"The review system should not be completely discarded like this just because it is a little beaten up and unappealing to a few."

Where did I propose that it should be discarded? Nowhere did I say that.

Rather, I am proposing that we keep the review-moderating system as it has been since the start of our site, with the exception of editing the really short stuff. How is this completely discarding the review system? It's keeping it as it is!

And it's not just unappealing 'to a few'.

"In the world of the analogy you describe, anyone could have shiny and high-quality clothes materialize right on them using only basic reasoning and a little extra time; that is, if the analogy fits the situation here. It is not my idea to moderate reviews, but just following that idea, it needs to be looser. You would decide how loose it is."

That's really not true. Not everyone is like you, Aiko, Trafton and the other good reviewers. Not everyone speaks english as well as you. Not everybody is as good at writing. Not everybody has the right mindset for it. Not everybody is as old. You're asking a lot of people. No, those ties can't just be materialised. And if we want them to be there there are other ways to purchase them than just editing everything. Like advice and other ways.

Even for me, someone older than most of the users on J2o, writing even medium reviews is quite hard. It's not just "a little extra time" and "using only basic reasoning". This does not mean it's good to have bad reviews, but what you say here is wrong.

"If you start out with an invalid opinion, a chain of invalid opinions with a small variance can easily invalidate a valid opinion if it differs a lot from the majority. This system alone is inaccurate and ineffective."

This has never happened on J2O and there is no reason to think why it would suddenly start happening.

"The reason I suggested what I suggested was because I was misled by the fact that the link to the "reviews" section reads "reviews." You have a vision of J2O where users rate levels with short comments that cannot logically be considered reviews because they show no evidence of review."

No, I haven't. Please read my post. I never ever proposed getting rid of longer reviews altogether. I never even proposed discouraging them. In fact, I'm only countering the people who think we should be much more authoritarian about it, instead of just using normal ways of helping the community get better.

"You value free speech, and that is fine. However, by having J2O up in the first place, you imply that you value the community's prosperity and progress. You certainly have the propserity down with the free speech part, but you cannot say that there will be any progress with this "rating" system."

Where I and you differ is not in how we perceive the downloads section but how we perceive the use of power. I prefer using other methods than power to improve the downloads section. You prefer having strict quality control.