| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 03/12/2008 : 21:06:35
Benj, are you please going to get to these at any stage? There may be cases I have forgotten, but every instance I remember where I have reported my own duplicate review hasn't yet been processed. |
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 07/17/2010 : 15:22:51
One's just been removed for which my comment at the time was, "This is similar to another review but non-racist, so I think that justifies adding it." I was totally up front about it, so it seems like some consistency as to what is acceptable is in order.
I hope my votes were not transferred to the other one: lots of people may not have wanted to vote for a racist review. |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 07/17/2010 : 15:19:15
quote:
Originally posted by BiggerBoat
If people are so dim or their memories are so bad that they duplicate their own reviews
What do you mean? My only near-duplicates of my own reviews have been when the MERPs have approved two similar attempts. I haven't forgotten any of them. |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 07/17/2010 : 15:16:14
Benj, thanks very much for starting to process the 'too similar' reported reviews. I'm glad to see my own reviews that I have reported removed (hopefully the votes were transferred, which is why I didn't delete them) and also another one that I did not realise was a duplicate (I've now voted for the older review, of course).
One of mine has also been removed that is not in fact too similar to any other review -- the only similarity is from the fact that it puns on a prominent character name (in a different way) and so that can hardly count! I'll resubmit it on Monday.
Thanks again.  |
| BiggerBoat |
Posted - 04/13/2010 : 14:19:24
Screw that Benj - the book and the new site are way more important. If people are so dim or their memories are so bad that they duplicate their own reviews, I hardly think you should be changing their nappies for them.
|
| benj clews |
Posted - 04/13/2010 : 10:43:47
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
quote:
Originally posted by randall
That's probably wise.
It was arguably wise when he said it and there was a backlog. There is not a backlog now.
No, there's just a book, the book's website, new fwfr and my day job. I'm just overflowing with spare time right now. |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 04/11/2010 : 02:16:38
quote:
Originally posted by randall
That's probably wise.
It was arguably wise when he said it and there was a backlog. There is not a backlog now. |
| randall |
Posted - 03/06/2010 : 22:09:17
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
Nope, I've no problems with people reporting their own reviews. I'm just trying to concentrate on the backlog before I get stuck into the reported stuff.
That's probably wise. |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 03/06/2010 : 22:03:22
A bit of an issue with the current system is that if a review with a problem remains on the site, one doesn't know whether (a) you disagreed with the report, (b) you haven't looked at it yet or (c) it has never been reported. If I knew it were (a) for one of my own at-fault reviews, I would at least be able to delete it instead. If I knew it were (b), I would know to wait. As it is, while I feel pretty sure what I've reported, I cannot be certain and so assume (c), thus continually reporting the same reviews just to be on the safe side. |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 03/06/2010 : 20:44:25
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
you're just assuming if something hasn't happened for you then everyone else must be the same.
Well, I took for granted that you would have gone through them chronologically (to be fair), so I thought that if any reported reviews had been processed then some of the ones by me would have been.
quote:
I admit that was a good while back.
You'll forgive me if there were some cases long ago which now escape me then.
One of the reasons I'm keen for this tidy-up is that I always put reviews through the F.Y.C.T.H. in order and have a backlog of about six to eight weeks. It happens all the time that someone posts a later duplicate which gets loads of votes and then when my older review goes through it doesn't seem as good. However, I similarly have votes that belong to other people and I want them to have them. |
| benj clews |
Posted - 12/31/2009 : 02:12:13
quote:
Originally posted by Sa10pian
What was? The reporting feature?
No- I was referring to the time I said I'd get started on the reported reviews after the review backlog came down.
quote:
Last time you said that you were waiting till the backlog had been cleared. The backlog has now been cleared. Will reported reviews always be the lowest priority?
They're certainly the lowest priority currently. The backlog was still there when I started work on the new site, therefore there was no point at which there was (a). no backlog and (b). I wasn't working on the new site which would have been the point I started work on the not inconsiderable job of working through the reported reviews. In the grand scheme of things, I put pretty much everything above reported reviews.
quote:
Maybe the feature should never have been brought in then, and we should just have carried on using the threads.
You're free to report things here instead of using the report feature- it's a free country. Be grateful I gave you an option. At least by reporting reviews, they'll be easy to look through (and in one place) once I do have the time.
quote:
Am I right in thinking that no reported reviews have ever been acted upon? (I've never noticed anything happen to any that I've reported.)
No- as usual, you're just assuming if something hasn't happened for you then everyone else must be the same. I made a good start on the reported reviews initially when this feature was first added but I admit that was a good while back. |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 12/31/2009 : 01:56:07
What was? The reporting feature? Lots of features are from before you started working on the new version of the site.
Last time you said that you were waiting till the backlog had been cleared. The backlog has now been cleared. Will reported reviews always be the lowest priority? Maybe the feature should never have been brought in then, and we should just have carried on using the threads. Am I right in thinking that no reported reviews have ever been acted upon? (I've never noticed anything happen to any that I've reported.)
It seems to me that quickly cleaning up actual errors on the site shouldn't be abandoned in the wake of endlessly adding new reviews. |
| benj clews |
Posted - 12/31/2009 : 00:47:14
Um... this was before I started working on the new fwfr. Until I've got that up in some form reported reviews aren't really my highest priority just yet  |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 12/30/2009 : 13:08:15
Any danger of any progress here, Benj? I've just seen ten votes of mine that need transferring to lemmy. |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 08/07/2009 : 00:42:26
quote:
Originally posted by MguyX
Why don't you just delete them from your own approved reviews (that is, unless you are reporting them because you want to make a correction without having them go back through the approval process, which inclination I would understand)?
Because (i) the votes need to be transferred and (ii) I want to know when reported reviews start being processed. |
| MguyXXV |
Posted - 08/07/2009 : 00:37:36
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
. . . but every instance I remember where I have reported my own duplicate review hasn't yet been processed.
Why don't you just delete them from your own approved reviews (that is, unless you are reporting them because you want to make a correction without having them go back through the approval process, which inclination I would understand)?  |
