Discussion for Physical review deleted

sully54sully54
Posted:
in Feedback
Why was the discussion thread for the review for Physical deleted? I know it was mostly negative towards the review but it seems disingenuous to delete the thread. I mean, a writer presented an opinion on something, people should be able to agree or disagree with it. 

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 3
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    Seems a little embarrassing that a critic can't take criticism.
  • Reply 2 of 3
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,861administrator
    sully54 said:
    Why was the discussion thread for the review for Physical deleted? I know it was mostly negative towards the review but it seems disingenuous to delete the thread. I mean, a writer presented an opinion on something, people should be able to agree or disagree with it. 
    While I didn't close the thread, and Stephen doesn't have moderation permissions, it was very clearly not the opinions about the review that was the problem. It's the forum-goers that decided to go out of bounds and attack the writer, instead of attacking the opinion.

    Nearly the entire thread was this, and not discussing the points that Stephen made.

    It seems a little embarrassing that adults that frequent the forums can't follow the rules as it pertains to discussing the piece versus declaring the author being "rusty" and worse, causing threads to get shut.

    As a reminder, we don't have infinite manpower. If a thread is no longer cost-effective to moderate because of forum-goer behavior, it gets closed and deleted.

    And seriously -- personal attacks because a critic wrote something that you (generally speaking) didn't agree with? Talk about petulance.

    If you don't like Stephen's reviews because your opinion varies, that's fine, fine a different reviewer. That's the nature of reviews -- find a reviewer whose opinions dovetail with your own, and you're good to go. There's literally no reason to mock a reviewer's name, his family, his taste in viewing, his perceived editorial bent, a perceived political slant, his choice of computers, his sexual orientation, and so much more just in that thread, simply because you see a review with his name on it. Exactly zero of these things had anything to do with the review.

    Absolutely ridiculous behavior from a forum of adults.

    Oh, and for folks who decided to try and have this spill into another thread, calling it "mostly positive" reviews elsewhere? Try again. While there are some positive reviews, it is certainly not "mostly" anything.

    https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2021/jun/18/physical-review-rose-byrne-appletv
    https://variety.com/2021/tv/reviews/physical-review-rose-byrne-apple-tv-plus-1234987791/
    https://www.avclub.com/apple-tv-plus-physical-has-a-lot-of-issues-to-work-out-1847030248
    https://www.cultofmac.com/736175/physical-review-apple-tv/
    edited June 2021 muthuk_vanalingamgatorguyGraeme000
  • Reply 3 of 3
    tenthousandthingstenthousandthings Posts: 1,036member
    Mike Wuerthele said:
    sully54 said:
    Why was the discussion thread for the review for Physical deleted? I know it was mostly negative towards the review but it seems disingenuous to delete the thread. I mean, a writer presented an opinion on something, people should be able to agree or disagree with it. 
    While I didn't close the thread, and Stephen doesn't have moderation permissions, it was very clearly not the opinions about the review that was the problem. It's the forum-goers that decided to go out of bounds and attack the writer, instead of attacking the opinion.

    Nearly the entire thread was this, and not discussing the points that Stephen made.

    It seems a little embarrassing that adults that frequent the forums can't follow the rules as it pertains to discussing the piece versus declaring the author being "rusty" and worse, causing threads to get shut.

    As a reminder, we don't have infinite manpower. If a thread is no longer cost-effective to moderate because of forum-goer behavior, it gets closed and deleted.

    And seriously -- personal attacks because a critic wrote something that you (generally speaking) didn't agree with? Talk about petulance.

    If you don't like Stephen's reviews because your opinion varies, that's fine, fine a different reviewer. That's the nature of reviews -- find a reviewer whose opinions dovetail with your own, and you're good to go. There's literally no reason to mock a reviewer's name, his family, his taste in viewing, his perceived editorial bent, a perceived political slant, his choice of computers, his sexual orientation, and so much more just in that thread, simply because you see a review with his name on it. Exactly zero of these things had anything to do with the review.

    Absolutely ridiculous behavior from a forum of adults.

    Oh, and for folks who decided to try and have this spill into another thread, calling it "mostly positive" reviews elsewhere? Try again. While there are some positive reviews, it is certainly not "mostly" anything.

    https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2021/jun/18/physical-review-rose-byrne-appletv
    https://variety.com/2021/tv/reviews/physical-review-rose-byrne-apple-tv-plus-1234987791/
    https://www.avclub.com/apple-tv-plus-physical-has-a-lot-of-issues-to-work-out-1847030248
    https://www.cultofmac.com/736175/physical-review-apple-tv/
    Well, I’m not entirely sure if I was one of the people who crossed the line over to a personal attack, if so I apologize, I did mention Stephen’s name and I think I overreacted to the words “secretly bulimic” in the review — but otherwise I was focused on criticizing the review. But I also was relieved when you all nuked a thread that had a poster ridiculing/downplaying bulimia in it, among other problems.

    For what it’s worth, I’ve since watched more of the show, and I can’t say I’m a fan — I really liked GLOW and had high hopes for this, but it’s not working for me. 

    A review of an ongoing, incomplete television-series pilot/first season is different from a review of a completed film. You can pan finished movies, but television series are moving targets — some of them can start out strong but then fall apart over the course of a season, or vice-versa. Your review can’t be the definitive take, because you haven’t seen the whole work of art. A good television review has to acknowledge that difference on some level, and I don’t feel like Stephen’s do that. It’s like he’s writing movie reviews for television series.
Sign In or Register to comment.