Dismal Rate

As my post count my indicate, I'm not someone who has ever felt particularly inclined to post on these boards, and most probably never will again. Nevertheless I took particular offense at the following rate:

http://www.weeweeslap.com/track_exchange/detail.asp?tid=13162

First off, the member in question has recently uploaded two tracks so he shouldn't even be prescribing numbers.

Second off, the fact that he openly admits that he has not even downloaded the track shows that he has no real reason to pass any fair judgement.

Mainly: The rate quite simply is just utterly retarded. To give someone a '1' for technique under the premise that the ride will kill someone is absurd. It is true that in certain seats there is a single instance of a red G , yet otherwise the ride remains within acceptable confines and clearly would not be murderous. The track is in fact generally rather smooth, and whilst there are certainly some rather quirky foibles, this is after all a fantasy roller coaster.

To give a ride a 10 for adrenaline in accordance with the fact that it would kill you is truly worthy of only a belligerent mongoose. Last time I was informed, death isn't perceived as the most desirable of experiences and besides, once dead there isn't much capacity of enjoyment is there? Perhaps the rater has his own penchant for a sudden demise? Furthermore, as established, the ride would in fact return its riders back to the station, a little bruised maybe, and perhaps thoroughly pissed off it is true, yet nevertheless quite decidedly alive.

Having just ridden the reviewer's own coaster: 'Mad Mouse' I must confess that there is a greater chance of its riders dying from old age on the exorbitantly slow life hill than on the ride in question

The ride design is indeed rather quirky - even if much of the originality could be attributed to building flaws. One must commend the designer for some initiative and experiementalism, and therefore this clearly isn't a run of the mill design that anyone could churn out, so a 0.5 is clearly a case of gross ignorance and indiscretion, and I don't even feel that it deserves being served with a counter arguement - that would be giving it too much respect and credibilty.

The bottom line is that he gave a review on a ride that he had not ridden. Which you just shouldn't do, because it is bound to be wrong, and therefore people like me are bound to come along and kick him up the ass. Hopefully that is reason enough.

[Oscar]

Thanks for detailed and informational review. We agree 100% on the post and assure you that the user will be terminated at once. I appreciate you pointing out this. It is sad for people like him to sign up and mess things up that. Thanks again for detailed post!