So I write for a little online magazine called Tiny Mix Tapes. Kind of like a Pitchfork-esque publication, where I review jazz and outsider music.
They use a "dot" system (instead of stars) on a 1-5 scale, with five being the highest. Most things that they have heard of or are hyping get 4 or 5 dots, I'll say that off the bat. Most of the things I submit I give between 3.5 and 4.5 dots, with a few submitted as 5s. I rarely review anything I don't like. Unfortunately, rarely do any of my "gushing" reviews or even "very positive" reviews stand with the rating I submit. Usually half and sometimes a whole dot is notched downward, but I haven't complained... until now.
Here's part one of my exchange with the editor, and I'm interested to see how he responds.
I've had back-and-forth with people on whether or not it's worth giving something a "poor" review. I don't always give perfect marks, obviously, and have ripped things a new asshole on a number of occasions. But if I'm going to submit a review to a more "general" site like TMT, it's usually going to be for a release that I think is really worthy of the attention of a wider audience. Hence the usual positivity. I'd be interested in thoughts from the o-board, though, on whether my bitching is worthwhile, egoist, or something in between.