it only annoys me at all because the people that are somehow chosen to be contribs or whatever on this site end up being the main review by default that represent the site, as opposed to the review chosen objectively by voting. takes away from the site's legitimacy
I've seen you make this comment a few times before, and it's interesting you should say that because not two days I let Gameofmetal have the Dreamless feature for a while simply because I appreciated the effort he put into his write-up. Of course, when my review was re-featured after 24 or so hours as per the ~hierarchy~ I came across these little gems..
What happened to the other feature?
Eh I'm just biased because the previous feature had a higher score and I like the album
..which illustrates why the userbase would make for a pretty piss-poor jury as far as flagged reviews go, after all, reviews here are sooner negged over the author's opinion than they are over quality.
Besides Sputnik isn't a democracy so your point is moot.
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
yeah but my point is it should be
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0 | Sound Off
is there actually a a feature hierarchy
|
| |
yeah but my point is it should be
Why? The coexistence of professional and amateur content and the exchange of opinions from all levels is a huge part of this site's appeal, and pretty much the sole reason I kept coming back here in my early days. There's no reason to get riled up because you don't like the style of a writer who has earned a promotion and takes precedence as a result, just.. I dunno, read another review?
is there actually a a feature hierarchy
staff > contrib > user > Gameofmetal
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
"professional" ;]
i don't know, i think the site would carve it's only little niche that way, the way it is now quality often gets unfairly buried, crap often gets defaulted, this way it might promote more creativity and draw a wider audience
(by the way im not implying this review is crap, its well written and my criticism was more of a difference of opinion on the meta of the review as opposed to quality)
|
| |
Do you volunteer yourself to be the arbiter of default reviews then? Clearly you know better than anyone else.
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
?
In promoting a democratic system I am not saying I or anyone know better than anyone else the point is a consensus is the best option plus promotes site activity
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
On the subject of the album, I'm surprised Jamie xx didn't have anything to do with With You.
|
| |
Album Rating: 2.5
Finally got this bitch on CD
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.5
Let it bang in the whip
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0 | Sound Off
can we talk about how the DMX sample and the re-enacted hook from "How's it Going Down" sound so smooth on U With Me? wonder how X feels about it
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.0
went platinum and outsold Chocolate Starfish & the Hot Dog Flavored Water !!!
|
| |
Album Rating: 1.0
watching the beginnings of social decay
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0 | Sound Off
Later generations' history students will, after being asked to provide a major example for the downfall of morality and culture in the twentieth/ 21st century, in large numbers cite this album's title and culprit for the making of it. In this regard, it is invaluable to future historians.
|
| |
confirmed for unmistakably a drake album
|
| |
Album Rating: 5.0
Bump
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
I've listened to this so much over the last week or so. It's pretty compelling to listen to, even though I don't think it's that great.
|
| |
Album Rating: 2.0
whats that supposed to mean
|
| |
this whips you guys are fucked
|
| |
Album Rating: 5.0
Meek fans
|
| |
|
|
