Unfair rates

http://www.coastercrazy.com/track_exchange/detail.asp?tid=15867

I am having a hard time finding out why I got a rating of 6.5 by Ed Boxer and 7.3 by Brtnboarder495 on my coaster that I recently uploaded. I am mostly concerned about the 6.5, and I'll give you reasons why I think the rates are "not correct/fair".

The 6.5 rate:
Quote #1 from adrenaline: "Interesting layout. Lots of Air. It did get a little repetitive: turn, air, air, turn, repeat. I felt the double up would have been more effective as a double down".

Comment: I don't understand what I am supposed to do other than turns and hills on a mega. It isn't one boring turn, or hill, after another. The ride has a variety of different turns with different feels. And there is barely any advantage or change from a double down to a double up so the last part makes no sense.

Quote #2 from originality: "It felt like an expanded version of Millie. I didn't find the water use as effective as others did. The second over-banked turn would have been much cooler if you expanded the water so that you looked down at water rather than trees and supports (even better if you reverse the braces). More terrain work would have helped make the trees more effective and the water more of a surprise."

Comment: A lot of this stuff seemed to be more of a "I wish you did that because I think it would be cooler" rather than actual problems with the ride itself. Other people told me I used the terrain well, which was my goal, but apparently I could have done more with the terrain and trees to make the water "more of a surprise". You can't really make the water a surprise when there is 160ft + lift hill from which you can see everything before you go through it.

Quote #3 from tech: "the supports in the second over-banked turn by the water would be more effective visually if they were reversed. (brace on the outside of the curve - which is how you have them on the very first and last braced supports on that curve)".

Comment: This is another one of those "I wish you did that because I think it would be cooler" moments. The supports are fine according to the style of Intamin, and there is nothing wrong with them having the braces on the inside. Overall half the things stated in this rate are not problems, just preferences of the rater. But I still get a "low" score.

The 7.5 rate:

Quote # 1 adrenaline: "Honestly, not that thrilling. There were some opportunities for air, but the middle of the ride was boring in terms of air and even it seemed to crawl over some hills. This is an Intamin Hyper! Give me hills with -1.0G's!"

Comments: My ride did have air. It had a mix from light floater air to -1.5 ejector air. There was a lot of strong forces and the ride had air on every hill, even if it seemed to crawl over some hills... at 35mph. The only reason he might have had the ride crawl over hills would be if he didn't use improved friction.

Quote #2: "Not really original to be honest, color scheme was nothing special, no theming or layout specialities. No fun elements. I, myself, dislike the Originality part of reviewing, but given the lack of adrenaline or introduction of anything fun or creative, I can't give you anything higher"

Comment: There really isn't a original color scheme anymore. There is only good one and bad ones. There was a lot of theming on this ride, (terrain and trees). There just wasn't any 3Ds work, but some rides don't need 3Ds work. If he doesn't like the originality part of reviewing, then why is he even rating any rides in the first place. It seems like he wanted an amazingly original coaster, but there is only so much one can do to make an Intamin Mega fun, but keep it realistic.

If you read this whole article/complaint. Thank you.

Both of those rates are valid. You can sort this out via PMs.