That #AMV-Review Discussion Again

[godix]

There's only two ways -review wouldn't cause drama. One is if you pick total noobs and tear them a new asshole, after no one has ever given the any indication they care what's said about a noob no matter how vicious it is. The other is if you turn review into a sucking the popular editor of the weeks dick, after all almost no one has given any indication they'll accept anything short of genuflexion to their cult like deity/editor of choice. Neither option is that interesting really so just let it die.

[Kionon]

Basically, I share the sentiments of those that think the recent reviews have felt less like reviews and more like lynchings.

This is the general consensus. I respect it. I am willing to change it.

Dunno how welcome I would actually be as a reviewer, though, seeing as how I have nothing uploaded to this site (or any site, for that matter). If you care about times from someone who hasn't been to -review, then I'll consider my schedule later.

As a participant? Perfectly welcome. If you mean as a member of the committee, remember there has always been a spot on the selection committee for a non-editor. That's quadir's old spot. I would be more than interested in hearing from you if you are interested in that position. Either way, yes, I do need times and days. Something most posts have lacked so far.

Meanwhile, I'll probably get flamed or something now. Meh. =\

Naw.

[Kionon]

Neither option is that interesting really so just let it die.

I consider that option on the table, as well.

[LivingFlame]

There's only two ways -review wouldn't cause drama. One is if you pick total noobs and tear them a new asshole, after no one has ever given the any indication they care what's said about a noob no matter how vicious it is. The other is if you turn review into a sucking the popular editor of the weeks dick, after all almost no one has given any indication they'll accept anything short of genuflexion to their cult like deity/editor of choice. Neither option is that interesting really so just let it die.

So, it's impossible for there to be a middle ground here?

Dunno how welcome I would actually be as a reviewer, though, seeing as how I have nothing uploaded to this site (or any site, for that matter). If you care about times from someone who hasn't been to -review, then I'll consider my schedule later.

As a participant? Perfectly welcome. If you mean as a member of the committee, remember there has always been a spot on the selection committee for a non-editor. That's quadir's old spot. I would be more than interested in hearing from you if you are interested in that position. Either way, yes, I do need times and days. Something most posts have lacked so far.

I'd probably just remain as a participant. Why? I don't plan on being a non-editor forever.
I work in Video Production and major in Visual Communication, so I plan on making something eventually. Sometimes I just do so much editing at work I just don't want to edit at home, though. So that could be a while, lol.

Maybe I'd be interested in such a position if I knew more and actually had a chance to attend some reviews first.

Erm, as for times, mine will be in CST:
Pretty much any time after 2PM on Sundays would usually work for me.
Mondays, Thursdays, and Fridays from about 7:30PM to 11PM (for starting time). I'm usually not asleep before midnight.
Saturdays from 8PM to 11PM.

You don't need to feel the need to put much weight on my times though, as I'm still one of the new guys around here.

[The Origonal Head Hunter]

Basically, I share the sentiments of those that think the recent reviews have felt less like reviews and more like lynchings.

This is the general consensus. I respect it. I am willing to change it.

You are willing to change it, but that's not the issue. The thing to ask: is it even possible to change the way people go about reviewing and such? If you ban the people who tear into videos from participating (with the exception of flaming for its own sake), then it's not a public review, its a 'mod approved' review.

I think its Quadir had it right when he instituted the 'good, bad, and general' theme, though the good always ended up being shorter than the bad. Equalling out the good and bad, no emphasis either way, would be best, I think, though its unlikely to happen.

Video choice... Eh, you had to choose from what was submitted. Can't complain the lesser known editors/videos didn't get put in.

Best time for me would probably be 7-12 EST any day.

[Yok/0]

There's only two ways -review wouldn't cause drama. One is if you pick total noobs and tear them a new asshole, after no one has ever given the any indication they care what's said about a noob no matter how vicious it is. The other is if you turn review into a sucking the popular editor of the weeks dick, after all almost no one has given any indication they'll accept anything short of genuflexion to their cult like deity/editor of choice. Neither option is that interesting really so just let it die.

So, it's impossible for there to be a middle ground here?

In this site I hate it to say it's one of the other. As far -review goes anyway.

Only someone from France would say something like that. America ain't gonna wait for you to finish your cheese, froggy.

[LivingFlame]

So, it's impossible for there to be a middle ground here?

In this site I hate it to say it's one of the other. As far -review goes anyway.

Only someone from France would say something like that. America ain't gonna wait for you to finish your cheese, froggy.

I think its Quadir had it right when he instituted the 'good, bad, and general' theme, though the good always ended up being shorter than the bad. Equalling out the good and bad, no emphasis either way, would be best, I think, though its unlikely to happen.

Obviously it's possible to have some form of middle ground. I'm not looking for right in the middle and perfectly equal or anything. But it clearly doesn't have to be out at the extremes.

[MioMug]

There's only two ways -review wouldn't cause drama. One is if you pick total noobs and tear them a new asshole, after no one has ever given the any indication they care what's said about a noob no matter how vicious it is. The other is if you turn review into a sucking the popular editor of the weeks dick, after all almost no one has given any indication they'll accept anything short of genuflexion to their cult like deity/editor of choice. Neither option is that interesting really so just let it die.

So, it's impossible for there to be a middle ground here?

I haven't read many of the logs from -reviews I didn't sit in on, so I’m basing this on what I’ve seen.

Its not that its impossible its just that its difficult.

The thing is that none of us (as far as I know) are professional reviewers, and as such during -review people say what’s on their mind, and they say it more or less immediately, right when they think about it. That’s why I think there is so much negativity in –review, because the first thing that is noticed is the bad things, epically if its obvious like AR or something.

The best way to change that is to have more people. The same people will generally (not always) say and do the same things every review. Not that this is bad, but it’s always nice to have a bit of variety.

Like for me the main problem has been the time slot. When I attended -review I would usually end up going to sleep awhile after midnight knowing that I would have to get up before 5 in the morning, some people are just more flexible and can handle that on a weekly basis.

If a good time was agreed upon, or if there were several -reviews for the different time zones more people could participate and there would be different opinions each review instead of “Ack, the quality from 1:25 to 1:53 sucks”.

If someone thinks that -review doesn't say what’s good about a video most of the time, then we should change things around so that that person has the chance to join a -review session and say for themselves what is good about a video.

[godix]

So, it's impossible for there to be a middle ground here?

After years of observation, yeah it is impossible or close enough to it that it's the same difference. No one minds if you worship a creator like they're the second coming. No one really seems to mind if you trash a creator in a way that's mostly a joke. But give an honest opinion of what's good or bad about a video in a non-joking way? There's a guaranteed drama fest. It's happened with -review a few times. It's happened in the announcement forums a LOT of times. It'll happen again the next time someone actually thinks 'feedback' can mean 'your honest opinion'. Trust me, being a total and complete asshole who flat out wishes people would die for editing videos actually gets less negative reaction than just telling the truth. Sad but that's the org for you.

[Serv0]

@ The Drama People
What do elitists call elitists?
In other words, this whole debate about whether -review resulted to bashing, flaming, and ripping is getting us no where. So pick up the chips and move on. It's really not progress when people are complaining rather than inputting.

Going back to the topic...

Kionon: Personally, I don't have enough time myself to attend the review alone. (Which is good news to some, so they can be grateful about my absense.)
But I do have some suggestions.

Attendance is a major factor, and would definitely earn the -review some momentum:

1) Advertisements. You can never have enough advertisments. Don't just create 1 banner, create a bunch. Be very creative in advertising. Post in General AMV everyday perhaps on updates and suggested videos. Constantly remind people of review, and better yet, get them excited for it. Not only is -revew just a discussion but it's a chance for friends and editors to get together. Try to sell -review as an event to look forward to.

2) PM Attendee's about the upcoming -review sessions. Participants like to feel appreciated (regardless of what godix says.) A simple "hello, are you going to be at review this week. We would love to have you," would be enough to encourage.

Basically, try to sell -review as an event. The more attendees the better. By all means, go ahead and overdo with the advertising and what not. The word needs to get out.

As for your coordination and assitance situation Kionon:
Go ahead and PM people who you think would be good coordinators. Again, this is encouraging to go ahead and overdoing getting the word out. PM them even if you know that they have strong potential of not showing up. It's better to try than never.
Personally, I have no problem with the prime time scheduling, just as long as you have people who'll do it. Once again, PMing possible candidates for prime hosting is worth a try.

Basic point: Get everyone and anyone you can to attend. Build up the need and excitement.