A Review of Your Reviews of My Review of Your Reviews
Hello all. Before I start writing another controversial blog I would like to thank everyone who took the time to yell at my Review of Reviews Blog. Not only did you give me another fun topic to write about, you also got me to 114 views on a single post as well as 10 comments. So in short, thanks for the hate. Now that I have given credit where credit is due, I will begin.
Okay, first comment is Lili's. This was one of the comments that was mostly positive. Not much to say other than thanks for summarizing 90% of the points I'm gonna make later in this blog in one sentence. The sentence said, "I like how you are not afraid to state you opinion even if they might make someone mad." This works for a big portion of my argument and I'll go further into depth later as to why it works as a fair argument but for now I'm going to move on to the next comment. Which was Nate's. This comment was essentially the same thing except it focused a bit more on the categories I mentioned in my review than anything else. So thanks for another reasonable comment.
The third comment was Jack's. His was basically a toned down version of some of the other comments that were criticizing my blog but the difference here is his tone. Instead of being like the other comments that criticized my review, he held a tone that made his argument seem reasonable. This meant that he wasn't just yelling at my review saying how it was wrong, rather what he thought was right. This is how most statements should be made.
The next two reasonable comments were those of Kate and Gus. Their comments were very similar and talked about how they thought I unreasonably contradicted myself but the only difference was that Gus talked about how Wesley had contradicted himself when telling me I contradicted myself which made me laugh a wee bit. So again, thanks for the fairly reasonable comments. The last comment that I got that wasn't hell bent on criticizing me was Arya's. Arya's comment said that he thought it was good that I actually said what I thought about the topic and that I should continue to do so in spite of the hateful comments. So thanks Arya for being the last reasonable comment. Now that that is out of the way, I can finally get to the part that you probably are here for, the comments Wes made.
The first paragraph of Wes' comments talked about how he thought I was judging your judgements of books. He also said that I was telling everyone what is right and what is wrong. Neither of these things are true. I was explaining the method I thought made the most sense when it came to judging a book and I was telling everyone what was right and what was wrong in my view.
His second paragraph took me about fifteen minutes to read through due to the constant grammar mistakes making it very hard to understand but I think I got the general idea of it now. It talks about how he thinks I said what a bad book is exactly and how to identify one. Nope. Again, not what I said. I said towards the beginning of the paragraph that I thought I had identified what you guys called a bad book and then gave what a bad book is in my opinion. I also made sure not to use the words "bad" and "failure" in different ways. Think of a bad book like a 4/10 book and a failed book like a 0/10 book. Neither of them are something you would read again, but one is definitely better than the other. He then proceeds to call me stuck up and a bunch of other pointless crap after calling my review pointless but none of that matters so I'll skip since I still stuff to say in this review.
His third paragraph or paragraph one of part two (Come on, man I know we're all trying to get our comments done but they take like twenty minutes to write you don't need to split up a comment in two that's just lazy) discusses how he thinks I contradicted myself by nitpicking in my review of the Lightning Thief and then saying how much I dislike nitpicking. First of all I technically never contradicted myself. All I said was nitpicking is mean. I never said I don't do it. Second, I said in my review of the Lightning Thief that I was able to look past this and I enjoyed the book implying that my nitpicking was somewhat pointless and the only reason I was pointing it out wasn't because I thought it ruined the book but rather because I thought it might bother others more than it bothered me so I was warning anyone who was considering reading the book.
His last complaint was that I am a big meanie and that being mean makes my argument invalid. First of all, can someone explain why being mean makes an argument completely invalid and second of all, WHEN THE HECK WAS I MEAN? Every example you give of me being mean is me being firm and direct, not mean. So unless there is a big something I'm missing, which I'm sure there is something you'll find and/ or make up to yell at me some more, YOUR argument is completely invalid. Also like Gus said, you can't yell at me for being contradictory when you are being contradictory (Or when your argument is just plain invalid.)
The last two comments (Emily's and Ethan's) are the same as the comment Wes made but they aren't original like his so even if I completely disagree with his argument, at least he didn't copy and use the argument of his peers to get his comment points. That's really all I have to say about their comments.
I GIVE YOUR REVIEWS OF MY REVIEW OF YOUR REVIEWS A 100/10 LEAVE ME ALONE AHHHHHHHHHH
Okay, first comment is Lili's. This was one of the comments that was mostly positive. Not much to say other than thanks for summarizing 90% of the points I'm gonna make later in this blog in one sentence. The sentence said, "I like how you are not afraid to state you opinion even if they might make someone mad." This works for a big portion of my argument and I'll go further into depth later as to why it works as a fair argument but for now I'm going to move on to the next comment. Which was Nate's. This comment was essentially the same thing except it focused a bit more on the categories I mentioned in my review than anything else. So thanks for another reasonable comment.
The third comment was Jack's. His was basically a toned down version of some of the other comments that were criticizing my blog but the difference here is his tone. Instead of being like the other comments that criticized my review, he held a tone that made his argument seem reasonable. This meant that he wasn't just yelling at my review saying how it was wrong, rather what he thought was right. This is how most statements should be made.
The next two reasonable comments were those of Kate and Gus. Their comments were very similar and talked about how they thought I unreasonably contradicted myself but the only difference was that Gus talked about how Wesley had contradicted himself when telling me I contradicted myself which made me laugh a wee bit. So again, thanks for the fairly reasonable comments. The last comment that I got that wasn't hell bent on criticizing me was Arya's. Arya's comment said that he thought it was good that I actually said what I thought about the topic and that I should continue to do so in spite of the hateful comments. So thanks Arya for being the last reasonable comment. Now that that is out of the way, I can finally get to the part that you probably are here for, the comments Wes made.
The first paragraph of Wes' comments talked about how he thought I was judging your judgements of books. He also said that I was telling everyone what is right and what is wrong. Neither of these things are true. I was explaining the method I thought made the most sense when it came to judging a book and I was telling everyone what was right and what was wrong in my view.
His second paragraph took me about fifteen minutes to read through due to the constant grammar mistakes making it very hard to understand but I think I got the general idea of it now. It talks about how he thinks I said what a bad book is exactly and how to identify one. Nope. Again, not what I said. I said towards the beginning of the paragraph that I thought I had identified what you guys called a bad book and then gave what a bad book is in my opinion. I also made sure not to use the words "bad" and "failure" in different ways. Think of a bad book like a 4/10 book and a failed book like a 0/10 book. Neither of them are something you would read again, but one is definitely better than the other. He then proceeds to call me stuck up and a bunch of other pointless crap after calling my review pointless but none of that matters so I'll skip since I still stuff to say in this review.
His third paragraph or paragraph one of part two (Come on, man I know we're all trying to get our comments done but they take like twenty minutes to write you don't need to split up a comment in two that's just lazy) discusses how he thinks I contradicted myself by nitpicking in my review of the Lightning Thief and then saying how much I dislike nitpicking. First of all I technically never contradicted myself. All I said was nitpicking is mean. I never said I don't do it. Second, I said in my review of the Lightning Thief that I was able to look past this and I enjoyed the book implying that my nitpicking was somewhat pointless and the only reason I was pointing it out wasn't because I thought it ruined the book but rather because I thought it might bother others more than it bothered me so I was warning anyone who was considering reading the book.
His last complaint was that I am a big meanie and that being mean makes my argument invalid. First of all, can someone explain why being mean makes an argument completely invalid and second of all, WHEN THE HECK WAS I MEAN? Every example you give of me being mean is me being firm and direct, not mean. So unless there is a big something I'm missing, which I'm sure there is something you'll find and/ or make up to yell at me some more, YOUR argument is completely invalid. Also like Gus said, you can't yell at me for being contradictory when you are being contradictory (Or when your argument is just plain invalid.)
The last two comments (Emily's and Ethan's) are the same as the comment Wes made but they aren't original like his so even if I completely disagree with his argument, at least he didn't copy and use the argument of his peers to get his comment points. That's really all I have to say about their comments.
I GIVE YOUR REVIEWS OF MY REVIEW OF YOUR REVIEWS A 100/10 LEAVE ME ALONE AHHHHHHHHHH
Wow! This was such an interesting post! Reviewing reviews, it's such a genius idea that's never been done before, but I digress. In specific response to my response to your review, you made a bunch of valid, well thought out counter-counter-arguments. My grammar is very iffy and in all honesty I was in a rush to finish my response. I will say that when I tried to post the entire response in one comment, Blogger informed me of some type of comment word limit. Don't worry, I won't force you to deal with another essay with absolute atrocious grammar.
ReplyDeleteTo summarize: good counter-counter-arguments, Blogger word limit that I didn't know existed, grammer?, and the last thing I say is that I probably won't leave you along. I'm madly in love with you now, sorry I mean bloodthirsty, and I will follow you with hearts in my eyes for the rest of this eternity (huh, sounds an awful lot like harassment doesn't it?).
I didn't proof-read that comment so good luck.
Delete