[6.0] "First two points of 2. 11 are honestly really stupid. point 1. Not everyone have time to rate everything they saw, and some people only watches highly popular or "in the news" matches etc. (Same with 2. 6 point 3, not everyone feel an urge to rate everything that wasn't either great or extremely bad, but in this case I can understand that many trolls are adding only extreme ratings) point 2. I don't really get what exactly this means. If someone compares PPV to any part of wrestling, stating what does he like of it/dislike lack of it in it, what's bad with that?"
"Okay but right now we're starting to see people give low ratings to wrestlers based on the #SpeakingOut situation, and while I stand with the victims, we have to be objective and not rate a wrestler based on their real life transgressions. These reviews need to be dealt with."
"Disclaimer: snakepit and DJC2003 have been warned (one of them multiple times) for violating several of the rules. I am not in the habit of publicizing warnings, but I am also getting frustrated and tired with the repeated narrative by a loud minority that CM or myself would censor real opinions expressed in a constructive manner beneficial to the community. I do not think that narrative will ever go away now, but I still hold out hope that the silent majority understands that policing any form of ratings system, like social media, is not easy and give us the benefit of the doubt that we do not actually have any sort of agenda other than trying to make sure that positive-thinking, sane, motivated and intelligent wrestling fans have a fun time on our little website. @SUGAMO: " Gimmick" means if users use gimmicky sentences or phrase to try and get noticed. @The Fiery Red Hand: Wird nachgereicht."
"I am just wondering and worried that if I start rating matches again, if they are gonna get taken down again even with me naming all of the reasons why I rated said match a low rating. I remember giving my opinion and review on Ospreay vs. Havoc in an early PROGRESS show and it got taken down even with all the reasons I gave out, and then I had to deal with an aboslute dickhead through emails, trying to get my ratings back even with me apologising, just to be told in the end that this is a waste of time. I read the article like two times, but even now I am still not sure if things are going to change. I'm still upset about the fact I lost all my ratings and reviews. Overall I am hoping that there are actual changes in the future, but I don't have those hopes too high. Hopefully I am proven wrong."
[7.0] "It has been a while, almost 4 years now since I made this account on Cagematch so forgive me if I am unaware and these practices are already implemented. To help combat and attempt to dissuade potential trolls from commenting/rating, would a time limit cooldown period where a new user would have say for an example 5 hours before they could rate or comment. Has this been considered or tested? It may not eliminate trolls but possibly decrease the intrigue and frequency of trolling or making of bot-like manipulating accounts."
[4.0] "In attributing the "negative feedback and personal insults" he has received to his "unhidden disdain for trolling behaviour", the author of this article completely neglected to mention that he also dished out countless rude, disrespectful email responses in re: unwarranted warnings --- my sympathy goes out to him for all the *abuse* he has received for doing such a noble and thankless job. But hey, such is life, and I hope this article will make him feel a bit better about himself. And you know what they say, "Don't be offended by any sarcastic or cynical remarks in this guide! " All in all, a well-written article containing some very ironic content. (4/10)"
[5.0] "I think that some ratings are somehow unfair. For example, Lance Archer has an 5 overall based on all the 2009-10 ratings that gave him a 0-4 rating. I think averages should be considered on a timeframe rather than since 2009. Also, the ban system is arbitrary and unfair. CAGEMATCH bans people that differ from their agenda."
