I supposed SilverBolt makes a good point. Even reviews of reviews are based on opinions. However, I don't think that this necessarily makes it a useless system. Over time, after someone makes several good reviews, people will hopefully change their opinion of said person, and read through before downvoting. So yes, it could make some reviews less valuable than others. But in the long run, it should on average, make the reviews and scores more accurate. Also, I think that we could use the "rate value" to weight the reviewer's score without simply multiplying rate value times the score they give. Maybe anyone's review would always have some base value, then well rated reviewers scores would be given a bit of extra sway. This means that even someone with a 0% rate value would still be able to have some effect on the score, so they wouldn't feel that giving reviews was pointless.

Our current system already has a review voting system that keeps track of a permanent "Average Helpfulness", and I can see how many votes were involved in creating that score. And I don't think that this has discouraged reviews.

A review based rating system might work, but I think that again, our community is a bit small. Most review probably will never get more than a couple votes, and this leads to a really small sample size, so I think that there would be too many short pointless reviews that get one thumbs up and have too much sway, or long, detailed reviews that one person disagrees with and end up counting for less than they should.

Jake's suggestions might help, but I think that even with forcing comments, most people would probably say, "Nice." or "I disagree," and it would be impossible for admins to tell the real votes apart from biased votes for friends or hateful downvotes. Not to mention we're asking the admins to micromanage a rating system of a rating system.