cptgaio

Ah, I made a mistake earlier: I meant to say that I'm at 75% compared to 7-8 months ago, not a decrease of 75%... sorry.

And I replied to you that, in fact, DeBaser offers (many) fewer reviews, about 75% less compared to the average up to 6-7 months ago, regardless of the change in HP ;-) It's not that this changes my opinion of the site, for goodness' sake, but since my calculation was challenged, I tried to provide details.
As for the rest, I will have a Quattro Formaggi with salami :-D

Whiterabbit...last period? I've always been losing it on these pages. Do you want the links or a statistical calculation? ;-)

Response only to Bartle (those bored by the "statistical" discourse are kindly asked not to read! My friend, it's undeniable that you receive many fewer reviews than in the past. It's not that before the change in HP the three sections were separate, and I only take those because the Interior ones have been around for a short time; the Ocular ones have maintained their frequency and average duration while the Acoustic ones have seen a fourfold increase. Your argument has a basis, but only if the Ocular and Interior reviews had increased; instead, they have remained more or less the same (more less than more) while the Acoustic ones have significantly decreased, which means that overall new reviews have decreased in total count because if two remain stable and one decreases (noticeably), the total sum drops.
The calculation is simple: if until a year ago the stay time for an Acoustic was 24 hours with 20 in HP, it means you received around 20 a day, while now with 25 the time is around 96 hours, meaning you receive about 6 a day. Considering that the Interior section did not exist last year and there was only the Ocular one, which had 10, if I remember correctly, and stayed in HP for up to 7 days (an average of 1.5 per day), now that there are 5 Interior and 5 Ocular which both stay in HP for an average of 10 days (should also check in HP), it means that both have an average of 1 every two days (and here your point about publication rates is valid; however, the problem is that you receive very few). Furthermore, there is also the issue of the publication waiting time, which has significantly decreased (meaning you have fewer in queue): in HP now you have one written at 8 last night and probably published this morning around ten, so 14 hours of wait; last year it sometimes reached 72, and this average has been stable for at least two months. Even if we did a total count among the differences with HP at twenty-five reviews (20A+5O), thirty (25A+5O), and thirty-five (25A+5O+5I), the situation doesn't change because HP (and sparing you the umpteenth calculation) has significantly increased its average renewal rate much more than it should have been with the rise in reviews in it. I hope I haven't bored you too much! Bye! Ps: regarding personal taste, I was speaking generally, and I still fear I may not be entirely wrong; I will explain.

ooopss: I almost forgot to reply to Bartle about the issue of staying in HP: I was only talking about the acoustic ones, whose number in HP has only increased by 5; it's not a number that justifies the increase from 24 hours to 96 hours, honestly, especially since the waiting time for publication has also decreased from 48 hours to less than 12-13 in some cases... The ophthalmological and interior ones notoriously have biblical waiting times (even up to 168 hours in some cases) and it has always been this way even before the revolution in HP. Not to be a pain, my dear, but just for the sake of precision... Ps: I don't think I've ever complained about editorial choices, right? ;-)

Ps: for the Doctor, I almost forgot: there will be an appetizer from the Maiden starting April 21 with the release (in Theaters!!!) of "Iron Maiden: Flight 666," a documentary about the last tour.

@Ole: indeed, I didn't say that the 1s (for the reviews, mind you, not just the groups... there's a difference, especially if the reviews aren't read) are given to all duplicates regardless, but it's certain that they're given to those from groups that annoy you. This is where your argument falls apart: for some reason, you think you have the right to judge which reviews (dubbed or not, in this case) are useful or not, and you use different criteria. It wouldn't be unjust (because in the end it's always a matter of taste) if I knew that the reviews from the groups that annoy you were read by you before throwing down the ace. The problem is that we both (you, me, and the others) know that you don't do it. I don't think I’m stating anything untrue, I’m sorry. Anyway, to be honest, if my insistence on this bothers you, know that your insistence on giving those 1s indiscriminately bothers me. We both have the right to think this about each other as long as the tone remains civil (and since you’re a gentleman, it seems there’s no danger of losing it with you), so I would ask you not to use terms like monologue when referring to me because you know very well that it’s not like that. Otherwise, you wouldn’t have felt called out and wouldn’t have replied to me. No hard feelings, you know I care about you.

My friends (without irony), I brought this up because the next time there’s a duplicate review of Maiden (Doctor, I’ll keep you updated on the developments of the new album!), and you all come to say the same old things, I will have a precedent on a multiple duplicate where you didn’t say those things due to personal tastes: it’s exactly because I don’t understand why in reviews of Maiden (or Metallica, or PF, or DT) you come to put a 1 regardless, and not in this one. You don’t really think you’re the only ones with the monopoly on repetita juvant ;-). Anyway, comment 150 was in response to 148 from Jurix; I thought it would be rude not to reply. In comment number 95, if you reread it, I raise a slightly different issue... With respect.

I accidentally placed a parenthesis inside another one...sorry.

And honestly (and I think everyone will agree with this even if not all will want to admit it) a DeBaser without a weekly review on PF is less fun.