About Reviews

Our Philosophy About Reviews

We want to bring heart and soul into our reviews.

We all go through this period when looking at reviews: We want an objective reviewer that will only state the facts and be scientific* about it.  We understand those feelings, but understand that these feelings only strive to hurt you in the end.

There’s a reason why you want us to be subjective: you want reviews that show care.  Unlike objective reviews where people simply tell you if they are good or not (which is subjective in its own right), subjective reviews tell you why they’re good from the reviewer’s point of view.  People need to know what made the reviewer care or not about characters, why did or did not the story resonate with them.  That only comes with the package of subjective reviews.  Does their personal history influence their outlook on characters, does the current environment they live in put the show’s story into a different perspective?  These factors influence reviews and also reflects how you see reviews.  That’s good because it can lead to good well meaningful discussion that enlightens everyone even if people hold the same opinions after discussion.

With that said, we want thoughtful discussion when challenging some of the ideas of the reviewer.  A simple “You’re wrong”, “You’re biased”, or words like “professionally offended” or “oversensitive” don’t challenge the ideas at all, but rather just dismisses them.  When people do that, expect for no one to take your discussion seriously as well as for the comment(s) to be removed (or not approved) from the comment section.  See where the reviewer is coming from, acknowledge it, and then refute with traces to the source (or from other sources) that show the actual point of how you interpreted the work.

About Scoring

We use a 20 point scale with 1 being the lowest and 10 being the highest.  We feel that these ratings act as a recommendation guide for how urgent the person should get to the material.  Normal circumstances for material will have a single score.  Under certain circumstances a material may get multiple scores because of the following:

The material has multiple audio track and one audio track makes the experience better than the other.

The material has multiple written languages (i.e. original, and translated) and one written aspect is better than the other.

Under certain circumstances scores maybe revised (either higher or lower) for any and all materials.  If the score is revised justification will come from the person revising the score.

*Science, also has politics (think different sides and not conservative versus progressive) and that often times can cause subjective viewings as well.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s