The anti-fanboys

Raff wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: ^ Different people use different rating scales ... and even in reviews people use adjectives like "good", "great" or "average" with different meanings. One person might call an album "good" and it's a recommendation, while another person might use the word "good" as a euphemism for "nice try, but not quite". I'll reiterate my point: Ratings, reviews, tags ... whether they mean something to you depends mostly on whether you know the person who submitted them. And, by extension, the more ratings are submitted for any item, the more likely will the resulting average be useful, since the different strategies that people use will "even out". That is true, but review sites do not always have a faithful readership. Internet surfing is not always about visiting the same site over and over again (though it may be for the likes of us), but often about visiting sites occasionally just in order to find a particular piece of information. Personally, though I visit a couple of review sites quite regularly, I have not really had the opportunity to get acquainted with the different reviewers and their individual styles - among other factors, those sites don't work like PA, where each and every reviewer has a personal page.

Wait, you mean there are other sites on the internet besides Progarchives?  Why would anyone have any desire to visit them? 

I try to point out negatives about even my most favorite albums (try to see it from other perspectives.......like Pawn Hearts, which is a 5 star album for me, I can still admit that Hammill's voice is an acquired taste and that some may be immediately turned off by it).  I also try to point out positives about even my least favorite albums (things like good production quality, or that the musicians are obviously very skilled, or things along those lines).  I actually have the most difficulty with negative reviews because if I don't like an album at all, I'm not likely to listen to it enough times to get to know it well.  I give every album at least 2 or 3 listens, usually more if there is anything about it I like.  But that often is not enough to give an informative detailed review about.  My early progarchives reviews make me cringe, as they are not informative, very short, and really offer very little insight to the average listener.  I've tried to improve that and as a result, I very rarely write reviews anymore

Overall though, I agree with the balanced notion.  Be informative, give your opinion, and leave the rest up to the reader.

Green Shield Stamp wrote: Can someone explain for me what is meant by the term fanboy?  It is obviously pejorative - but why fanboy and not fanman? Does it carry connotations of immaturity?  Is being a fan negative? Does it carry slight homosexual connotations? I see the term used a lot in Prog Archives and often wonder what is meant by it.

Oh, and about it having homosexual connotations, it's not uncommon for homosexual traits to come out in fanboys, I think.  They might worship certain men (say Petrucci) so much that they queerly fantasize about the man.  I certainly see self-professed fanboys playfully playing with homo-eroticism, but there's probably some truth behind statements such as "I want to get into such and such male musician's pants" from professed heterosexuals.  I've never been a real fanboy, or a rent boy for that matter, so I don't know. 

To write reviews is an art.

harmonium.ro wrote: Dude, relax, he was talking about those who come here only to leave low ratings in order to manipulate the charts.