Inappropriate Ratings

Ah-hem - you've got to have bloody good solid irrefutable evidence before you start making accusations like that.

Oh, and I take back any thoughts of Anglagard's P.R. being behind any conspiracy - they have their share of 1-stars from list-manipulator ratings as well...It basically happens to everyone on the Top List...

pianoman wrote: ^ spammers like them had been pushing my band's rating down too. It honestly doesn't bother me, but I know it must bother other artists.

It's just disappointing, really. You see the number of ratings increment, and wonder, ooh, someone new has taken the time to consider this art we've made. Maybe they posted some thoughts on it, good or bad. Then you realize you just got caught up in a mouse-clicking numbers game.

Looking at it in reverse, I would be very saddened if I found out anyone gave some other release one star to move us up further in the list. I know first-hand the tens of thousands of dollars that go into keeping a band together for multiple albums and shows, the friends gained and lost, the sacrifices to careers and personal relationships. The thoughts of assigning an arbitrary number to a release that I've never listened to, without a thought to these sacrifices, is extremely lame. (and inexcusable when the release can be heard in its entirety for free).

Sure, let band members give themselves 5 stars. (I gave my own first release 3 and 2nd one 4). Even a presidential candidate gets to vote for himself! But to dish out bad ratings to others to that end is, in my opinion, ludicrous, especially as it's one that can be easily remedied with some SQL and VB script.


Edited by jplanet - February 10 2013 at 19:41

This is getting to the point where it's not even funny, a bunch of people signed up just in December for the sole purpose of giving Anglagard 5-stars and every other band on te list three stars. I am wondering if there is a coordinated effort going on here:

http://www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=43901
http://www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=43929
http://www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=45077
http://www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=45053
http://www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=43821

Some of them are kind enough to not deliberately give the rest of the release a low rating, but some, like Bren Rodmar, go so far as to give everyone else one star!

Again, I do not complain about my own release's rating, I would give it only 4 stars myself, and the average is above that. But it's quite annoying when you are an artist searching for its audience to have so many ratings from people who very likely never even bothered to listen. (and I would bet good money on that).

I have only recently listened to both, so I have to hold off on comparisons.

^Whether it flies or not, I fully support this idea.


On a lighter note, for my inappropriate rating of the week I give the new Riverside album 4 breasts. 4 and a half really.

timothy leary wrote: If you disallow ratings for the current year A lot of trolls would disappear Make them do what they like to do But only if it is in a review They really aren't that slick They just like being.......a part of the anatomy which people fell uncomfortable talking about.

^^ Poetry! Love it!

jplanet wrote: Kati wrote:   jplanet, I will not discuss progressive ears on here, they have quite a big member base and most are not fans of P.A. for their own reasons. Enough said, this is a great site and I'll leave it here.   Also do not read too much into what I said, there are many sites who can easily compete to P.A. one of those is also DPRP they are good too, currently P.A. for me is the best and being stuck up with a broomstick stuck in our ahum won't help, all I want is to be upfront and helpful even if my ideas are wrong, atleast I care and am trying is to contribute for this site to be and maintain most influential.   jplanet sorry forgot the hug lolol plus hug me too Who am I do deny a hug? Yes, I am aware of the unfortunate cliques - hence the reason I have retreated a bit form discussions on any of the forums, though that is also because I am a rather non-neutral member since I've been creating prog music. Of course I will be interested in promoting myself, so I don't want to be a spammer, and I would want any discussions about my own music to be free of any knowledge of observation on my part, but that's another story...

Dayvenkirq wrote: jplanet wrote: For the non-English speakers, it takes only a few seconds to paste their review into Google Translate or similar. I love reading reviews that are translated that way, even if they are not 100% accurate. No, they have to be accurate. You must have heard the phrase "lost in translation". A review is worthless if that kind of loss is in a lot of places in the review. jplanet wrote: ... or, let anyone submit in any language, and then include a link to a Google translation in English. That makes even less sense.

I would never profess to offer any thoughts that make sense! Only ones that possibly make more sense than zero improvement, or at least possibly lead to a discussion that will bring about a better idea.