[ SECRET POST #2704 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2704 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________



16.


__________________________________________________



17.


__________________________________________________



18.


__________________________________________________



19.


__________________________________________________



20.


__________________________________________________



21.


__________________________________________________



22.












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 022 secrets from Secret Submission Post #386.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 1 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[scrubber]

Because at a certain point it becomes obvious that this reviewer is just a contrarian idiot with terrible taste?

I don't know THIS guy but there are a few other reviews out there like Armond White who have reputations for giving horrible reviews to good things and glowing reviews to shitty things. If I'm going to listen to a reviewer, as opposed to just any old person, they should have a immense knowledge of and experience with their subject of review and a somewhat refined sense of aesthetics because of it - AT LEAST. If you review to stir shit, or time and time again prove that you don't know what the fuck a good movie is, you're a shit reviewer. You're bad at your job. You should go do something you don't suck at. Sorry you gotta leave your cushy job that lets you see free movies all day, but that's just the way it is sometimes.

You can disagree and be critical (I know I generally think anime reviewers are way to fucking nice, though the reason why should be obvious) but this is an issue of shitty opinions. If you have shitty opinions, why are you a pro reviewer instead of some angry forum poster?

[(Anonymous)]

But shouldn't a site with as much weight as metacritic (I don't go there) have a system for community-weighing or moderating the weight of individual users?

Otherwise, that's pretty terrible.

[scrubber]

I assume you meant "individual reviewers" not "users" but I don't know. I know Rotten Tomatoes doesn't. And Metacritic might not because it it seems like a iffy system to implement, I know I see an ocean of trouble stretching out before me when I think about it. People dogpiling certain critics for ONE bad review and affecting their entire review history because of it, or companies telling people to downvote the critics of certain releases to undercut bad press. Stuff like that.

I just think that if you're an accountant who's bad at math, you should get a different job, and same if you're a critic with terrible taste. That's all.

[(Anonymous)]

I guess reviewers? You don't have to submit there to be weighted in their process? That would be even more weird.

But while that kind of trouble is definitely possible, it seems not to happen too much on sites that implement it.