Dear John-sama

I didn't know how to reach you, so I'm just posting here in hopes that you'd see it. I read your review on Blood + and forgive me, but I took offense at it. While I'm sorry my review made you think otherwise, I DID take into account that there were 52 episodes and that she might have developed more later. I really don't need action every 5 minutes but I did expect more than just Saya crying for 15 episodes. That's the job of a long series isn't it? To keep the viewers attention? Well it didn't. and even you agreed that it took awhile. So please don't call my review half-assed. i reviewed strictly based on what I'd watched, i didn't hypothesize about later episodes and that they might be crappy or whatnot. I reviewed what i watched and what i watched was disappointing. I didn't say the series as a whole was disappointing. i didn't watch my 15 episodes, skip the middle to the end and call the series boring. THAT would be half-assed. no, i reviewed what i saw, and i said i didn't know what would happen next. so really, i'd appreciate it if you considered all this and not call me out next time.

Thank you.

I fully agree with bitem_e.

John-sama, you're writing excellent reviews, but we all might be better of if you accept that other people have their very own opinion. After all, it's the variety of opinions that makes CAR what it is. You don't have to offend other people to make your point, as matters taste won't allow any "objective truth" anyway. Why don't you just delete those references to other reviews? Why can't you see that I rate Gantz as "Avoid" based on the level of violence, regardless how many episodes I've watched? Look, I'm aware that Forbin (a long-time regular here) reviewed the series before and gave it a "Buy", but that's not necessarily my taste. Do we call each other names? No, we don't, because we agree to differ. You want to write reviews that disagree with mine - and I'm perfectly fine with that. Just please comply to the usual rules of politeness.

Actually he hit Jan-Chan on a later review...something about FMA. I forget. But yes Devil Doll and I have VERY different tastes. There are a few that we match on, but most of the time we are on opposite spectrums (see Golden Boy). Now Gantz is an acquired taste, it's level of violence is way off the chart and I was very surprised to see DD even watch it.

But yeah, John was jumping on other reviews.

Let me just join in to say-- yes, I agree.

Part of the premise of the site is that there is no objective truth as to what you should and shouldn't watch. This is why I encourage people to rate things based on their own feelings about things (which no one can argue with you about) rather then about what some theoretical reader might want.

The rating is supposed to be what you would do, not what you think others should do. I've seen plenty of things that I recognize as well made and high quality but that I'm uninterested in (or actively dislike). Similarly, there are some things that I recognize as being poor quality that I enjoy in spite of that. Ratings here should reflect that. :) (Obviously, it's helpful if you acknowledge these things... but generally everyone here seems to do so.)

Just one question: Is this (http://anime.mikomi.org/series/632.html#2340) what CAR will become like from now on?

Hey DD! I was concerned about the latest posting and I sent you an email sharing with you some of my concerns.

Collectively, we have invested too much time, attentiveness and creativity to allow this site to become encumbered by such minor and petty issues.

Pls give my thoughts some consideration..

Rebecca has booted someone before, way back on the old version of the site. While this reviewer didn't insult other reviewers, they used to post GIANT hentai image collages for the front-page of the hentai titles they'd review. Even if they weren't hentai images, they were too huge. I'd fix the images to non-hentai ones with a reasonable size, but the smegger would come back and put their image back. Further, they'd touch their reviews to make them show up in the "What's New" log. And their reviews were full of descriptions of the hentai action in the title, which is not appropriate for a review.

I mention this because should John-sama just be a touble maker, Rebecca can give them the boot. One can disagree with another person's review without being insulting. I believe all of us have done that with each others review at some point or other and that's not even a problem. But I'd never say, "Jan-chan's review sucks because 'x', 'y', or 'z'."

While John-sama hasn't insulted me, I did get insulted, which I discussed here: http://anime.mikomi.org/forum/showpost.html?num=147&posts=3

So, if we all feel that "John-sama"'s reviews are in inappropriate then, yes, I can do something. Before I'd be comfortable doing that, I'd like to discuss what we consider appropriate for reviews. Any suggestions as to what the review guidelines would be? What would result in the silencing of a reviewer?

i do find it funny, as i still dislike that person and am very inclined to do as devil doll did (but in not so nice words), that he thinks "People who make ignorant assumptions then regard them as fact." are stupid, when his hypocritical self completely dissed blood:the last vampire as a "knock off" of blood+ when in fact it was completely oppositely true. get the facts straight asshole. (sorry, my inner petulance speaking)

I agree with everyone that John-sama's posts seem to be attacking other reviewers as 'Wrong' because they don't agree with his views.

So what would be inappropriate? Direct attacks at other reviews. 'I don't agree with ANB' is not an attack, or 1 Post of '1 Episode of an Avoid does not make this an Avoid title' but I have seen at least 6 different reviews (Of his 13) where he takes a direct launch against someone and their particular reviewing style. I would think this would warrant a ban over say someone doing advertising. At least Advertising (which we don't allow) isn't attacking and driving away other reviewers.

See his reviews on Grenadier, Mezzo Forte (Where he takes a dig at me!), Narutaru (Devil Doll), Rurouni Kenshin: Meiji Kenkaku Romantan - Seisouhen (General to all), Blood Plus (bite_me), and Bondage Game (Devil Doll) and see the case is easily presented.

Btw bitem_e,

Just because he reviewed Blood:TLV wrong doesn't mean it's a bad review.
He just liked Blood+ that much more.

Compare reviews of the 3 FMP's (Especially Mine and ANB's) and you will see differences. And a couple of review mistakes made in there as well (I forgot the guy's name). I didn't diss him but I did point out that his review appeared to be for a different version of Panic.

So far this site has been a collection of opinions about animes, not opinions about reviews. I would prefer it to stay this way.

Is it inappropriate to ever reference another review? I know that references to other reviews has gone on for a long time.

I note that many of his reviews, his commentary on other reviewers is not the bulk of the review.

That's true Rebecca, but their comments are usually calling someone stupid or other types of Direct Attacks because they didn't like their opinion.

It goes way beyond, 'I don't like their opinion' to something like 'I think they are stupid because they referred to FMA'.

Agreeing or disagreeing with an opinion expressed in some other review is still an (indirectly expressed) opinion about the anime.

Then again, using that disagreement for drawing conclusions about the other reviewer has nothing to do with the anime any more IMHO.

i didn't say it was a bad review, Forbin. I just thought it was funny because they were so arrogantly hypocritical.

and while its okay to reference other reviews (and reviewers), ie: "what so and so said was wrong, because i think blah blah said main character DID have a personality blah" it's not okay to do it john-sama's way, ie "what so and so said was completely wrong and retarded the main character had an awesome personality they're just too blind to see it." they judge the reviewer based on their review, people they're never met but calls retarded and morons and stupid. i may be overreacting, and that sentence above was probably really exaggerated from anything they ever said, but that's the gist of it, and this is the impression that i get. hey, some reviews might not be good, some reviews might give the story away. but they have no right to attack anyone the way they doe.

you don't have to kick them out or anything Rebecca, can you please just ask them to remove the offensive references to other reviewers? His reviews are probably more thorough than a lot of people, and they probably does watch a lot of episodes before making judgements, unlike people like me. bravo to them for being so patient. but that doesn't give them any right to kick my opinion aside and call me lame or half-assed. it might not be the bulk of their reviews, it might be an afterthought, "i thought the anime was great, unlike that dumbass down there," but it's still there.

what i'm asking is, can you just please ask them to be NICE?

I see CAR as a place to write anime reviews. That's what the review section is for, I think. If we have something to discuss then there's the forum section, for example. Furthermore each reviewer has his/her "homepage" (in my case, http://anime.mikomi.org/by-rev/752.html) and most of us already use this page to describe what we like about anime and how our individual reviewing style works. John-sama could safely write whatever he considers the best reviewing style on his homepage (http://anime.mikomi.org/by-rev/2340.html), leaving the reviews for information about the anime itself. But even then none of us is writing anything about the others' reviewing style on their homepages, and none of us is insulting the other.

I have been giving this situation some measure of thought.

On one hand, John-sama is contributing to the web site and his reviews are well thought out and generally very detailed.

On the other hand, his reviews have an edge that suggests some measure of high-handiness (I even heard the term arrogance mentioned once.) It is this tone that has succeeded in getting a number of the sempais of this site (myself included) up in arms.

We have tried very hard to keep this site as a fun and interesting place to offer comments and share our thoughts on anime series. We try to be supportive of each other and of any new or inexperienced reviewers who might want to make a posting here.

I need only to call attention to the Kbanger1's request for some insight as to what a good make a good review. (see thread - http://anime.mikomi.org/forum/showpost.html?num=170&posts=12 ) A number of responses were posted which share our different thoughts in a respectful and supportive tone.

I believe that I speak for a number of us in that what concerns us most is the idea that is it is OK to jump on other reviewers or reviews, and negatively criticize them in an attempt to make our review stand out as being better or more valid than any other.

At a personal level, this type of behavior reminds me of a schoolyard bully, someone who puts other people down to elevate himself. Some of the content of John-sama's reviews strike me as being something that I might expect to see in a blog entry, in which it OK to go on a rant and just spill ones thoughts without giving consideration to others.

I think that this is the core of our concerns. We do not want to discourage anyone from sharing their opinions and thoughts, but we would like to keep the tone of the content as friendly and as supportive as possible.

And if needed, there are several literary styles that permit one to offer criticism and still be polite and respectful. Typically they are in a 3rd-person-neutral writing style. (example: One might want to these comments to be harsh, but they reflect a heart felt and sincere opinion.)

Well, these are just my thoughts.

Edited on 09/15/2008 08:52 PM.

I did take a look at the review. It is safe to say it was a "cheap shot" at someone else's review. bitem_e is justified to call out on another reviewer. This is a review site and not a flamer site. To just point out a mistake (which I rightfully admit to having made a couple of screw-ups and someone respectingly pointing it out) is all good. The remark made to bitem_e about his review is uncalled for. I know I make mistakes and may give a lousy review, but I sure wouldn't like another person to slam me about it. Maybe we should put some type of ground rule to not condone any type of flaming of any reviews or reviewers alike. I like doing reviews but criticism should be kept in at least a respectful manner. None of us should ever have to put up with something like this.

Well, being a longtime member of mikomi, I guess I should say something too. Here goes...

Mikomi is a modest website with a relatively small number of reliable contributors, but we take pride in holding ourselves to a high standard. It goes without saying that part of that standard is being polite to one another. Hopefully, by avoiding things like inflamatory comments, Mikomi will be a "friendly" website that people will want to read from and maybe contribute to. I have certainly gotten a lot of help with all sorts of problems from fellow reviewers here, and I don't want this to devolve into a nasty website which my cyber-friends would choose to leave. So, John-sama, for everyone's sake, including your own, please think twice about the way you phrase your reviews.

Rebecca said: "Is it inappropriate to ever reference another review? I know that references to other reviews has gone on for a long time."

Its not inappropriate to reference another review. I didn't directly do it in Nadesico, but I did note everyone's positive feeling of the series that I didn't feel. "I knew that the series is well liked among a majority of people who've seen it. So I finally carved out some time to watch it, but sadly didn't find the gold that others seemed to find."

I can't remember what reviews I may have specifically cited someone elses review, but I know I've done it. Sometimes, it is to say, "I agree with So-and-So about..." or "Unlike So-and-So, I didn't care about..." I don't feel I'm praising or attacking the reviewer, but pointing out an element that I felt was good or not so good in the series I'm reviewing.

I'd never say that any other reviewer was just wrong for their opinion, but I would say why that same thing didn't do it for me.

Wow what a new post on Bondage Game. At this point I think Rebecca should start banning. John's mission appears to be to piss off the other reviews and chase them away.

Yeah, his "review" is more of a review (rant) of other reviewer's and their style.

Just read the latest one of his one-sided attacks. You can't even call it a review now. Seriously, this has got to end. No one should have to put up with this crap. It goes from harsh critisizing to blatant insulting and very little (if any) of a review. This is bull and I know it shouldn't stay this way.