Imho, a review can be short, but it should help the level author in some way. Saying "this is great level, eyecandy and gameplay is good! 9!" does not help the maker of the level in any way. How is the eyecandy good? How can it be improved? What are the level's strong points and what should be taken out? It just takes a few sentences to write this. People can at least try.

J2O is a community site, and people should have the freedom to rate things how they feel as long as there is some proof they actually played and evaluated the level. It could be as short as "The level is good, but next time you can use more ramps for smoother play, and less leaves in the foreground to distract you from whats going on."

Also, I sort of disagree on only editing short, pointless reviews with a rating too high/too low. If a user says "Great level! You get 8.5!" to a level rated 8.5 or so, it should get the same treatment if that review was said about a level averaging a 6, since in both reviews it doesn't give any notice whatsover that the reviewer even downloaded the level.

Of course, short revies are allowed and can help people, and there is no real rule to how long a review should be. It's really the reviewer's choice.

Well, that's my opinion. Feel free to criticize it.