| Author |
 Topic  |
|
MguyX 
"X marks the spot"
United States
|
 Posted - 14/11/2005 : 00:27:02
|
Dal� needs changing.
|
 |
|
|
benj clews 
"...."
United Kingdom
|
Posted - 14/11/2005 : 00:30:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by MguyX
Dal� needs changing.
Fixed, ta' |
|
|
|
Sludge 
"Charlie Don't Serf!"
United States
|
|
|
Montacute 
"More Balls Than Most"
Expat Brit in US
|
Posted - 14/11/2005 : 23:29:17
|
| Not sure of the policy regarding same reviews for similar films, but my "Back to the suture" review for Son of Frankenstein was duplicated in the review of Bride of Frankenstein |
|
|
|
MguyX
"X marks the spot"
United States
|
Posted - 15/11/2005 : 04:28:41
|
As I recall, from way way back in the day, identically worded reviews for differnt films were permissible, though this led to some consternation.
The concern, I believe, was that some less scrupulous fwfrs (e.g., noncentz) would steal clever reviews and post them for different films for which they appeared appropos. Indeed, I seem to recall the outing and subsequent scouraging of a certain guilty party, blood stains from which I continue to scrub away on my monitor.
Part of the debate included, I believe, analysis of whether identical reviews defied, nay, mocked the "what film?" bubble identification test. I don't recall clearly what became of the matter. I believe one group espoused the way of flattery, announcing that an identically worded review served as a form of adulation or perhaps sporting fun to the author of the primary post. Eventually, I believe, they became the ruling class.
Still yet another sect chose the way of scorn, disdaining the practice and nailing manifestoes to doors all over fwfr-town. They are rumored to eat their young, which would account for their dwindling numbers.
But those days are long ago, and memory fails me now. But every 23rd Spring . . . . |
|
|
|
Sludge
"Charlie Don't Serf!"
United States
|
Posted - 15/11/2005 : 17:19:06
|
Yeah, MguyX, it still hurts.
I have 30 votes for Ani mated
Noncentz has 32 votes for Ani mated
Same series. "Ani Mated" is my #2 review by votes.
I don't have that much fight in me these days. Could you point me to one of your famous raves, and I can cut and paste?
Sludge |
|
|
|
MguyX
"X marks the spot"
United States
|
Posted - 17/11/2005 : 07:19:17
|
Sludgie, my good friend, always happy to oblige. Peruse the following:
The mother of all rants. (Grrrrr....)
(Post 5 in particular, but you need the rest for context.)
Oh history!
(Good thread, even if educational.)
A certain someone revisits Soylent Green.
(Post 11, in particular.)
This one is a two-parter.
You really have to read the rant here (posts 1 through 4) to understand "Donuts for everyone."
(or "Egalitarianism vs. Transportationism," so don't miss the closer on page 3.)
Someone getting pithy on a point of grammar.
(Well, it could be a lisp.) (Not classic, but it made me titter.)
Sean, doing a perfect MguyX impersonation, twice.
(2nd and 3rd posts from the bottom.)
And, the old standard, just to brighten up the joint: The Tale of the Warm Fuzzies. (Post 15.)
Have Fun! 
|
Edited by - MguyX on 17/11/2005 09:19:24 |
|
|
|
Sean 
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
New Zealand
|
Posted - 17/11/2005 : 08:33:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sludge
Yeah, MguyX, it still hurts.
I have 30 votes for Ani mated
Noncentz has 32 votes for Ani mated
Same series. "Ani Mated" is my #2 review by votes.
I don't have that much fight in me these days. Could you point me to one of your famous raves, and I can cut and paste?
Sludge
A crystal-clear case of a dupe. Have you told noncentz about this one? There's a good chance he doesn't know about it. And it wouldn't surprise me if he gave the dupe the bullet himself if he knew about it.  |
|
|
|
Josh the cat
"ice wouldn't melt, you'd think ....."
East Yorkshire, England.
|
Posted - 20/11/2005 : 18:56:23
|
Benj,
Both Salopian and I have 'Polka tots' for Mad Hot Ballroom, I think that Sal was first, if that is the case then I bow out gracefully, on the listing of the respective pages Sal was 3 days before me.
Cheers
Josh the cat |
|
|
|
Cheese_Ed 
"The Provolone Ranger"
Guernsey
|
|
|
Koli
"Striving lackadaisically for perfection."
United Kingdom
|
Posted - 03/12/2005 : 09:17:22
|
It's ironic that Cheese_Ed should have posted the most recent contribution to this thread. His name crops up below.
Among the 50 or so reviews for Closer there are two with identical wording: Portman strips for Nichols. One is the Cheese's (6 votes) and the other is tommyboy's (1). |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper.
"A fourword thinking guy."
United Kingdom
|
Posted - 03/12/2005 : 10:21:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by Montacute
Not sure of the policy regarding same reviews for similar films, but my "Back to the suture" review for Son of Frankenstein was duplicated in the review of Bride of Frankenstein
Sorry Montacute, when I wrote my review, "Back To The Suture", I wasn't aware of yours. Of course the idea is exactly the same although I prefer my capitalisation of the words as its a (mis-)quote of a title, but thats my preference. In any case, I am dishing you out a vote forthwith!
I'll leave it up to the editors to do with it as they will. However, I would say that if identical reviews for different films are not allowable then the software could very easily reject (or warn) the review immediately, couldn't it? Also shouldn't there be a means of checking whether a given review exists for any film?
Can I add that the same words don't necessarily make the same review as the review stands in relation to the film. I am quite happy that I have the same wording for two different films: "Goodkiddies" for Bugsy Malone and for City Of God, because the sense of the reviews is quite different given the different films. The first is lightly amusing and the second is bleak.
|
|
|
|
bife
"Winners never quit ... fwfr ... "
Singapore
|
Posted - 03/12/2005 : 13:32:08
|
benj's policy on this is that two identical reviews for different films is allowable.
However, I am very uncomfartable if a review of mine is a duplicate of someone else's, not only in the wording but also in the meaning of the review. If I find it, I usually delete mine.
I don't feel anyone else should be pressured to do the same, because I understand that 'great minds think alike'. I just don't like to think of one of my reviews cheapening someone else's work, which is what a duplicate does.
On a seperate note - where have you been hiding out Montacute - you've been even more absent than me of late? |
|
|
|
Cheese_Ed
"The Provolone Ranger"
Guernsey
|
Posted - 03/12/2005 : 16:42:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
quote:
Originally posted by SixLean
Cheese_Ed & tommyboy
Fixed- ta'
That's weird, Benj claims to have fixed it a page ago?! |
|
|
|
randall 
"I like to watch."
NYC, USA
|
Posted - 03/12/2005 : 22:24:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by bife
benj's policy on this is that two identical reviews for different films is allowable.
However, I am very uncomfartable if a review of mine is a duplicate of someone else's, not only in the wording but also in the meaning of the review. If I find it, I usually delete mine.
I don't feel anyone else should be pressured to do the same, because I understand that 'great minds think alike'. I just don't like to think of one of my reviews cheapening someone else's work, which is what a duplicate does.
I happen to agree with bife's entire sentiment [excepting the highlighted point!], including not minding if others disagree with me and maintain any of their duped reviews. I believe it's a matter of personal ethics, and another person might even disagree with that! |
Edited by - randall on 03/12/2005 22:25:49 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Duplicate Reviews
