Reviews reporting thread - Progressive Rock Music Forum

http://www.progarchives.com/Review.asp?id=239701

This review uses completely unnecessary profanity, and is a direct violation of forum guidelines. As stated earlier, I too want to make sure Prog Archives remains a civil place to visit. Thanks.

Just an observation, but someone who clearly joined this site to rant about that one album. Even the user name is telling. PT old fan LOL

https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays

Well Steve Wilson's lyrics are awful...But I do think it's funny he put that much work into ranting about one album when we'll probably never see him again.

if you own a sodastream i hate you

LiquidEternity wrote:

These reviewers seem mildly fishy:

http://www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=25618
http://www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=25761

Col.Nuke wrote:

http://www.progarchives.com/Review.asp?id=239701

This review uses completely unnecessary profanity, and is a direct violation of forum guidelines. As stated earlier, I too want to make sure Prog Archives remains a civil place to visit. Thanks.

Colonel Nuke, with all due respect, I appreciate that you reported this, but I think this review is OK. It's really OK to hate a record and state why you hate it, I actually think much of the review is well-written. There was some unneccessary crude language here and there, but not enough to warrant editing. I think he knows his subject and approaches it with a certain integrity.

P.S. Mr Eternity, I guess those reviews you listed could be seen as ratings manipulation, but I don't think it is clearly that, maybe he just doesn't like those records, it's OK to dislike anything you want to.
I admit the one with the three ratings is definitley a gray area, if another admins see that as ratings manipulation then I will go with that.

Edited by Easy Money - September 17 2009 at 20:10

Yeah, I too vote in favor of cracking down on inappropriate content in the reviews. A profanity filter might not be the most fair thing, such as in the case of bands whose songs feature curse words in their titles, but forcing reviewers somehow to be much more responsible with their word choice is something I quite stand behind.

And in reference to those two, yeah, I'm not sure if they're spam or not. The latter seems much more likely to be so, especially considering the username.

Made mistake in last post

http://www.progarchives.com/album-reviews.asp?id=2251 This album has only 5 and 4 stars reviews and eight 1 star ratings, most of them given by that guy who loves Pink Floyd very much. I think admins should check that out.

I haven't heard this album either but at least five of those 1 star ratings are obviously given by one guy. I think those IP adresses should be checked.

Uros Krunic wrote:

I haven't heard this album either but at least five of those 1 star ratings are obviously given by one guy. I think those IP adresses should be checked.

And that's only the tip of the iceberg I can tell you. I've done a small investigation on this subject since I'm very annoyed about this childish behaviour. I know our admin Dean has worked on this a few weeks ago and I suggest he should be trying to put an end to this crap. The only thing I don't know is whether this is a group of PF fanboys or just one or two persons coming up with different membernames all the time. Is it possible to check on this some day ?? Here's the list:

poliadicto, manolos, martha, saudiman, canismajor, postage21, unfriendly, vesta, encore, xanadu29, jimbo26, hummer, marlonbrandon, cayeno, display, journey2112, mario36 and pasttime.

And probably this is not all by a long way. Same pattern all the time: 4 and 5 starratings for Pink Floyd albums and 1 and two stars for their rivals in the top 100 of all times. I don't even have a problem with the promotion of Pink Floyd, I feel that is allowed in a way. My problem is the unfair way in which their competitors are treated. I already discovered 18 names by just a small research. Let's say it's a total of over 20, then it's the same weight as two or three one starreviews by a prog reviewer and even four or five one starreview by a guest reviewer. I think that's a BIG problem we should deal with asap.

A day without prog is a wasted day

Yes, I was just about to report his Per un amico review, because it was the first thing I saw when I opened the site home page today:

http://www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=25592

I believe this review (and surely the others of the same kind) is worthless to anyone who wants to learn more about the album - which, after all, is the whole point of any review.