Subject:
|
What is a "review"?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Tue, 8 Jan 2002 02:18:50 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1473 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Allan Bedford writes:
> In lugnet.general, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > In lugnet.general, Allan Bedford writes:
> >
> > <"I don't have to use words correctly">
>
> Is this referring to me? If so, I'm not sure what you mean by it.
OK, I shall reiterate.
It refers to the new subject line. A review has a certain formalised
meaning. We expect a movie reviewer to have read the movie. We expect a
book reviewer to have read the book. We expect a restaurant reviewer to have
eaten at the restaurant. In every case there is an outlay of time, effort,
and expense (if the supplier doesn't subsidise it) before word one is
commited to a medium.
Seeing the previews, reading the jacket blurb, or looking in the window and
reading the menu are not acceptable substitutes for actually partaking of
the product.
A restaurant reviewer who calls what he writes after looking in the window
and reading the menu a "review" is saying he doesn't have to use words
correctly, for what he has done is *not* a review. A restaurant reviewer
who writes a review without having eaten in the restaurant is, in fact, a
liar. He does his readers a disservice with every so called "review" he posts.
> > But why dilute a powerful message by using propaganda tricks?
>
> Because I'm tired of the compartmentalized views found elsewhere. I'm
> trying something new. I'm ranting outside the box.
That's all fine and good and I admire you for it. But do it honestly, it's
much more powerful.
> I'm willing to look
> like an idiot if it will make even one person pay attention.
The person who pays attention to an idiot, or to a person who appears
indistinguishable from an idiot, is not someone whose attention you want.
Trust me.
> > Your message
> > is better than that. You don't need to lie.
>
> I am not sure why you'd say I lied.
See above. I have rather strict definitions. I called someone who removed
price tags in a store a thief, once.
> The review is my opinion. My opinion
> is that those columns aren't worthy of the LEGO name.
So call it an opinion, not a "review". A review has very formalized meaning.
> Please disagree with
> me, but I find it worrisome that you'd call me a lier.
"liar" rather than lier.
And I find it worrisome that you'd engage in intellectual dishonesty to make
a point that is **so** compelling that it *needs* no dishonesty to make. You
have posted an opinion, but it is not a review, as it fails key tests, and
you do yourself, your readers, and the general public a disservice each and
every time you do it.
> > Go borrow a set and give an
> > honest review and the facts will speak for themselves.
>
> Borrow a set from whom? I don't know anyone who'd waste their money on it.
> All the sets around here are still sitting on store shelves.
Tell you what.... send me your snail and I'll GIVE you a copy of this
particular set if you will promise not to, in future, call screeds that
aren't based in a thorough review of the sets in question "reviews".
> > What you do now destroys whatever credibility you might have with many.
>
> I have no credibility Larry, therefore nothing to loose.
Then perhaps you are the wrong person for the task you have set yourself.
Don Quixote may have looked foolish in his quest, but he lied to no one.
> My review is
> nothing worse (in fact it's milder) than some things I've posted to this
> website.
It's not about how hard you are on the set, it is about HOW you arrive at
your judgement and what you choose to call it. I'm sorry if that point is
lost on you.
> If I had a shred of credibility, I'm sure it's gone. This is just
> about making a message heard. If the messanger gets mocked doing so, then
> I'll take that.
And perhaps that is the saddest of all about this. The ends do not justify
the means, you are better than this, are you not? BE better.
> Regards,
> Allan B.
I am not sure but what this has veered to, lugnet.off-topic.debate as it
seems to get at the nature of truth and intellectual honesty. Feel free to
set FUT there if you think so.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: What is a "review"?
|
| (...) Sorry, I didn't make the connection between the bracketed words and the new subject line. Thanks for clarifying. Larry... you've taken a lot of time and effort to make some good points below... I just want to say that right up front. Any (...) (22 years ago, 8-Jan-02, to lugnet.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
63 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
