STEAM GROUP
Reviewers' Guild ReviewGuild
STEAM GROUP
Reviewers' Guild ReviewGuild
35
IN-GAME
296
ONLINE
Founded
5 January, 2016
Language
English
This topic has been locked
AviaRa 18 Sep, 2021 @ 4:50am
A concerning matter about certain "reviewers".
Hey all!

Some of you might know that my role here is to put the reviews you share in the “Share your Steam Reviews” thread into the Guild's curator; thus, I browse through it every now and then, as well as taking my time to read most of them and give a comment or an upvote, which some of the active members can confirm. Due to this, I am well aware of what content is allowed and shared here and whether it was written by a newcomer, hobby reviewer or a professional one. The Guild aims to promote and support reviewers of all kinds after all, but that should be under some conditions, and that would be being honest with your thoughts.

However, I have noticed (plus was informed by other regular members of the Guild) that two members might not share that idea, and that would be BiteMexD and Piston Smashed. Both of them write for the same curator The_Cpt_FROGGY CLUB and website Zeepond[www.zeepond.com] to which the curator is associated. They receive many review copies directly from the publishers or developers through their curator/website, just like many of us, me included. Groups like Devils in the Detail, Save or Quit[saveorquit.com], IndieGems and so on are ones that come to my mind.

The problem is, however, that the said “reviewers” do not care about delivering an honest opinion like the abovementioned groups or perhaps even you. How so? Let me show you an example of BiteMexD first.

BiteMexD clearly fakes their playtime via idling and achievements via SAM (Steam Achievement Manager that allows you to unlock any achievement). Let us check out some proofs (everything highlighted in bold links to the said reviews/achievements):

Here is their Dust to the End review and their achievements.
As you can see, BiteMexD unlocked 42 out of 47 achievements in the same day, hour and minute. Moreover, they are not even smart about it, as they somehow unlocked “1000 KM” achievement, but on their “100, 000KM” achievement it clearly shows they have 0 kilometres. These are not counted individually but are a continuation of the previous, so it's evident they didn't even take the time to properly look over their cheating. Or you can see that they reached all of the endings at once (four, to be precise).

Let us move to another review, which would be Life is Strange: True Colours. BiteMexD has about 20.4 hours despite the game being about 10 hours long, which, in and of itself, is pretty questionable in a linear, narrative-driven adventure but might be explained by them being away from keyboard for a time. However, they only have two achievements. As you can see, those are collectables from different chapters (1 and 2) unlocked within two minutes from each other. ”Amateur Archaeophile” requires you to unlock all memories for the achievement, yet they haven’t obtained achievements for the single memories, such as “Pro Tip” or “Team Chomp-Bot”. What’s even worse, though, is that the chapter 2 achievement was unlocked while the one for finishing chapter 1 was not.

Here is another example, which is a Patron review. You can see that most of their achievements are unlocked at the very same time, with the exceptions of “Camping”, “Moar berries!” and “The know-how”.

And I could go on and on. BiteMexD even uses SAM on games they haven’t reviewed, such as King’s Bounty II, which only underlines my point about them being dishonest and not caring about playing the games they receive for free.

What about the abovementioned Piston Smashed, though? It is harder to tell whether they use SAM like BiteMexD, as they have more reasonable unlock times. However, Piston Smashed does not seem to be interested in finishing the games either, proven both by their low number of achievements and the low amount of playtime (and confirmed multiple times by Piston Smashed themselves in their comments, as others found that questionable already).

You can check out their Tales of Arise review along with their achievements or King’s Bounty II review and the corresponding achievements as an example.

Even though the achievements have been unlocked at different times, it clearly shows that they barely played the game, as the average playtime for both titles is about 40 hours while they have 6.3 hours for Tales of Arise and 8.4 hours for King’s Bounty II. The problem is that writing a positive review for a game you barely touched will not provide me much information about its qualities, as the said reviewer simply hasn’t experienced the game and can’t tell me, for example, if the final act is subpar like in Final Fantasy XV, Mass Effect 3 or Fallout 3 - which in some cases might be enough to ruin a game, which Piston Smashed wouldn’t know. Moreover, most of the information they write is similar to what is already mentioned on the store page or they even waste space by mentioning all the available languages and in-game options instead of actually reviewing it.

Why is that problematic? Because both write for the same curator/website, as I mentioned above, and they write only positive reviews, as you can check here on their curator. They have only 8 “informational” ones for games that haven’t been released yet or they haven’t obtained a copy of. Keep in mind that this is the curator that belongs to The_Cpt_FROGGY who has been banned from this group’s discussions because he attacked other members when he was confronted about similarly sketchy behaviour.

Simply put, they do not care about delivering an honest opinion, they only care about writing a positive text as soon as possible, so they could get more free copies in the future. That is not reviewing, as that is basically free promotion for both publishers and developers.

Personally, I think that both of them shouldn’t be a part of this Guild if all they wish to do is simply promote games they got for free instead of writing an honest review without resorting to cheating the playtime and achievements, or simply playing the tutorial and judging the whole game based on it. It misleads the Guild members, followers and any Steam user that might stumble upon their review. I feel that their presence is insulting to others, who actually put their time and effort into writing informative and honest reviews while finishing the game and not faking their overall playtime and/or achievements.

Well, I am posting it here to hear your opinions, as well as theirs if they would somehow care to explain themselves, especially BiteMexD.
< >
Showing 1-15 of 60 comments
Manostion 18 Sep, 2021 @ 4:56am 
As someone who has also reported these "reviewers", I think that removing BiteMexD should be a given, considering he very obviously, blatantly, and stupidly cheated, which is not only pathetic and dishonest but also probably violates Steam's TOS. He should be glad if he doesn't get reported for it by the folks here.

As for Piston Smashed, while a point could be made that he didn't obviously cheat, I agree with everything said here. Aside from reviews for barely touched games being rather useless, it's obvious that their curator doesn't care whether a game is good or not. If it's free for them, it's good. And if it has Trading Cards and Achievements, it's even better.

I can only speak for myself (and my curator), but that's not what we stand for as reviewers.
Last edited by Manostion; 18 Sep, 2021 @ 4:59am
DeadeGuard98 18 Sep, 2021 @ 5:29am 
I'm all for it- the banning/removing I mean. I'm glad that you took the time:redblooddrop: and effort to be thorough in your assessments!

Certainly makes a strong statement that we cannot and won't tolerate this from now on~

They're obviously doing well on their own, just not as reviewers... Though I have not read any of their works. So I can't say for sure.

But anyhoo, that's my stand. Thanks @AviaRa~:UDG_HackingGun::edwin:
Amirite 18 Sep, 2021 @ 6:57am 
I understand that the Reviewer's guild was established with giving exposure to curators and individual reviewers in mind, though we can't allow just anybody with malicious intent to undermine other members with integrity in their efforts.

Their reviews, however lengthy and verbose at times, are absolutely valueless and lack any important information whatsoever. As DeadGuard noted, BiteMeEksDee and their peers are doing well on their own already, so cut them loose.
FruitNDoggie 18 Sep, 2021 @ 7:26am 
With stuff like this being a part of why I've left another review group before, I'm certainly of the mindset to remove content like this from the guild. No reason to sully our hands and reputation by guilt of association.
Considering I go out of my way to put in playtime, even in games I am -not- having fun in. Uh, yeah. I definitely follow the general "let's remove these guys" - vibe. It only benefits the rest of the guild to do so, as we currently provide some degree of 'legitimacy' to these guys by virtue of housing them, so to speak.

That, and removing them means there'll be more eyes on people who are actually doing the work.
aquatorrent 18 Sep, 2021 @ 7:40am 
I don't think it is alright to review a game if you haven't played them. Idling a playtime and unlocking very basic achievements through SAM means that the "reviewer" hasn't played the game at all, so as a reader, i'll doubt where they got their review texts from (copy pasting wikipedia? Store page? Or other reviews?).

As for the first impression review (few hours of playtime), i don't think it is a problem if it is a new game with a few number of reviews or info, since some people might need extra info about the game before picking it up (little information is better than nothing after all). However, although i'm tolerating it to some extent, i'm still discouraging this practice, and even if they still want to do it, i don't think they should do it everytime, especially if they are not updating the review (nor continuing playing the game) after that. If the review is positive, i doubt the game is that good since the reviewer themself doesn't even have a motivation to finish the game.

That's just my general opinion on both cases.

However, piston themselves said that they are not a reviewer (from their tales of arise review), and since this group is made for reviewers, i believe it is clear on what action that needs to be taken for both cases.
Last edited by aquatorrent; 18 Sep, 2021 @ 7:42am
The_Cpt_FROGGY 18 Sep, 2021 @ 8:31am 
Hi,

The Cpt Froggy here.

I hope that everyone is doing fine and you are safe, wherever you are in the world due the this Covic -19 Pandemic.

Let me introduce myself properly. My name is Rom Krieger, and I am the proud founder and owner of Zeepond Pty Ltd, which is a Company listed in Australia.

I started my Curator Group THE CPT FROGGY CLUB on the 11th of June, 2014. I started with nothing at all, and I was only creating giveaways through a well-known website before starting my own.

I started writing reviews for fun and developed a style which a lot of people like and some don’t, but I have never jumped into anybody else’s reviews and started criticising them; even if I were to be asked, I would choose not to as I have always respected everybody’s individual style.

I was invited in the Guild by Craktus Jack, the founder of this Guild, as he enjoyed my reviews and I accepted. And let me tell everyone that I take extremely seriously what I do. After all, I have spent many thousands of dollars on Steam and have invested much more on Zeepond.

Then along comes Manostion, Avaria and Sv. Prolivije commenting on my reviews, which was fine in the beginning as it’s good to have different views. But then their comments became personal attacks against me, my reputation and my company.
Now, they are attacking my reviewers too. Why?

I would like to clarify a few things:

* I am the only one in Zeepond who actively contacts publishers, developers and PR companies. I have done this since I started. And the reason for that is very simple. I will only review games that I want to play. Yes, we receive games on our curators groups, but if it is not what we are interested in we politely send the games back to the developer so they can use the key for somebody else. It is how we do things, nothing wrong with that. 95% of the games are outsourced and received through Zeepond. And yes, I decided to use the informational option in my curator group to inform our viewers of upcoming games; what’s wrong with that?

* In regards to BiteMexD, I can assure you that Piston and I have played several times online with him for a couple of hours on games he subsequently reviewed, and on beta games, too. And to be honest, he’s written some cracker reviews for Zeepond and the Cpt Froggy Club. Now, if he uses SAM, it is not ideal, I agree, and I will have a chat with him about it. Having said that, it is his prerogative and has nothing to do with our way of reviewing. But honestly, telling people he doesn’t take reviewing seriously is a bit much. And, he can replay games as many times as he likes; if a game can be completed in 10 hours and he chooses to replay it, so be it!

We write honest and informative reviews, in a different style to Manostion, Avaria and Sv. Prolivije and others. Guys, it is fine! Variety is the spice of life.

Now, I am asking the three of you, along with the admin of this guild, and any other reviewers within the guild, to immediately stop these attacks on myself, my company and my reviewers. We have our views and you have yours; be respectful and please stop! Perhaps you could give someone you love a hug instead.

If you want to talk to me directly, please feel free to send me an email at support@zeepond.com. Make sure you have the decency to put your full name, as I have done here, and be respectful.

Rom Krieger
Managing Director
Zeepond Pty Ltd
Piston Smashed™ 18 Sep, 2021 @ 8:43am 
Hello folks :happyleon:

I have never used a cheat, or hacked any game or achievements in 18 years on Steam or in over 20 years online gaming. I have a 4 digit Steam ID so I wouldn't use any programs which could cause me to have a mark against my account.

Nobody has to finish a game in order to review it. I give a bit of the story to begin with but I would rather let other people discover how the game unfolds on their own, who wants to know the ending before you start a game? Not me..

I don't compare games to other games either whether they are similar or in the same series as I like to review the current game not one from 5 years or so ago. Is that wrong of me as well?

Everyone is entitled to review a game how they like and not be dictated to by a bunch of people who don't like the group they belong too. If someone doesn't like a review then they can simply either ignore them or give them a thumbs down.

I have seen people here who have posted reviews and not finished a game. Does that mean we should get rid of those as well? I don't see any ruling which states that a game must be finished or how long it's played before a review can be posted. I don't have any games reviewed after being played for only an hour but there are plenty posted.

I have done nothing wrong to be accused of may be cheating my achievements. I have a right to play a game and review it as I feel just like everyone else does, as long as it's an honest review. I don't go for achievements, I don't need achievements to enjoy a game, I'm not the only one who thinks that way when it comes to gaming.

Current health problems cause me to play games less than I'd like but again there's no rule which states I need to play a game this length of time before I can review it. I still have most of my games still installed waiting for me to get back to them. Although not all sadly I had a hard drive die and lost the games installed on it.

The problem here isn't my reviews, the hours spent on a game, the problem here is that a small group of people caused some troubles like this a while back. They didn't like our group, they've let the dust settle and have now started to continue and get the rest of us removed from this group. I have done nothing wrong to warrant this attention except be in a certain group and because of this I'm now being attacked. I am not sullying anyone in this group, I have no malicious intent towards anyone.

I have stated that I'm not a reviewer because I don't think my writing is the greatest nothing more. I liked to play football but it didn't make me a footballer. Just because I write reviews doesn't necessarily make me a reviewer.

I'm a honest, quiet old fart person, I don't hold any grudges to anyone, I just do what everyone else does here, enjoy games (when able) and write reviews. I think I'm entitled to write and play games and post my reviews in the way I do without being hounded because someone doesn't like my group.

Have a good weekend :happyleon:
BITEME!!XD 18 Sep, 2021 @ 8:58am 
Hello everyone, I'll keep it short and honest.

1st I will apologize, I am sorry. I didn't read or pay attention to the rules of this group.
2. Yes, I have used SAM's multiple times throughout the years. I have a small merry band of gamers that I hang around with who are my friends in real life as well. I have never used SAM for the wrong reasons, or so did I thought. And never got discouraged by my friends for using it.

3. Since I casually play/enjoy games and I am not into Achievement hunting, I've never really paid any attention to the Steam achievement system other than the aesthetics side of some of them.

4. Achievement has never been my personal gaming focus. I play to enjoy and for my own amusement. achievements have never played a role for me personally, I have some comments about SAM well before I got into writing.

5. Am sorry again for ignoring certain rules this group might have.

6. I am in the habit of leaving games running while I do other stuff eating, attending classes and meetings, hell I've even had a full night of sleep only to wake up in front of my screen to see the game is still running.

7. But apart from that I will not accept any flak against my work with Zeepond.com. I keep my reviews to a limit and stick to it. I have played full games and even if I didn't on some, I've played to the extent of those where they don't have much to offer later on. (Mostly repetitive 2D indies)

8. But I can assure you my review are my honest unfiltered (SFW of course) opinion. Zeepond does regulate some aspects of my review basis on their existing rules. Which I agree to, respect, and follow.

9. My reviews are worded in such a way in which I constantly point out the issues, not to the point where I personally feel bad about dissing a game. it's my personal trait. I do not diss. Well, I do I have a bad mouth; I am learning to control it.

10. Again, am sorry for the SAM and nothing else, my review is of my own thoughts and opinions. I put my time and effort into them, but thats not gonna fly since the SAM thing, which is okay. This is free internet, and you can judge me at your own merit.

11. I leave my case to you all, if you think, you all like to give me a second chance! I would me humbled.

And if you think I need to be punished, I will wholeheartedly accept and welcome it, I will leave on my own.

12. But do not question my opinions/reviews. It's a free internet, can't stop you. But please no personal attacks.

13. And yes, I am very new to this, just under a year. I still don't understand some things and I am still learning. English is not my first, not even second language, I do have my issues. Which I am trying to sort out.

I rest my case and am sorry.

Last edited by BITEME!!XD; 18 Sep, 2021 @ 9:09am
Originally posted by The_Cpt_FROGGY:
Hi,

The Cpt Froggy here.

I hope that everyone is doing fine and you are safe, wherever you are in the world due the this Covic -19 Pandemic.

Let me introduce myself properly. My name is Rom Krieger, and I am the proud founder and owner of Zeepond Pty Ltd, which is a Company listed in Australia.

I started my Curator Group THE CPT FROGGY CLUB on the 11th of June, 2014. I started with nothing at all, and I was only creating giveaways through a well-known website before starting my own.

I started writing reviews for fun and developed a style which a lot of people like and some don’t, but I have never jumped into anybody else’s reviews and started criticising them; even if I were to be asked, I would choose not to as I have always respected everybody’s individual style.

I was invited in the Guild by Craktus Jack, the founder of this Guild, as he enjoyed my reviews and I accepted. And let me tell everyone that I take extremely seriously what I do. After all, I have spent many thousands of dollars on Steam and have invested much more on Zeepond.

Then along comes Manostion, Avaria and Sv. Prolivije commenting on my reviews, which was fine in the beginning as it’s good to have different views. But then their comments became personal attacks against me, my reputation and my company.
Now, they are attacking my reviewers too. Why?

I would like to clarify a few things:

* I am the only one in Zeepond who actively contacts publishers, developers and PR companies. I have done this since I started. And the reason for that is very simple. I will only review games that I want to play. Yes, we receive games on our curators groups, but if it is not what we are interested in we politely send the games back to the developer so they can use the key for somebody else. It is how we do things, nothing wrong with that. 95% of the games are outsourced and received through Zeepond. And yes, I decided to use the informational option in my curator group to inform our viewers of upcoming games; what’s wrong with that?

* In regards to BiteMexD, I can assure you that Piston and I have played several times online with him for a couple of hours on games he subsequently reviewed, and on beta games, too. And to be honest, he’s written some cracker reviews for Zeepond and the Cpt Froggy Club. Now, if he uses SAM, it is not ideal, I agree, and I will have a chat with him about it. Having said that, it is his prerogative and has nothing to do with our way of reviewing. But honestly, telling people he doesn’t take reviewing seriously is a bit much. And, he can replay games as many times as he likes; if a game can be completed in 10 hours and he chooses to replay it, so be it!

We write honest and informative reviews, in a different style to Manostion, Avaria and Sv. Prolivije and others. Guys, it is fine! Variety is the spice of life.

Now, I am asking the three of you, along with the admin of this guild, and any other reviewers within the guild, to immediately stop these attacks on myself, my company and my reviewers. We have our views and you have yours; be respectful and please stop! Perhaps you could give someone you love a hug instead.

If you want to talk to me directly, please feel free to send me an email at support@zeepond.com. Make sure you have the decency to put your full name, as I have done here, and be respectful.

Rom Krieger
Managing Director
Zeepond Pty Ltd

I mean, I don't think these was an attack against you. Unless you're taking accountability for an action that someone takes. That said- someone using SAM -Or- investing a large amount of time in something -without- the associated achievements does lend itself to some degree of natural suspicion about their works at large.

It's entirely -plausible- that some of their games -are- played, and they simply idle through ones they're less fond of, That said, this post is being brought up, because there's reasonable doubt at this juncture.
janner66 18 Sep, 2021 @ 9:57am 
I think everyone has contributed very professionally in this thread and kept it extremely civil which is heartening. :retro_beer:

Using SAM is not acceptable in games that you review because it misleads the viewer into thinking you have played longer or you have achieved something you haven't. It should never be used and I am surprised you didn't realize that. Idling is the same but I understand it can happen.

Apart from that I find Bitemex's and Piston's reviews to be honest opinions and they are detailed reviews which cover the remit of the group.

To continue in the group I think it would be imperative that you stop using SAM for any games you review though Bitemex. It's not my decision if you stay or not of course, but I think that would have to be agreed if you wanted to stay and contribute.
♥Skyknighter 18 Sep, 2021 @ 10:07am 
When it comes to reviewing, I think beating the game or being some where near the end, as long as you beat it, is fine to review. However, if you give a game a positive review that is detailed, with only a few hours in is questionable at best.

I have worked for curators for at least three years and I have some standards when it comes to the games I play and review. Even if it's a game that I hate, I play till the end to at least give my full thoughts on it at the end.

I review as a hobby and I do my best to at least give the review some good or even decent quality to it. Beating the game to review it is a goal for me that I must accomplish in order to review it depending on the game. Personally I find programs that just give you the achievements a waste of time in my eyes but if you like doing that then to each their own.

This is just my thoughts as a fellow reviewer in the reviewing community.
AviaRa 18 Sep, 2021 @ 10:32am 
Originally posted by The_Cpt_FROGGY:
...

Hey,
thank you for your explanation.

As Piston Smashed and BiteMexD wrote their own comments, I will cover the issues in answers related to them.

However, I would like to address that lovely claim of yours about me “attacking” you, your reputation or your company. As far as I am aware, you firstly caused havoc in DMs because I dared to ask about your ratings. Then I ignored you for months (exactly what you wish for now!) until you started havoc here in the Guild because of my promotion and attacked me publicly a few times, for which you were banned by the owner, Cracktus Jack. Thus, maybe you should stop playing a victim and think about your own actions for a bit. I would also like to know how the “admin of this guild”, Cracktus Jack, is assaulting you. I am only aware of the fact that he banned you for your behaviour, so implying such a thing is hilarious at best.

If Sv. Prolivije or Manostion attacked you – that I do not know, and they will have to defend themselves – but based on my experience, which many Guild members witnessed, I am not sure why should I believe you without proof.

How you decide to run your company, groups and write reviews is up to you and none of anyone’s business – that much is true. However, if you decide to join another group, which has its own rules and goals, then you have to respect them and their decisions, as you are a mere member there, a quest, not its owner (meaning no public attacks on people as you did before, just reminding it yet again).

Steam is a platform that allows anyone to share their thoughts and opinions, as long as they are not against the Steam rules. If you still find others’ people view annoying, then you have every right to block them or delete their comments.

However, you barely reacted to the points I stated in my text. I would say it even feels insulting that you addressed BiteMexD using SAM as “not ideal”. There is already plenty of paid people, whether reviewers or other content creators and frankly, BiteMexD’s playtime and achievements proves that he is dishonest (welp, he even admitted using it later on!). Why would he need to use SAM if he wasn’t dishonest? Did you even check the links I shared in my post? How do you expect that anyone can trust people like that? And I am talking specifically about BiteMexD in that regard. Yes, if he dares to use a SAM to unlock achievements like that, then I will dare to say he is not serious about it. To clarify it yet again, I am still talking specifically about BiteMexD, not about you nor Piston Smashed.

Yes, people have different styles, even if we compare just all the people that commented in this very chat, you will find out that all of us have a different style. Yet, I do not have anything against them. How could it be? Perhaps they do not use SAM (like BiteMexD) or they do not threaten me after asking them about the rating/attacking me publicly (like you before)?
AviaRa 18 Sep, 2021 @ 10:33am 
Originally posted by Piston Smashed™:
...

Hey,
thank you for your explanation.

My accussations towards your person are because of your colleague, BiteMexD. I am sorry to hear about your health issues, and I hope that you will feel better soon, as our health is one of the most important aspects, and I do not wish you any ill will just because of our quarrel.

However, you seem to claim as if I want to dictate how everyone is supposed to write reviews in order to be in the Guild, which is not true at all. There are several styles that I am not fond of, and even my friends use them, yet, as they put their time and effort into actually finishing the games they play and recommend, I will give them a read despite my personal preferences. Plus, it is not even possible for me to dictate such things, as Tamaster or Cracktus would have stopped me (or even demoted me).

As your boss, you talk about me attacking you or members that have a different style, yet I do not see a single proof of that. Are there any threads in which I stated which reviewers should be allowed in the Guild? Did I ever come to your or other people’s DMs, telling them to change their style or they would not be allowed to post here anymore? If so, show us the proof then! Your boss, Cpt_Froggy, was banned by Craktus because of the public attacks that others have witnessed, as I already said in my response to him, so feel free to read it; thus, I find these claims of yours about me constantly attacking you both humorous and hypocritical. Especially as I was respecting your presence here for months. I only started this post now because of my findings of yours and especially BiteMexD’s methods.

Nevertheless, you seem to be the most honest to me. Thus, I would not mind much if you would stay in the Guild per se, but in order for me to be in your favour, I would like to see you finish the games you recommend or mark them as what they are then – first impressions. Journalists distinguish between these, too. If you do not wish to finish the game, then name your texts rightly and state them in every review, so any reader could see that. Yes, you are allowed to write your “reviews” however you want, but that applies to your own profile and the site you write for if they tolerate it. If you decide to share your work in other groups, then you should adjust either your text or your approach to reviewing. Moreover, I think that aquatorrent already elaborated on that greatly in the comments above, so feel free to read it.
AviaRa 18 Sep, 2021 @ 10:35am 
Originally posted by BiteMexD:
...

Hey,
thank you for your explanation.

You probably do not realize that you can be banned from using SAM. And I do not mean from this Guild, but from the Steam functions. There are several people that received bans for using it.

That being said… I do not believe you because, in your third point, you say that you are not into achievements, and that achievements do not play a major role for you. Okay, but why did you decide to use SAM, if you do not care about achievements, then? If you do not care about them, why use such software?

Frankly, I do not believe you, and I am against your presence in this group, as your arguments about SAM are not convincing enough for me.

Also, your eight-point is quite interesting, meaning that Zeepond regulates some aspects of your review? Care to elaborate on what? Otherwise, it would kinda prove my own words from the original topic, which would not go well for you and Piston

I would also like to know where did I personally attack you since you and your colleagues claim it (you do so in your point 12). I mean, you even admitted to faking achievements, so it seems I was stating facts about your approach to reviewing.

< >
Showing 1-15 of 60 comments
Per page: 1530 50