|
|
Post by ringmasterrob on Apr 29, 2004 6:14:43 GMT
So far the average review of pothole is ****-***** So which is it going to be?
|
|
|
|
Post by electronico1995 on Apr 29, 2004 6:37:14 GMT
It'll probably be 4 stars. The Critique said that ***** was a bit too much.
|
|
|
|
Post by ringmasterrob on May 1, 2004 7:03:59 GMT
I don't see why, Pothole is the best article up there atm (sorry as I am to inflate HStorm's ego any higher) and I see no reason why it shouldn't recieve 5 stars.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheCritique on May 1, 2004 7:50:44 GMT
I can't put up a rating before I have a definative answer! I'm going to have to leave the rating box blank for now.
|
|
|
|
Post by ringmasterrob on May 5, 2004 18:42:55 GMT
Very well, i've argued my corner for 5 stars well enough I think!
|
|
|
|
Post by TheCritique on May 11, 2004 7:13:25 GMT
Article rating needed for the chain e-mails opinion. Please post suggestions.
|
|
|
|
Post by HStorm on May 11, 2004 10:17:47 GMT
I'd give it 3 going on 4. The writing's lively and enthusiastic but the subject's a teensy bit dull.
|
|
|
|
Post by ringmasterrob on May 11, 2004 12:13:18 GMT
*** I think the article didn't quite do enough for me to earn higher, there are much better articles that only got **** so I stick with ***, no offence to Detrius of course!
|
|
|
|
Post by TheCritique on May 11, 2004 17:16:37 GMT
That suggestion has been taken into account. Any other suggestions?
|
|
|
|
Post by TheCritique on May 20, 2004 16:00:40 GMT
There are many articles on the homepage without ratings. I forgot to put a rating up for chain e-mails, but does anyone have ratings for the others?
|
|
|
|
Post by ringmasterrob on May 20, 2004 17:47:04 GMT
The new article by Liquidus is very thought provoking and interesting, it really makes you think about those who smoke. I am not in the least bit surprised it got an A* well done Liquidus!
|
|
|
|
Post by TheCritique on May 22, 2004 10:37:11 GMT
I have updated 3 ratings. HStorm's pothole article has *****. Liquidus' smoking article has ****, and the chain e-mails article has ***. Thankyou for your reccomendations gentlemen. Keep them coming!
|
|
|
|
Post by ringmasterrob on May 28, 2004 20:31:32 GMT
The new interviews, compensation culture and my effort need ratings too now.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheCritique on May 30, 2004 9:11:10 GMT
For once I've decided to announce my reccomendations for ratings as we don't seem to be getting that many for the new articles (Politician speak. Means none).
I reccomend **** for the interviews and the school bureaucracy follow up. I cannot rate compensation culture as it is my own, so I still need ratings for those.
Any other reccmendations (please!)?
|
|
|
|
Post by ringmasterrob on May 30, 2004 17:09:25 GMT
Compensation Culture: **** (I would give it 5 if it was just that teensy bit longer)
Interviews: ****/***** (can't decide on this)
|
|
|
|
Post by TheCritique on May 31, 2004 10:14:24 GMT
ok. I could still extend the compensation culture, but what would I add to it? What other points would I make?
|
|
|
|
Post by ringmasterrob on May 31, 2004 11:09:28 GMT
Anything, perhaps some real life examples cases, there are plenty out there.
|
|
|
|
Post by HStorm on May 31, 2004 13:00:14 GMT
I haven't had a chance to read through most of the articles properly yet as I've been very busy for days with several projects for other websites. Will rate them all before next weekend though.
I give **** for the Lib/Dem interview, and *** for the army one.
|
|
|
|
Post by HStorm on Jun 5, 2004 0:47:28 GMT
More ratings...
Compensation culture *****
School Breaucracy follow up ** (It's not badly written or anything, it's just it doesn't really belong here. It really just amounts to a lot of private belly-aching about the rules of a particular school.)
Arab Israeli Essay 2 **** (Would've been five but a bit too brief.)
|
|
|
|
Post by ringmasterrob on Jun 5, 2004 11:05:38 GMT
"It's not badly written or anything, it's just it doesn't really belong here. It really just amounts to a lot of private belly-aching about the rules of a particular school.)" I see this point here, and at least you had the decency to give fair reasoning for your rating. In my one defence the original School Breaucracy was well recieved here and was not considered out of place, I asked Critique beforehand and he didn't think there would be anything wrong. I did have another article on education as a whole, citing the particular school as an example but I was not happy with it and so in one fairly dull 30minutes I scrapped the other and wrote the follow up instead.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheCritique on Jun 5, 2004 20:55:35 GMT
Article rating suggestions have been taken into account and will be displayed at next update. I'm sorry Rob but your article will get **  . |
|
|
|
Post by ringmasterrob on Jun 7, 2004 15:08:20 GMT
Ah well, live & learn. Should I write another article i'll try and make it a bit more relevant, although writing another article is something unlikely for me seeing as I am immensely busy now, instead I'm settling for co-creating the new forum RP.
|
|
|
|
Post by ringmasterrob on Jun 27, 2004 13:55:44 GMT
Regarde Les Reviews:
NINETEEN-EIGHTY-FOUR ANALYSIS: *****
THINK-TANK INTERVIEW: *****
BUS COMPANY REPRESENTATIVE INTERVIEW: ****
JUNE 10TH ELECTION REPORT: **/***
|
|
|
|
Post by HStorm on Jun 28, 2004 13:14:27 GMT
THINK-TANK INTERVIEW: ***** (Terrifically cynical stuff!)
BUS COMPANY REPRESENTATIVE INTERVIEW: *** (Bit too similar to a Rail Privatisation mock-interview done by the real Long Johns.)
JUNE 10TH ELECTION REPORT: *** (Accurately written and detailed, but just a tad too statistical to hold the reader's interest consistently.)
|
|
|
|
Post by TheCritique on Jun 28, 2004 18:21:02 GMT
Maybe you should give thinking from the point of view of Sir Dennis of Harvey a rest eh?
Reports have a tendancy to do that unfortunately.
Unless any other suggestions are submitted the articles will be rated as follows:
NINETEEN EIGHTY FOUR ANALYSIS: *****
THINK-TANK INTERVIEW: *****
JUNE 10TH ELECTION REPORT: ***
BUS COMPANY REPRESENTATIVE INTERVIEW: ***
Hopefully we will get some more reccomendations in so these might change.
|
|
.