| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Joe Blevins 
"Don't I look handsome?"
|
 Posted - 01/22/2005 : 01:50:13
|
Say you have a review which is declined, and then later that same review is submitted by someone else and approved. Obviously, the second person didn't rip you off because your review was never posted in the first place. But it's the same joke nevertheless -- same film even. It's possible that the same pun might occur to different people working independently.
|
Edited by - Joe Blevins on 01/22/2005 01:51:08 |
|
|
AC 
"Returning FWFR Old-Timer"
|
Posted - 01/22/2005 : 01:54:41
|
Yep, I've had that. Nothing can be done, really - this was discussed at length in the past and the biggest hurdle is that not many people will delete a perfectly good review of theirs on someone else's word of honour of 'I thought of it first!'. Generally it's a 'some people get all the luck' grumble, then onward. There's no way to prove it to the site so it's a losing battle, sadly. 
|
 |
|
|
Joe Blevins
"Don't I look handsome?"
|
Posted - 01/22/2005 : 02:05:44
|
Eh, well.
The reason I didn't resubmit the review in question was that I didn't think the joke was all that great. I mean, it was moderately cute, but I wasn't terribly disappointed when it was declined. I wasn't going to bat for it.
It wouldn't actually be fair to the SECOND person to take away that review. I mean, if the situation were reversed and I'd had a review approved which someone else had submitted unsuccessfully, I'm not sure I'd be keen on giving it up.
I did discover recently that one of my recent approved reviews was (unknowingly) similar to one approved just days previously by someone else. The reviews were for different movies, but the joke was exactly the same. Since my review had been in my pending list for quite a while before it was aproved, I knew I hadn't actually stolen the joke from the other person. Again, the same pun had occurred to two different people. So what I ended up doing was taking my name off the inadvertant "copycat" review. I'm proud to say that the review in question is now one of Alan Smithee's top vote-getters.
|
|
|
|
AC
"Returning FWFR Old-Timer"
|
Posted - 01/22/2005 : 02:11:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by Joe Blevins
It wouldn't actually be fair to the SECOND person to take away that review. I mean, if the situation were reversed and I'd had a review approved which someone else had submitted unsuccessfully, I'm not sure I'd be keen on giving it up.
The reason I brought this up was that there was a heated conversation last year involving a member who wanted another reviewer to give up their review even though the first reviewer hadn't had it published. I argued actively against this attitude, and eventually the matter died away. Not that I was suggesting you wanted to do that, just covering bases. 
|
|
|
|
Joe Blevins
"Don't I look handsome?"
|
Posted - 01/22/2005 : 02:40:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by AC
quote:
Originally posted by Joe Blevins
It wouldn't actually be fair to the SECOND person to take away that review. I mean, if the situation were reversed and I'd had a review approved which someone else had submitted unsuccessfully, I'm not sure I'd be keen on giving it up.
The reason I brought this up was that there was a heated conversation last year involving a member who wanted another reviewer to give up their review even though the first reviewer hadn't had it published. I argued actively against this attitude, and eventually the matter died away. Not that I was suggesting you wanted to do that, just covering bases.
Like I said, I didn't think the review was that great to begin with. Good but not great. If I'd been really sure about the quality of the review, I would've resubmitted it in the first place. I'm pretty sure the other reviewer would have been a good sport about whole thing, but this wouldn't ever have reached the "heated conversation" stage. In fact, when I discovered that someone else had gotten the review approved, I immediately voted for the review.
A few months back, I had a review approved which got a couple votes before I received a personal message from another FWFRer saying that he'd posted the same review for a different movie. The review could have applied to either movie and had been approved for both of them -- once for him and once for me. I didn't see any problem with that, but to avoid even the appearance of copycatting, I took mine down. The other reviewer hadn't necessarily ASKED me to take mine down, but I wanted to avoid a conflict.
If the same thing happened today, I'd probably just credit the "duplicate" review to Alan Smithee. Benj's "disown" feature does come in handy for such occasions.
|
|
|
|
lemmycaution
"Long mired in film"
|
Posted - 01/22/2005 : 05:51:34
|
For what it's worth, my feeling is that if you have come up indepedently (i.e. innocently) with a review that turns out later to be similar or identical with another review for a different movie they should both co-exist on the site.
|
|
|
|
GHcool
"Forever a curious character."
|
Posted - 01/22/2005 : 06:36:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by AC
Yep, I've had that. Nothing can be done, really - this was discussed at length in the past and the biggest hurdle is that not many people will delete a perfectly good review of theirs on someone else's word of honour of 'I thought of it first!'. Generally it's a 'some people get all the luck' grumble, then onward. There's no way to prove it to the site so it's a losing battle, sadly.
The same thing happened to me too once or twice. I think AC has the right attitude. I just shrugged it off. One review won't make or break me.
|
|
|
|
benj clews 
"...."
|
Posted - 01/22/2005 : 08:52:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by AC
Yep, I've had that. Nothing can be done, really - this was discussed at length in the past and the biggest hurdle is that not many people will delete a perfectly good review of theirs on someone else's word of honour of 'I thought of it first!'. Generally it's a 'some people get all the luck' grumble, then onward. There's no way to prove it to the site so it's a losing battle, sadly.
Actually, the submission date is kept untouched in the database now, so it would be possible to verify who created a specific fwfr first. However, given that MERPs are now working through reviews as well as me, it's possible I may decline a review that when later separatedly submitted by someone else is approved by the MERPs, which is a problem of inconsistency.
Not much can be done about this, but if you alert me to the declined-for-me-approved-for-someone-else review I can either decline something I disagree on getting through via the MERPs or approve yours and decline the later one.
|
|
|
|
Joe Blevins
"Don't I look handsome?"
|
Posted - 01/22/2005 : 20:16:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
[quote]Originally posted by AC
Not much can be done about this, but if you alert me to the declined-for-me-approved-for-someone-else review I can either decline something I disagree on getting through via the MERPs or approve yours and decline the later one.
Thanks, anyway, but at this point I think it's best to just let the second person HAVE the review. What I was really hoping for is that, because of this incident, I'd get the benefit of the doubt the next time I submitted a review that was "borderline." 
|
|
|
|
Joe Blevins
"Don't I look handsome?"
|
Posted - 02/06/2005 : 06:12:57
|
quote:
Originally posted by lemmycaution
For what it's worth, my feeling is that if you have come up indepedently (i.e. innocently) with a review that turns out later to be similar or identical with another review for a different movie they should both co-exist on the site.
I couldn't agree more. If the same review can legitimately apply to two different movies on the site, and the second person isn't trying to copy the other person, I see no problem with the reviews co-existing in harmony.
But from the tone of the message I received, the first reviewer seemed a little upset about it. So in that case, I took the original review down. (Today, I'd probably just disown it.)
|
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
A question of etiquette
