This doesn't qualify as a review. It's way too short and you only talked about the overall rating and you didn't say anything about the other categories. If you can edit this a little and make it better that would be great. Because if you don't make a long enough review the thread is usually closed or moved to Game Discussion.

Dragoon26 : Ok, come on, Dragoon. This is a little low in wasting space on the internet just to prove a point on what makes a bad review. Besides, people will probably not see this when it is deleted or moved. If you want to make an example of a bad review, ask David if you can make a thread like that, and then he might move it to the sticky section of the forum.

play4fun : I know, I know... just having some fun. But lets face it, what I did isn't against the rules, and the website allowed me to post it...


Sacra may have been coming off as.... hmm... intolerant, but he still had a great point. If a review is supposed to be 100 words+, then let it be so. Right? Where is the harm in not letting someone post a review unless it is 100 words+... just as the rule states. All that does is make the reviewer say.."Hmm, I need to make this longer/better"... that's literally all it does.

And technically this does qualify as a review... you can go right to the game page and it's with all the other reviews. It didn't go to a "not a review" section... it's with the reviews... Rate it a 1 if you'd like. It certainly deserves that...

I wouldn't use a bad review from anyone else as an example, because that would be embarrassing/disrespectful to that individual.

I mean seriously, you could have the best review ever and if it doesn't have a title then it gets blocked and you can't post it... because it states in the rules that all reviews must have a title. Yet you won't get it blocked for posting under 100 words.... which is another rule...? Just wondering why one but not the other...?

Hahaha, loved your "wasting space on the internet" line... classic.

Bottom line -  I think this improves the site. People who disagreed in Sacra's thread thought he meant "every" post, or was being bias because they were offended somehow.

Dragoon26 : Reviews 100 words and up that is not exceeding requirements will get moved or closed by mods. Local Mods : you're call

Dragoon26 : Really...this again? Ok, what Sacra didn't know (and what you didn't know I guess) is that David has been in discussion of making a script to automatically reject anything that is below 100 words in reviews. It has already been discussed, it's being worked on already, and I actually told him that in my reply to his thread. The reason why everyone was confused about this is because Sacra made his poll to say "every post" not "every starting thread" THAT is why everyone thought he meant for every post. Also, the problem is people are not reading the rules or my thread. We just need to figure out how to get people to actually read those before posting their reviews, because I guarantee you, even when the 100 post rejection is implemented, people will still make bad reviews over 100 words if they don't read the rules.

You making a post like this is just causing more drama to an already heated discussion, which shouldn't have been in the first place. I think that thread could have been dealt better, but both sides were too stubborn in the way that they communicated that it blew up.

play4fun : Awesome, that's a good thing
. All I needed to know.... I hope I'm not coming across the wrong way. We seem to agree about the bottom line.
 
No one told me before you did. Therefore, before I just heard that from you, I didn't know that.  If I had do you think I would have done this? That wouldn't make any sense. I didn't see your post in the last thread, my apologies.
Even with the mistake on the poll title, just reading his first post would have cleared that up... simple mistake.


...

"if we lose each thread with less than 50 words vizzed would lose users and activity, then David wouldn't be able to keep add up, then David wouldn't get any money to feed his family and keep vizzed up. Do you want someone to starve for some good posts?"


... 
that is what someone said in the last thread. That does not sound like the confusion you speak of...
 
So unless you want David to starve I guess I wouldn't change that rule.. HA!

Yeah, for it to be a proper review you need to label the other categories of the game and you have to score them and provide a description . I rate each category accordingly and then I talk about why I gave it that score instead of a 10. Be sure to make your reviews detailed, descriptive but also interesting and try to convince someone to play the game, really make it sound like this is ''the game" to play. Be honest with your scoring and be sure to explain your reasoning for each category. I don't think it is necessary to write this to prove someone else's point, it is a waste of time and space. Please stop posting over and over again, you know the rules and going back and forth in drama like this isn't necessary. I am glad you understand things more clearly though...

Dragoon26 : Even if you didn't know, you still shouldn't have done this. This is a little immature in the way that you tried to express yourself. There are better ways to express this than to make a phony review and doing the exact thing that you are trying to prevent.

The automated system was discussed in this thread: https://www.vizzed.com/boards/thread.php?id=57252

And from the quote you posted, that IS the confusion, because everyone thought he said the requirement was for every forum, which is why everyone thought that would lower the post frequency, when he was only focusing on the Review forum. Believe me, I thought he was saying a post requirement for every forum at first as well, which I find impractical. Furthermore, people started to talk about it through their emotions, not through their heads. No one was listening to each other and demeaning conversations went flying. So even if both sides have good points, no one saw them. You said so yourself that you didn't even see my post.

I'm just going to end it here. Please close this thread and just move this discussion somewhere else.

play4fun : Immature?ok... I was doing what had to be done to get my point across.

I never saw that thread or I would have known already...?  I'm not clairvoyant. Nor do I have ESP.

 I quoted the David starving thing, to back up my point that people were bias and offended. AND! He wasn't confused. He literally said... he(Sacra) was fighting a losing war and that having to have 100 words to make a review will NEVER happen. You said it is being talked about... that doesn't sound like NEVER. So no offense but that example goes against what you said.

Anyways close this thread because the problem I was trying to fix(in a immature fashion?) is being solved... 

Before closing this... This IS NOT a review... It's most likely a comment about the game. On a review, you talk about the game's content (such as graphics, sound, story, etc.) and give an opinion about the same. 

Here, you're supposed to post Reviews... Not comments.

Now, I shall close this. Hope next time you put more effort on this and make an actual review.

Dragoon26 : I re-opened this because I have something to add. First of all, I banned SacraRain because he was arguing and demeaning other users to try and force them to see his point. Although I agree that in the review section those which are under 100 words should be rejected, there is a wrong and a right way to go about it. Instead of arrogantly suggesting something be done, or breaking a rule to prove a point, you could suggest something be changed in a polite and logical manner. There are forums specifically for suggestions, and using them appropriately in combination with valid reasoning can mean the difference in being considered for a staff position or being banned. If it is a matter that you truly want to press, you can always ask David or an administrator privately about it. If you act out in a negative way, not only are your suggestions likely to be ignored, but you subject yourself to a bad reputation.

I respect the fact that you are a good writer, and you could definitely go places around here. You are my friend, just as SacraRain was, but I'm blunt and bend the rules for no-one. It was a shame that he had such an aggressive attitude towards others, because he had a lot of potential. My point being, don't take the wrong path. I wouldn't want to, but I will have anyone that causes trouble for other people banned for their conduct, so consider this your warning.

Also, you have to remember that David not only pays for this website to stay free for us all, but he does most all of the site coding himself. He stays constantly busy with projects to improve the site, not to mention balancing his family life. The logical thing to do would be to address things in an order of importance, from least to greatest. I'm sure that he is already aware of the situation, but he will get to it as he has the time. Please consider things like this for future reference.

If you feel the need to argue the point further, then you can private message me, and I'll be happy to discuss it with you.