Email me at
If you're in favour of a single-rating system, put 'Yes' in the message body (no other text). If you're against it, put 'No'.
This is in a separate thread because it keeps being ignored by the mods (and Tanneur in particular) in the thread it's most suited to, the Review sticky.
The Review Guidelines, as they are, need attention and change. The community is mostly agreed on this, particularly reviewers such as Julius (who has said he'll give up his reviewing if the current situation continues) and many of the oldies who are still around.
In Julius' words:
I can appreciate the need for a benchmark like the Review Guidelines, but I don't think that said benchmark should be seven or eight years old and never updated or tweaked.This isn't an unreasonable thing to ask. The current review guidelines, and the legalistic way in which they are interpreted, needs to change. At the very least, we need a full and open discussion of them, in which the staff of this site take an active role instead of ignoring all dissent.
Every time the topic has been raised (and it has been raised frequently over the past year especially) the subject has been ignored. It'll keep happening until it is addressed.
I suggest that we, the community as a whole, come to an agreement on what we feel the new guidelines should be. This will mean compromise (I certainly don't expect to get my way with the 'no categories, just an overall score' approach), but we can all chip in here. Staff included.
This will work as long as said staff do not decide that the guidelines are somehow sacrosanct and unchangeable merely because they've always been this way.
So what say you?
[This message has been edited by Andrew Dunn (edited 07-09-2008 @ 03:20 PM).]