I've already posted this on J2O a little earlier. This kills off the other half of the argument that was missed, was stressed against only by the author, or not stressed by the other side (the rest of the community) at all. Here's the non-profit plagerism. ;-P



"Personal attack. I'm so heartbroken. ;-P



I don't believe you can actually be stressing our freedom to review levels posted here. We're lenient enough not to rate your hotel in the first place (one reason being that you asked us not to, the other being that J2O needs lower ratings than just 1). It's all or nothing, and there is no in-between; either none of us rate it (there are some requests like that occasionally, and that's perfectly alright) or all of us rate it (with the exception of the creator(s)), so this is going to be considered overrated in every view possible. Wasting your time reading these reviews is better in every way than wasting your time making hotel levels no one likes; that's the truth that some might take in with difficulty. As this level has already been rated, other users may do one of two things:



1.) Users may cancel their system ratings and change them to N/A.



or



2.) All users may rate this download.



I don't believe it is fair for you to get higher ratings than others on this file pack just because you are only allowing positive ratings. You're defeating the purpose of J2O's review system, and are probably making many people (less myself, of course, as I haven't uploaded any levels) somewhat angry.



To put it simply, either noone rates it, or everyone rates it (excluding the creator(s)). That's all; no more, no less."



I believe this should be a loosely followed rule on J2O. What does everyone else believe? (Aside from the one person who I know will reject this idea.) ;-P