk section is starting to need a post-hardcore section. It'll take of the bands that don't belong in the metalcore section (The Fall of Troy, alexisonfire) and will take the bands that don't belong in hardcore out as well (Trophy Scars).

[masada]

I don't really think the "Jam Rock," or whatever, category is necessary. All of the bands that are lumped into the genre fit into a lot of the other genres, making it rather redundant to have it.

[DFelon204409]

This sort of seemed like a mix of a problem and a suggestion. The album charts for all time albums only give albums labeled in the main genre and don't include any bands in the subgenre. One of the punk albums only has like 500 reviews and I had never heard of the dudes before and there were only like 10 comments. I think the thingy should be fixed so all time albums include ones in subgenres.

[biografiend]

I was thinking the other day that maybe before any user gets to post comments, they have to answer if the review was helpful or not, forcing the system to be used alot more than it is now.

[br3ad_man]

Nice idea. Maybe it should be made that you have to do both.

Or maybe it's a good idea to leave it as is. :confused:

[DFelon204409]

No way man. Think of all the people who are just going to answer "no" to everything just to be able to write comments. Anybody who writes a positive Green Day review is going to be a Top15 member and anybody who criticizes The Arcade Fire is going to have an average rank of 0. It'll get wayyyy off balanced.

[Iai]

I think he meant that, on the main genre pages (Rock, Jazz, Pop etc.) the charts only include albums that are listed under that genre alone, instead of the subgenres.

[mx]

I'm not sure if that is the case, let me double check

[mx]

fixed

[DFelon204409]

Sweet.

[Iai]

Nice.

Next little thing to whinge about - when I view people's album ratings, ratings still appear for albums that have been deleted from the database. They appear as just as a dash, where the band/album name should be. Is there any way to delete ratings along with reviews?

[Dead Star]

I'm not sure if I should post this in here, but I dont really want to make a new thread about it.

http://www.musicianforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=9228481&postcount=31778

Any chance of rectifying that?

[Neoteric]

Get this, Sputnik community thread!

[Jom]

Get this, Sputnik community thread!

No.

[Neoteric]

why not? :(

[DesolationRow]

I'm not sure if it belongs in this thread, but the fanboy-ism is really getting annoying. I know there is nothing you can do to prevent people from voting on reviews, but I get people voting negatively on every review because they feel their opinion is superior to mine. Just last night, i got a kid and reported him. I wanted to know, if I catch any fanboy blatantly voting for/against any reviews because of their Elitist opinions, may I report them to the bad user list?

[Jom]

why not? :(

What's the point? How many people even visit this forum (or write reviews for Sputnikmusic)? It would be just to raise postcount. The site/this forum should be focused on album reviews, not "omg I had a Hani special for lunch today lol."

People will look for anything to raise postcount. We don't want a flock of idiots to swarm here just to post but not be involved in Sputnikmusic, I don't think.

If you want to post in a community thread, pick any other forum to do that, really.

[Neoteric]

What's the point? How many people even visit this forum (or write reviews for Sputnikmusic)? It would be just to raise postcount. The site/this forum should be focused on album reviews, not "omg I had a Hani special for lunch today lol."

People will look for anything to raise postcount. We don't want a flock of idiots to swarm here just to post but not be involved in Sputnikmusic, I don't think.

If you want to post in a community thread, pick any other forum to do that, really.
I mean, we could discuss Sputnik like "What Format Do You Use For Reviews?"

[DesolationRow]

Med, I know what you mean, that's why I'll only report it if the person posts a comment, like last night. Otherwise, I'll just ask around. :)

[DesolationRow]

I personally think that there should be a "Newbie's Guide to Sputnik" that should be mandatory for all reviewers to read. It would really help. Too many people post without reading the rules. A link on the main page would be awesome.

[DFelon204409]

I personally think that there should be a "Newbie's Guide to Sputnik" that should be mandatory for all reviewers to read. It would really help. Too many people post without reading the rules. A link on the main page would be awesome.

I would love to help write that. Also, it definitely shouldn't be part of the like terms and agreement type thing, because people always ignore that. Actually people ignore rules in general. How about say I'll ban them if they blatantly didn't read the FAQ and guide.

[DFelon204409]

The problem with any formal thing is that people just don't read it. I mean, we've got the FAQ thread stuck in this forum, but I still get people IMing me asking questions that are answered in there...problem users just don't read registration agreements or stuck threads saying "Read this or risk being banned" in the title (e.g what was the case in R&M). I'd be more than happy to help write it, but we have review guidelines, this forum linked on the sputnik homepage, and both Damrod and I are online all the time, basically. We're currently working on setting up something so Damrod and I can ban people from using sputnik, although we're waiting on Jeremy for that. If/when that happens, it should improve things further.

I'll just ban people who don't follow the rules. That's a simple forum rule. Don't follow the rules you get banned. Make it manditory and they'll start doing it or suffer the consequences.

[DesolationRow]

Definitely.....if you need any help, just ask. Doubt you would though.

[Dave de Sylvia]

Are individual's ratings weighted according to seniority? Like if I rated someone's review, would it be worth more than someone further down the list?

[Damrod]

Are individual's ratings weighted according to seniority? Like if I rated someone's review, would it be worth more than someone further down the list?

No, the weight of the votes is the same, as far as I know

[pulseczar]

is there anywhere where we can see a list of all the sputnik users and where they rank?

[JohnXDoe]

Since this thread seems active right now, I figure I will ask this question here.

I was going to review a Rancid album but saw it had already been done. Then a few days later a new review pops up of the same album? Now am I mistaken about this, or does a new review of an album take the place of a prior review of the same album if a new one is submitted? I'm new to reviewing at sputnik so I may just be confused :confused: But I could swear that was the case.

[Dave de Sylvia]

If a second review for an album is submitted, they're merged together. The one with the best rating by other users, as far as I know, is the one which appears first when clicked upon. The other review, or reviews, is listed in the box with the tracklisting.

Example:

Indestructible (by Rudd13) (http://www.sputnikmusic.com/album.php?albumid=494)

There's a link within the small box to brycey's review of the same album.

[JohnXDoe]

^Thank You :)

[DFelon204409]

Still, people don't really like repeats unless it adds a constrasting or really profound opinion on the subject. Do we really need more than one review for Avenged Sevenfold's album City of Evil? Dear Jesus no.

[Berserker!]

Hello forum. I've done 3 reviews on sputnik that I feel are of quite a high standard. However, I've realised that no one has actually rated two of them, and only two people rated the one that was rated at all. I feel that there are many other excellent reviews, such as this one by BuddyBigsby: http://www.sputnikmusic.com/album.php?albumid=2302
that have not received the ratings due to them. I think that it would be a good idea to make the 'was this review well written' icon much more noticeable and large so people a) actually know it's there and b) actually bother to rate the review.

Thanks.

[JohnXDoe]

Still, people don't really like repeats unless it adds a constrasting or really profound opinion on the subject. Do we really need more than one review for Avenged Sevenfold's album City of Evil? Dear Jesus no.

That's the way I see it also. And although it is a community based forum, so to speak, I wouldn't feel right reviewing an album that has already been reviewed by someone. I think perhaps that would be an insulting thing to do. Although it may not be the intent. I figure once one review is written for any given album, why do we need another? But the system of putting links to the alternate reviews in the Track Listing box is good and fair, I think. At least that way everybody has an oppurtunity to have there reviews read. :)

[Damrod]

Fair point...personally I think a bigger problem with that button is that too many people use it incorrectly, i.e if they're rating an AC/DC review, they'll vote "no", no matter how well written the review is, since they don't like AC/DC. I think that before we make it more noticeable we'd have to set it up so Damrod and I can see who voted on reviews, as otherwise I think abuse of the system would grow still further. I'm not opposed to the idea at all though.

That's basically exactly my point of view as well. Especially as more "rate abuse" seems to occur recently, we need some means of logging for us mods who voted a reviw what way before it should be more noticed

[Iai]

Everyone should be like me and just review stuff that isn't rock, so all the MXTabs n00bs don't even look at your reviews.

[JohnXDoe]

Well, I've done a few re-reviews because I think that I can add to what's previously been written. Also, if you have a radically different perspective on an album, then it's good that that gets heard. Like...if you absolutely hate Led Zeppelin IV, and want to write a review of it, then that's a good thing in my opinion

Always good to hear an opposite point of view on an album or to be further informed about it somehow. So I'm assuming from your post that re-reviews are not necessarily frowned upon at sputnik? That will be good to remember in the future. Perhaps after I have been there longer I will be more comfortable with the idea.

Also what is the view on a critic writing multiple reviews on the same artist. Different albums of course. And no re-reviews. I would like to eventually have all X albums reviewed, including there lesser efforts, and I would like to review them in chronological order. Not one right after the other, of course. But over a period of time. Would this be ok?

[Iai]

You wouldn't be the first. That one kid, b-rad, has reviewed all the 311 albums.

I don't think anyone would really have a problem with it.

[Let's Chop Cats!]

Remove the sub-genre 'Classic Punk' or just replace it with 'Punk' or 'Punk Rock'. There is no real need for the genre as only a very limited number of bands fit in there and it would make things easier if there was just Punk Rock or something which would cover all the bands that do not fit into the other subgenres.

[DFelon204409]

You wouldn't be the first. That one kid, b-rad, has reviewed all the 311 albums.

I don't think anyone would really have a problem with it.

I commented on that idiot's Morning View review and he negged one of my reviews. Douche.

[Jom]

I've been the recent victim of negged reviews, which is complete bullshit. I went from having a 1.05 average to a 0.94. Over a tenth of a point? That's ****ing ridiculous.

[Damrod]

I've been the recent victim of negged reviews, which is complete bullshit. I went from having a 1.05 average to a 0.94. Over a tenth of a point? That's ****ing ridiculous.

Me as well. :angry: We need something. Desperately, I know. I'll try to bring it to the chief's attention ;)

[Jom]

Me as well. :angry: We need something. Desperately, I know. I'll try to bring it to the chief's attention ;)

Heh, I want to say it's a non-issue, but it still sucks. I would definitely understand if my older reviews were seen as non-helpful, but that's because they got carried over from the CD Reviews Archive, where there was a 10,000 character limit for posts, and I absolutely hated breaking up my reviews into a second and sometimes a third consecutive post.

Besides, when I have a bit more time, I'm going to re-write the ones from the archive, and I'm going to add a specific format. I'll showcase it in my review tomorrow (album comes out, heh), and we'll see how people like it :)

But when my more recent reviews are getting negged, I want to know why, so I can improve, not be told that something I spend hours on sucks without an explanation. That's elementary and middle school fare. A lot of us are adults or will soon be adults, and we should act as such. Pfft.

[DFelon204409]

Well, your reviews seem a little too long anyway. Did John Cena really need 10 pages?

[Neoteric]

Yes. Don't be moany.

[Jom]

Well, your reviews seem a little too long anyway. Did John Cena really need 10 pages?

I would concede this, but people thought it was a good review. Yes, the music sucks, but that doesn't mean the review should.

[DesolationRow]

I am growing tired of having petty arguements over grudges in the reviews. I know Med and Damrod are doing their best to keep the site in order, but Beyondtheblueprint's most recent, Coheed and Cambria review's incedent is just way too far. It's a complete spam/flame fest in there. Can I ask for the consequences of spam and flaming to be a little bit heavier, not just deleting comments. Please keep the spam out, as well as the elitists.

[Jom]

That's nice and all, but how do you go about doing that? What suggestions do you have for Med and Damrod to do this? What can you do to help?

None of these questions have definitive answers, but believe me when I say that Med and Damrod are trying.

[DFelon204409]

No, you're right.

You forget I'm a mod and can read deleted posts. Think of me as a mindreader.

[DFelon204409]

Well, I'm going to start asking the supers to ban people more often on sputnik as there are far too many people acting like complete jerks on there at the moment, and they're not getting the message in spite of warnings in the reviews, and having comments deleted. Just a warning, but nobody is exempt from this, so don't complain if you get banned. I'm not going to be unduly trigger happy here or anything, but I'm fed up with tolerating this, and I frankly see no reason why people can't just listen to the warnings.

Just IM me with a laundry list of people and I'll check it out and ban them. And to be honest, I'm one of the people making negative comments, the difference is, I'm not aimlessly moaning, I usually am invited to comment on reviews by people IMing me, or I back it up.

[Jom]

You forget I'm a mod and can read deleted posts. Think of me as a mindreader.

No, I didn't forget, hence my "reason for deletion" messages. If you're out for e-intimidation, you might as well stick to tweeners that say "Emo is gay lol" and continue throw your weight around there. I'm not at all worried about your pseudo-psychic powers, so no need to sound like you're full of ****.

[Liberi Fatali]

Well, your reviews seem a little too long anyway. Did John Cena really need 10 pages?
Some would say your reviews don't give enough description about each song, and just give a very general overview.

I don't see making long reviews is a fault, the regulars that visit Sputnik and would read that review certainly would not mind the length. They would probably enjoy the depth to it.

[Dave de Sylvia]

I thought Jom's John Cena review was great, if only because the thought of John Cena making a hip-hop album deserves 10+ pages of laughter. I've had 3 negative ratings in 3 days to take my rating down to .94 and I know that not one of my reviews warrants a negative rating. I can say the same for Jom and Med and even DFelon, who I know has suffered more from unfair negging than anyone. It's quite disheartening to have your review negatively rated from somebody who doesn't explain why, though I must also admit I was guilty of it in my earlier days.

[Jom]

Something that could be looked into is consecutive posting. Sputnikmusic shouldn't be The Pit and should have decent album discussion, not haha, refl, bump, suck my back, etc.

Now, there are a couple exceptions: if you write an extensive comment and need to take two posts, for example.

But there are people who are making comments like

haha

followed by

if you dont like mah reviewz dont read them d00d

followed by

lol.

Now, come on. No one is getting a trophy for having the most posts on Sputnikmusic. If there was, Ethan would be posting there.

One suggestion I had awhile ago was to delete all the comments that were prior to Sputnikmusic (in the old CD reviews forum), especially considering many users don't frequent MX anymore, but then this is likely a bad idea.

[The Flabbit Rides High]

Sorry, im quite new at this Sputnikmusic review posting. Wondered if you guys could help me out.

Im interested in doing a review for sputnikmusic. Should I ask for permission first or should I just post it? Im interested in doing some Anathema reviews (seeing as there is none).

Please reply as to this regard. Thank you.

[Iai]

Now, come on. No one is getting a trophy for having the most posts on Sputnikmusic. If there was, Ethan would be posting there.

lmao

In other news, I agree.

[The Flabbit Rides High]

Just write the review and post it...as it's your first review either me or Damrod will have to approve it, so it won't show up on the main page for a while after you submit it, depending on whether or not either of us are online. If you haven't read them already, then you might want to take a look at this link

http://www.musicianforums.com/sputnik/guidelines.php

as they're just the general guidelines for writing reviews. But yeah, go ahead and write as many as you want. :)

Might not be until somewhere in the weekend tho. Im busy writing mock exams.

Thanx for your help anywayz. :wave:

[mx]

I could set a larger character limit for sputnik comments, say 20 chars

[Damrod]

If that's possible, I'd definitely support it. 20 characters sounds good to me as well...it shouldn't be beyond people to type that on the site. mx, if you see this while you're still on, could you sign on AIM briefly if possible please?

Just wanted to note, I support this as well. :thumb:

[Berserker!]

I'd just like to say that I think that it would be a good idea if the street punk genre on sputnik didn't actually exist anymore and any bands of said genre were just to be put under punk. There are about 2 albums under it and it's a bit..well..silly

[DFelon204409]

Some would say your reviews don't give enough description about each song, and just give a very general overview.

I don't see making long reviews is a fault, the regulars that visit Sputnik and would read that review certainly would not mind the length. They would probably enjoy the depth to it.

That's because I'm reviewing an album and not a bunch of songs. With albums like El Cielo and Frances the Mute being massive concept album, isn't it more helpful to understand the album as a whole instead of the individual chunks? Also, more general reviews give more space to stylized writing and opinion and are plain old more professional.

[DFelon204409]

No, I didn't forget, hence my "reason for deletion" messages. If you're out for e-intimidation, you might as well stick to tweeners that say "Emo is gay lol" and continue throw your weight around there. I'm not at all worried about your pseudo-psychic powers, so no need to sound like you're full of ****.

I was joking dude. Put away the rifle.

[Liberi Fatali]

That's because I'm reviewing an album and not a bunch of songs. With albums like El Cielo and Frances the Mute being massive concept album, isn't it more helpful to understand the album as a whole instead of the individual chunks? Also, more general reviews give more space to stylized writing and opinion and are plain old more professional.
I was trying to show that they are all just opinions, and that everybody has a ton of faults in their review styles.

Also I never critized any specific reviews (nor said I dislike your writing style), and after another quick search I can't even find reviews of those respective albums by you.

[Jom]

Liberi: your avatar is from one of the Cannes Festival films, correct? Or why does it look familiar?

///

In other news: yes, I realize that my style of reviewing is seen as unprofessional by the powers-that-be or the wannabe-powers-that-be. I'm not going to be submitting these to esteemed reviewing magazines/sites/what have you. I write because it's fun. And I like to think that my reviews, as "unprofessional" as they are, are still informative and helpful.

[morrissey]

the wannabe-powers-that-be
heh.

My reviews are structureless and inevitably meander toward pointlessness but I don't care.

[JohnXDoe]

heh.

My reviews are structureless and inevitably meander toward pointlessness but I don't care.

I've read your reviews, Amanda. You are being far too modest. And the WHAM! review was aces.

:lol: WHAM!. Gotta love it.

[Damrod]

Cleaning time. Check the new Ideas thread here (http://www.musicianforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=9449212#post9449212)