Why do you review?

[LordVreeg]

How intersting and altruistic of everyone.  I even believe most of it, though I don't belive it the whole story, except for a few of you.

Maybe it is the 'Social Uselfulness' drilled into me back in college, or my urge to be a Centrality Eigenvector, or even all those books on management I read.  But I think it comes down to my opinion of this site as a 'Social Network', and there are times I review because I believe people are here to get feedback, not just scribble into a vaccuum.  So I try to at least pop into most new threads, especially from new folk, and give some feedback.  Call me nuts, but I believe that everytime someone put something up, it is so people might comment on it, not merely to watch the thread toll down, then off, the 'Latest Forum Posts' list.

After give feeback twice to a poster, and they don't reciprocate, or I don't at least see them reviewing other threads, I deign them socially inept and stop going to their threads.  Really.

I have learned a lot from some of the people here.  I'm just bright enough to know that there are a lot of smart posters here, underneath all the cabbage leaves.  So to say that I have not enjoyed many of the better threads, and the interaction and Social network 'radiality' would be ignoring a lot of the reasons I review, and the enjoyment I get out of it.  I have fun in the tavern, and I get a little silly...and I post after wine often. CeBeGeia was a riot, and there are some first rate thinkers here that actually have given me pause to go over something twice.

But this site is the very definition of a Social Network.  And as such, I do my very best to ignore the conventions and my personal preferences, and try to give the writer some of the feedback they are asking for.   Yes, I like fantasy better than Scifi a little, and I enjoy the Superhero stuff.  I tend to like more mature games, and grittier ones.  But that is immaterial, in that I review because I personally put things up to get reviewed, and I believe everyone else puts things up for the same reasons, to get feedback.  It is my responsibility to do my part in the post-feedback loop, and in a bigger picture, reinforce avid, helpful posters with more feedback. That is why I review, to answer the question of the thread topic.

(I bet I killed another one)

[Raelifin]

I review because I enjoy being critical. I read because I enjoy worlds. I love the CBG.

I will typically review a setting if any of the following apply:
  * It is original
  * It is less than one page
  * It is entertaining
  * It matches my personal tastes

I do review (or a least read) big settings, though not all the time, due to the time (and lack of distractions) requirement.

Oh, and I thank the posters above me. Insight into the minds of the reviewers is always nice.

[Tangential]

This has been a most fascinating read. It's valuable both as a reviewer and a writer to get a glimpse into the consciousness and thought processes of other members.

[SA]

To be totally (and perhaps brutally) candid, I review/comment when the setting makes me go "wow", and ignore pretty much anything that elicits a lesser response.  There are a few exceptions, but those are ususally so brief that I feel like I'm insultig the creator by posting such perfunctory responses (which means I might qualify as one of Vreeg's "socially inept" posters).

I guess I just find it hard to be inspired by a lot of settings; I hunt through the boards searching for evocative fantasy, but one of my chief requirements for fantasy is that it be unexpected and unusual (strictly speaking, the presence of magic, strange races, anachronistic fusions of technology and the arcane, mysterious precursor races, etc. are irrelevant to that requirement, though my own setting includes all three).

Most settings really don't meet my qualifications, and so I'll often read them but not offer any feedback.  This is not to say that they are inherently uninteresting, only that they're headed in a direction that I don't consider "fantastic". I could offer nothing but hollow words, so I offer nothing.

Maybe that makes me an unproductive poster?  Believe me, I wish I was more motivated.

EDIT:

As a brief idea on the standard by which I tend to judge fantasy, I consider fantasy in the most general sense to be that which deviates from the common perception of reality in some way.  However, many of the comman tropes of so-called fantasy have become so commonplace that I consider them part of the "reality of fantasy".  Thus, I look for the things that deviate from both the reality of reality, and the reality of fantasy.  A lofty standard?  Probably, but no-one's here to please me, and I'm really just here for the company.

I haven't seen a single run-of-the-mill setting on these boards, and that's the honest truth.  But it's the very rare setting that I would genuinely call fantastic.

[Lmns Crn]

As a brief idea on the standard by which I tend to judge fantasy, I consider fantasy in the most general sense to be that which deviates from the common perception of reality in some way. However, many of the comman tropes of so-called fantasy have become so commonplace that I consider them part of the "reality of fantasy". Thus, I look for the things that deviate from both the reality of reality, and the reality of fantasy. A lofty standard? Probably, but no-one's here to please me, and I'm really just here for the company.

those[/i] as well.

[SA]

To an extent (though not entirely) I think that applies to any manner of fiction (or even the creative process as a whole).  Of course, to say that the genre is escapist does not in itself imply that the individual exploration of the fantastic is expressly "escapist".

As somewhat of an aside: I've heard many people say that they "just didn't get science fiction or fantasy", or that they thought it was a silly or substanceless genre.  But I'm often quick to point out that fantasy is not separate from other forms of fiction: the pattern and nature of events in most novels and films is patently unreal when you think long and hard about it (which is probably why we don't), and the fantasy genre is but a more focused realm of nonreality.

It's just a matter of degrees.

[Sarandosil]

Actually, I find it about impossible to read through other people's work. This is true of fiction in general, left to my own devices I'd probably stop reading novels at all (my own reading preferences tend towards "dry" things, like economics). My brother on the other hand goes through them like candy, and occasionally tosses one at me to read or talks about a certain book enough to pique my interest. The funny thing is this reluctance is generally short lived once I start reading through something, because most books grab my attention well enough and I'm not very picky. It's just getting started that usually seems to be an insurmountable problem unless I'm driven by something other than pure interest in the material.

For this site, it's the quid pro quo that I would imagine members here expect that's driven me to read some of the other settings. Life has kept me busy and, quite frankly, miserable these days so I haven't had much energy or motivation to read anything at all. I have however read the settings of the people who have responded to mine (though I haven't commented on all of them) in an effort to at least return the favour to the people who directly aided me.