CaptainHowdy

By the way, Rivoli, you are copy-pasting one of the Reviews I am most proud of; if you took yourself a little less seriously, you would understand it, but I guess the effort is too much.

You're pathetic, Rivoli, you don't even realize how ridiculous you're making yourself.

So I respond cumulatively to everyone (and thank you in advance for the comments):
A) The DVD in this edition is at its first review, so I don't think I've violated the (non)rule about duplicates. B) I've never been a metalhead; as a kid, I was passionate about Maiden and a couple of other bands, but otherwise, my favorite genres have always been Dark-New Wave, Electro, and Singer-Songwriter (go check my review list), and Maiden remains among my top 5 bands because, at a certain point, they literally saved my life. C) Regarding the validity of posting reviews about them, I've already discussed this extensively, but I'll summarize: for those who like Maiden, the reviews are not bothersome, while those who can't stand them generally just leave a double 1 without even reading the review and often, in my opinion, without knowing the albums in question. I'm not going to redo the statistical calculation on how much Maiden affects DeB, as it would be boring; it's just that it's so low that all the criticisms about duplicates appear objectively pretextual. The argument about confusion generated by multiple reviews doesn't even hold, because in cases like Maiden, Floyd, or Queen, opinions are so already formed that often feedback, both negative and positive, is given regardless. When those who contest duplicates (on anyone, even on the 883) realize that they are just making "much ado about nothing," it will be much better for everyone. And in any case, as long as the Editors and Webmasters publish them, the matter is closed. Are there rules? They should enforce them; I’m not involved in that matter; out of 38 reviews, I have only 3 duplicates, two of which are unintentional and, moreover, they all add new things compared to the previous ones, and I say this even knowing I’m being immodest. D) I've read all the reviews on Maiden present here; well, I could review all their works again, adding things that haven't been said, but I don't do it because I don't think it's the case. However, this nonsense about the fact that everything has already been said about certain bands is really sad. E) @C'e': the review is not from 'Casi lettarari' because it explains, albeit concisely, the work in question. If you didn't understand, it's probably because you, as usual, didn’t read it. You might also dislike it; that's fine; there are 1s and 2s to let me know, as the good Icnar honestly did, but your bitterness is rather ungraceful.
I think I've said everything, thanks to everyone again.

Rivoli, I repeat it here, either you start acting like a decent person or you’ll get banned; otherwise, there will be endless Maiden reviews, with some of your ramblings as an intro just to showcase a bit more of your moral and intellectual lowliness around, you decide.

I’ll keep sending reviews on Maiden until they ban you or you start behaving properly; it’s up to you. By the way, my cat has a much better sense of irony than you. Regards.

I don’t think it has ever been Maiden's metal (who are very much alive), but everyone believes what they want.

I am talking about the Maiden's career and anyway, judging by the behavior of many users on this site, you are not entirely wrong about the state of health of music.

Come on Ole, thank you for taking a stand, but now let's stop giving satisfaction to certain individuals.

Probably the best of this decade.

@Unkle: My friend, but Eno seems to arrive much earlier besides not being from Cavriago, and one thing is the slogans one uses for oneself, another is what one really does...