Metal Reviews

Because I explained why I disliked it. It was boring. It was unoriginal. You get the damned idea.

The review I wrote was better then that review you offer as an example because I drew valid comparisons, explained the music, and noted parts that were specifically bad and especially good. What's your problem with the review? Sure, it's monotonous and repetitive, but since when were we holding the prose on metalreviews.com to such high standards?

To be honest, I have no idea why you seem to dislike me so much. Every time I say something that you disagree with, or word something ambiguosly, you jump down my throat and we explain back and forth for pages of forum space.

Dago- Liquid was from the last album. Deathbox is from this album.

1. I wasn't the guy who mentioned this review to be bad, I only gently agreed on it, and summed up some comepletely normal arguments that you might want to use, such as don't repeat the same argument more than 10 times.
2. Maybe the reason why you think I dislike you is that you quote me, but don't read me. You may not be the person I like most around here, but I don't hate you.

As a matter of facts, I didn't say this review of yours was comparable to "it sucks don't buy it 57/100". You said that yourself!

Now read the following again, and rewrite your previous hostile post. Doesn't my post make more sense now that you have actually read it?

I DID read your post, and I see no reason to rewrite mine.

Now you're twisting my quote, there. My opinion is certainly just as VALID as the opinion you posted for comparison, but mine is backed up better.

I quote you, but don't read you? That doesn't even make sense. You're the one who continually misinterprets everything I write that's the slightest bit unclear.

I was NOT twisting your post, I quoted every word that had something to do with the argument! Don't acuse me for something I didn't even suggested doing! If you didn't mean what you were saying after that you got confronted with it, then that is not my fault. If you scroll up a bit, and read my comment on your review, then you'll find out that they exactly match the italic part:

Now I made some more comments about what reviews should be like, but they weren't pointed specificly at your review. They were merely there because you and somebody else claimed that reviews are all opinions, and can't be wrong if they are well constructed, something you repeated in your semilast post again. I just added that I think that the most important part of the review is objective, and unrelated to opinion, such as how a band sounds, or how they changed their sound. I think this because the reader can make up himself wether he will like this change or not, but that asside. Is this all a bit more clear now?

Crystal.

If I may, I'd like to apologize for the overly hostile tones of my second post. Spending six hours in the car does tend to make one irritated and easy to piss off.

Ok, I understand that as well...