Something went wrong. Try again later

Giant Bomb News

231 Comments

Power to the People, Until the Power's Out of Control

A negative review is one thing, but 20 of them? In an hour? Out of nowhere? The problems developers face when Metacritic goes awry.

Signal Games is not the only developer to experience a rash of strange, out-of-nowhere negative reviews on Metacritic.
Signal Games is not the only developer to experience a rash of strange, out-of-nowhere negative reviews on Metacritic.

Signal Studios had a problem last week.

The tiny developer of Toy Soldiers: Cold War discovered its game had been hit with a series of negative, score-only (meaning no text) user reviews on Metacritic overnight, dragging its overall user rating down. While the scores assigned by critics are important, so are user reviews--anyone visting Metacritic is free to sort games by user reviews, too.

Metacritic has been a lightning rod of criticism over the years, due to its ties to developer pay.
Metacritic has been a lightning rod of criticism over the years, due to its ties to developer pay.

"There is a rash of fake negative user scores going about Metacritic and it hit TS:CW (and other games)," said Signal Studios community manager Logan DeMelt last week. "This means we need to hear your voice!"

DeMelt started mobilizing fans to add more reviews to the pile, incentivizing them with free download codes for Toy Soldiers: Cold War.

"If you write a user review," he said, "just being honest (we aren't bribing for positive) we will do the following: You write a review & post it, and we will put your name in for a chance for a prize on Friday. Every 10 new posts, we will drop a code out."

Of course, there are problems with this approach, especially in terms of the perception of a developer asking people to write reviews, albeit not advocating positive or negative, by dangling prizes around. DeMelt even got some Twitter flack about the concept from a friend, Sucker Punch community manager Colin Moore.

When I talked to Signal Studios president and creative director Douglas Robert Albright III on the phone last week, he told me he'd asked DeMelt to stop the promotion, understanding how people might interpret it.

"It doesn't matter what your intentions are, it's what the perception is," said Albright. "If that's the perception, then we'll just stop doing it. Because, honestly, he [DeMelt] had no intention of bribing people to get good scores."

"It was actually my fault," he continued. "I looked at the Metacritic and contacted them and told them 'This has been spammed.' We're not a bunch of dudes with a bunch of money laying around or whatever. It affects us, right? You can search by user scores and stuff like that. It's clearly spam. Metacritic just responded with this generic thing. All the intent was 'Well, this isn't our fault, we're just going to go on Metacritic and [ask users to] review the game.'"

Signal Studios noticed a spike in negative reviews overnight, without review text to accompany it.
Signal Studios noticed a spike in negative reviews overnight, without review text to accompany it.

Like it or not, Metacritic has become important to the games industry. It's a system with faults, and one that's come under enormous criticism over the years. But game publishers have few ways to determine success outside of sales--so they turn to Metacritic. Metacritic determines bonuses and royalty payouts for many. Thus, developers have reason to pay close attention.

The situation prompts hard questions for developers, especially small ones with financial destinies tied to something partially out of its control. There are few options. Asking for reviews could be perceived wrong, but what do you do if the negative reviews seem fake? How do you prove that? If you can't prove it but know you're right, do you gamble the possible backlash?

The motivations behind the user or users spamming Metatritic with negative reviews are unknown. Blind Internet rage? Sheer boredom? A new form of spam?

"I don't imagine there is some conspiracy," said Albright. "I think some folks just do annoying crap because they can. Like the kids who hack the leaderboards or idiots who deploy viruses. Ever play mailbox baseball?"

...no comment.

In any case, Albright hasn't received any evidence worth acting on--and neither has another studio.

The only reason Signal Studios even realized something was goofy on its Metacritic page was thanks to Supergiant Games noticing a similar explosion of negative user reviews overnight for Bastion in early September.

Signal Studios was tipped off to the Metacritic issue by Supergiant Games.
Signal Studios was tipped off to the Metacritic issue by Supergiant Games.

"I think it was sitting at around a mid-8 on Xbox 360 and at a 9 on PC, but on September 2 it had dropped into the 6s," said Supergiant Games creative director Greg Kasavin to me over email. "No additional user reviews were posted on that day (or at least no new negative reviews were posted), but I noticed that we had 20 new 'negative' user ratings that were entered for both versions of the game. This struck me and the rest of us as highly suspicious, because we were gathering new user ratings at a much slower rate than that in previous days. The idea that all of a sudden we would get 40 extremely disappointed people come and give us a 0 out of 10 rating all at the same time seemed very dubious."

Supergiant Games mentioned the bizarre nature of the user reviews over its Twitter and Facebook accounts and left it at that.

"It's the first time we've ever complained about something via our Facebook and Twitter so I didn't do it lightly," said Kasavin.

Bastion's user review score went up as a result--7.7 on Xbox 360, 8.0 on PC--but the damage was done. Kasavin flagged the issue with Metacritic but was told little could be done. Metacritic said it's very careful with user reviews, especially so if the user doesn't actually write a review. On Metacritic, it's possible to submit a "review" with only a score, making it difficult to determine whether someone simply registered an account and their negative review was their first submission--or spam.

Supergiant mentioned the Metacritic issue and users responded with positive reviews.
Supergiant mentioned the Metacritic issue and users responded with positive reviews.

"We just had to let it go," he said. "We value Metacritic as a service and are the highest rated XBLA [Xbox Live Arcade] game released so far this year according to them. There are some really great user reviews of our game on there, and if ratings-bombing continues to be an issue for other products, I trust it's something that the team there will investigate a solution more closely."

I contacted Metacritic about this pattern of issues. Metacritic told me each review has a "report abuse" option, which sends the review to Metacritic's team to possibly delete the review or ban the user.

"If any interested party feels that there has been a group of illegitimate user ratings (score only) entered for its game, they can contact me through the website and we'll investigate the issue," explained co-founder Marc Doyle. "We track each rating and can delete any that appear to be illegitimate or suspicious to us after a staff review of the rating data in question."

For now, for better or worse, that's the way the system works.

"The way to fix Metacritic user reviews is to simply require a written review and verify user accounts," said Albright. "If it was just some random blog I'd say whatever. But this is a major news review aggregator that should have better oversight and some standards."

Patrick Klepek on Google+

231 Comments

Avatar image for hellbrendy
HellBrendy

1425

Forum Posts

111

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By HellBrendy

Metacritic can die in a fire. It's nothing but problems to the business.

Avatar image for robertorri
RobertOrri

1207

Forum Posts

433

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By RobertOrri

@Mordukai said:

Developers know Metacritic is crap. We know Metacritic is crap. Now someone please let the suits in the publishing house know about that.

Yes.

Avatar image for justinaquarius
JustinAquarius

319

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By JustinAquarius

I knew publishers took MetaCritic very seriously, but I didn't think that meant they took the USER reviews seriously too.

Avatar image for viking_funeral
viking_funeral

2881

Forum Posts

57

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 5

Edited By viking_funeral

@Undeadpool: To be fair, regarding Dragon Age 2, it was the fans voicing their frustration at what they saw as bought reviews. It is the general consensus these days that Dragon Age 2 is not a great game, or even that horrible, rather being merely mediocre, but at the time the fans were seeing 94 & "Game of the decade!" reviews pop-up on Metacritic. Either reviewers were getting a very different experience than the fans, or something happened.

Then it was revealed that members of BioWare's team were stealth-posting 10 reviews on Metacritic. That, in addition to the horrible reaction BioWare had to the backlash, made Metacritic user reviews one battleground of many between the upset fans and BioWare.

Avatar image for dvorak
dvorak

1553

Forum Posts

616

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By dvorak

User scores are just a little bit more useless than critic scores. But we already knew that.

The joke is that the only people that actually get paid more if they receive better reviews are the devs.

Avatar image for mordukai
mordukai

8516

Forum Posts

398

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By mordukai

Developers know Metacritic is crap. We know Metacritic is crap. Now someone please let the suits in the publishing house know about that.

Avatar image for sammo21
sammo21

6040

Forum Posts

2237

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 45

Edited By sammo21

This is why Metacritic shouldn't allow user reviews at all, especially before the game is even released to the public.

Avatar image for shaanyboi
Shaanyboi

1804

Forum Posts

3224

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

Edited By Shaanyboi

Fuck metacritic. I hate aggregated review sites... Worst fucking thing.

Avatar image for prestonhedges
prestonhedges

1961

Forum Posts

42

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By prestonhedges

@dox said:

@Vinny_Says: The only reason they care is because consumers review those sources. If consumers didn't care then developers would not care.

Citation needed.

Avatar image for meatsim
MeatSim

11201

Forum Posts

150

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 23

Edited By MeatSim

They said how to fix it. Only allow a user rating if they have written a text review.

Avatar image for sirdesmond
sirdesmond

1545

Forum Posts

1672

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Edited By sirdesmond

@Vinny_Says said:

It's sad devs put so much importance on metacritic, even sadder when they care about user reviews where anyone can write anything

It's sad that devs have to put so much importance on Metacritic because their jobs, amount of pay, and future opportunities depend on the publishers that put so much importance on Metacritic because they need a collection of subjective numbers to tell them if something was a success or not.

Avatar image for wrathofconn
wrathofconn

1511

Forum Posts

10983

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 12

Edited By wrathofconn

Man, this is fucking stupid.

Avatar image for deactivated-6610658acf7f5
deactivated-6610658acf7f5

962

Forum Posts

23877

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Metacritic is a reductive blunt instrument. Find writers you know and trust instead of using silly aggregators.

Avatar image for vexxan
Vexxan

4642

Forum Posts

943

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Edited By Vexxan

Proves why Metacritic is a BAD IDEA.

Avatar image for madlaughter
madlaughter

462

Forum Posts

17

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By madlaughter

This same thing happened to Dragon Age 2. That game has legitimate issues, but there was a huge bombing of negative scores as the swell of frustration about so many pre-order bonuses occurred.

Avatar image for somedelicook
SomeDeliCook

2353

Forum Posts

61

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By SomeDeliCook

Reviews don't mean a damn thing compared to word of mouth.

Avatar image for mormonwarrior
MormonWarrior

2945

Forum Posts

577

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 21

Edited By MormonWarrior

User reviews on those sites are nothing but spam. The vast majority of them are like this: (CoD: Black Ops) "COD SUX ITS LAME NOT REAL GAMING TOTALY BROKN. 1/10" I don't care who you are, a good game is a good game even if you're not a fan. The regular Metacritic score is a little better. At least they somewhat mask the hyperbole. Sometimes.

When taken in the right context, Metacritic is really useful. I can see that "Gee, Brad's review of Metroid Other M is quite a bit higher than what most people think and the complaints others have concern me. Maybe I'll GameFly it before buying it." It gives me an idea of what to expect from a game rather than blindly buying it. I don't put too much stock in the ratings anymore, but it often helps me sift the amazing games from the merely good ones so I can prioritize. Anything below the 70's is not worth playing ever.

Avatar image for fizzy
Fizzy

379

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Fizzy

@krazy_kyle said:

Review scores are very unreliable to the point where I do not bother with Metacritic or any other large gaming site like gamespot or IGN. I just use my own initiative now and it has served me pretty well so far. I still read reviews to see what the reviewer has to say and at times I see the reviewer mentioning plenty of good things about the game but the game would get a 7/10 for example. If a game looks good, I buy it, if it looks bad, I don't bother. People need to think for themselves instead of relying on review scores to decide on whether to buy a game or not.

That's what I usually do. I can't understand why games that look amazing get horrible reviews because of stuff like "Oh, the story is boring."....I can understand if a story is boring, but if it's not a story driven game it shouldn't warrant a 6 or 7 because of it.

Avatar image for originalgman
originalgman

306

Forum Posts

557

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By originalgman

Metacritic's interface is ass. Just use Gamerankings. Problem solved.

Avatar image for hyperfludd
hyperfludd

405

Forum Posts

366

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 7

Edited By hyperfludd

Great write-up, and it'll hopefully add a reason for publishers to not depend so heavily on the site.

Avatar image for dox
dox

114

Forum Posts

101

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Edited By dox

@Vinny_Says: The only reason they care is because consumers review those sources. If consumers didn't care then developers would not care.

Avatar image for saturnprime
saturnprime

23

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By saturnprime

The sad fact is that user reviews on the internet should not be using such a stratified scale for anonymous ratings. The larger the scale, the more weight a 0/10 or 10/10 vote bombing will skew results by mean average or even median scores. Most users don't understand or differentiate the ten point scale with 0.5 or 0.1 increment on established sites like IGN or Gamespot had; why would we allow a ten point scale for anonymous submitters. An unrealistic number of ratings are always on the extremes on Amazon, Yelp, Rotten Tomatoes as well. This is not unique to Metacritic, except ratings at Metacritic get tied to bonuses and financial progressions for unfortunate reasons. A thumbs up, thumbs down vote or 5 point scale would help, but not solve the issue. Personally I have ignored user ratings on Metacritic and would not display that user score on the games page or in search results without a click-through to a user reviews page.

Avatar image for krazy_kyle
krazy_kyle

740

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Edited By krazy_kyle

Review scores are very unreliable to the point where I do not bother with Metacritic or any other large gaming site like gamespot or IGN. I just use my own initiative now and it has served me pretty well so far. I still read reviews to see what the reviewer has to say and at times I see the reviewer mentioning plenty of good things about the game but the game would get a 7/10 for example. If a game looks good, I buy it, if it looks bad, I don't bother. People need to think for themselves instead of relying on review scores to decide on whether to buy a game or not.

Avatar image for three0nefive
Three0neFive

2446

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Three0neFive

Reminds me of when Bioware was blaming DA2's low Metacritic score on /v/. Because it's impossible that, you know, that game was just a fucking awful yaoi fanwank.

But that's besides the point. lol, metacritic.

Avatar image for nmarchan
nmarchan

189

Forum Posts

40

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By nmarchan

There's also the fact that people who work in the industry have been caught voting down competing games on metacritic while voting up their own. There was a thread on GAF a few months ago, where a few metacritic reviewers were giving super high scores for Bioware RPGs and super low scores to... I think it was the new Witcher game. Turns out when you look up their username, it brought you to a linkedin account showing they worked for EA or something like that.

I wouldn't assume these rushes of negative reviews are all from fans. Do some research, you may actually find something worse going on.

Avatar image for andrewb
AndrewB

7816

Forum Posts

82

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 16

Edited By AndrewB

Amazon gets review bombed just as frequently. Recently I noticed a ton of negative reviews for Deus Ex Human Revolution based solely on the point that it requires a Steam install. It's a valid point of criticism, but not enough to justify an instant 1 star review.

Other games get lambasted for their DRM.

Avatar image for fizzy
Fizzy

379

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Fizzy

Interesting. I always wondered why some awesome games received oddly low scores on metacritic.

Avatar image for lokilaufey
lokilaufey

306

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By lokilaufey

@White_Silhouette: Did you ever see the Amazon page for the Star Wars BluRay set? That had 1.5-2 out of 5 stars for weeks up until release and that is a site that even requires text with the scores. All this from people who had never seen or touched the set, but were going off of clips or information they had heard that they were unhappy about. People "reviewing" products yet to be released because they are unhappy about what's been shown off or have an agenda to push has been going on for awhile and probably will continue.

Avatar image for dabuddada
DaBuddaDa

306

Forum Posts

13894

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By DaBuddaDa

Metacritic is the most useless, idiotic concept that has plagued the entire industry. Developers need to stop giving a flying fuck about it, and publishers need to learn that Metacritic scores mean shit all for sales numbers. It is completely, utterly useless.

Avatar image for privateirontfu
PrivateIronTFU

3858

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Edited By PrivateIronTFU

@Delta_Ass: Seinfeld. Nice.

Avatar image for white_silhouette
White_Silhouette

527

Forum Posts

308

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By White_Silhouette

@Delta_Ass: it was from the futureshop website, but yeah the FF symbol is their logo.

Avatar image for zakkro
zakkro

84

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By zakkro

I used to pay attention to Metacritic years ago, but now it's just a waste of [internet] space to me. Also, I never pay attention to user scores; only to what they actually have to say.

Avatar image for ollyoxenfree
OllyOxenFree

5015

Forum Posts

19

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 9

Edited By OllyOxenFree

As Adam Sessler most eloquently said:

"Fuck Metacritic."

Avatar image for delta_ass
delta_ass

3776

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 36

User Lists: 7

Edited By delta_ass

@White_Silhouette said:

No Caption Provided

Here is just another example of how user reviews are getting out of hand. A screen shot taken today.

Instead of stars, they use... fast forward symbols? Really? Really?

Avatar image for om1kron
137

487

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By 137

the fuck is meta critic?

Avatar image for bhhawks78
bhhawks78

1348

Forum Posts

18

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By bhhawks78

@JoeyRavn said:

What worries me most is that if I sincerely dislike a game (for example, Bastion) and give it a low score, my rating will be dismissed as "spam". What an awesome tool Metacritic is.

There is a huge difference between a written review with a low score and 40 random accounts giving a 0 out of ten with no explanation.

Avatar image for alexw00d
AlexW00d

7604

Forum Posts

3686

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By AlexW00d

Maybe the game just sucks?

Avatar image for white_silhouette
White_Silhouette

527

Forum Posts

308

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By White_Silhouette

Here is just another example of how user reviews are getting out of hand. A screen shot taken today.

No Caption Provided
Avatar image for hadestimes
HadesTimes

969

Forum Posts

13

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 8

Edited By HadesTimes

Great piece Patrick, no one else has this. I would suggest publishers begin the painful process of ignoring Metacritic and actually reading reviews again. *gasp*

Avatar image for maddprodigy
MaddProdigy

1074

Forum Posts

178

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By MaddProdigy

I had no idea anyone in the games industry actually used Metacritic to determine pay! Who are they and what in the world are they smoking? Even if it wasn't an oversight-less, independent site, the entire content of the site is opinion based. Even the game critic reviews are just professional user reviews, that's totally ludicrous that someone else's opinion would decide bonuses, and not the years and years of work developers put into a product.

I would like some more details Patrick, perhaps another story about MetaCritic and which developers/studios give it such importance?

Oh and that sucks that someone is obviously review bombing developers scores but the Metacritic people are too lazy to make a fix.

Avatar image for lokilaufey
lokilaufey

306

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By lokilaufey

@Vinny_Says said:

It's sad devs put so much importance on metacritic, even sadder when they care about user reviews where anyone can write anything

Devs care because publishers care because some consumers care. Most people kind of admit either MetaCritic is terrible or flawed, but publishers & consumers pay attention to how things are scored on that site so devs have to pay attention to it whether they want to or not. It can actually impact sales.

Avatar image for cretaceous_bob
Cretaceous_Bob

552

Forum Posts

3

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Cretaceous_Bob
But this is a major news review aggregator that should have better oversite and some standards.

That's not a word.

Avatar image for delta_ass
delta_ass

3776

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 36

User Lists: 7

Edited By delta_ass

"Excuse me I'd like to give a user review of 1.0."

"Certainly. May I ask why?"

"For spite."

"Spite?"

"That's right. I don't care for the developer."

"I don't think you can review a game for spite."

"What do you mean?"

"Well if there was some problem with the game, if it were unsatisfactory in some way, then we could do it for you, but I'm afraid spite doesn't fit into any of our conditions for a review."

"That's ridiculous, I want to review it. What's the difference what the reason is?"

You can't review a game based purely on spite."

"Well so fine then... then I don't like it and then that's why I'm giving it a 1."

"Well you already said spite so..."

"But I changed my mind..."

"No... You said spite... Too late."

Avatar image for ultimaxe
UltimAXE

887

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By UltimAXE

@JoeyRavn said:

What worries me most is that if I sincerely dislike a game (for example, Bastion) and give it a low score, my rating will be dismissed as "spam". What an awesome tool Metacritic is.

Not if you take the time to explain what your issues are. Really, though, this industry puts way too much stock in numerical scoring of its software. I've never even been to Metacritic and am not one to argue semantics over whether a game deserves an 8.5 or a 9, but when people's paychecks are revolving around that and it is fairly easy to manipulate maliciously, it does become a bit of an issue.

Avatar image for darkjester74
darkjester74

1743

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By darkjester74

Why anyone would base a buying decision on Metacritic is beyond me. Utterly useless for getting any actual reviews.

The real insanity here is publishers tying bonus and royalty payouts to Metacritic scores. Does anyone really believe that a higher Metacritic score is directly tied to higher sales?

Avatar image for robin_gr
Robin_Gr

139

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Edited By Robin_Gr

User reviews don't really matter, if its perception everyone is worried about. Especially on Metacritic where the the average "official" reviews value is displayed much more prominently. It might be different on an amazon style site where user reviews are the only opinions given on products.

Avatar image for foolishchaos
FoolishChaos

515

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By FoolishChaos
@Vinny_Says

It's sad devs put so much importance on metacritic, even sadder when they care about user reviews where anyone can write anything

They care about metacritic because people use it. It affects game sales. Its not sad that indie developers put so much importance on making a living.
Avatar image for mosespippy
mosespippy

4751

Forum Posts

2163

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 8

Edited By mosespippy

This is clearly the fault of John Davison.

Avatar image for seakae
seakae

266

Forum Posts

158

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 8

Edited By seakae

Just another reason why people shouldn't use the site.

Avatar image for silver-streak
Silver-Streak

2030

Forum Posts

587

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 4

Edited By Silver-Streak

I think this could likely be solved by listing review-only scores with the username that submitted them, as well as have a username related review history. You know, like the smart people at Whiskey Media have.

If a user has no other reviews, was registered within 30 seconds as the other 10 score-only-reviewers did, there's a good chance it's a sign of abuse.