Working in the video game industry, I see the problem with this kind of rule all the time. You're not demanding a good review, but the implication for it is still here.
A game reviewer with the promise of free games, invitations to special events, and the like, can see all those rewards disappear if he gives a game the review it deserves or the game publisher/developer feels the reviewer just didn't go far enough in praising the game. This causes game reviews to be skewed.
Game reviewers don't often put their perks (or sometimes their job) on the line by shining too much light on the negative parts of a game. I'm sure everyone can think of at least two games that were stinkers or had issues despite reviews just brushing over them, 'conveniently' not mentioning them at all or at least not until the game's already out and people are already complaining anyways.
What does this have to do with Minecraft servers?
After seeing a few server listing and the reviews for them, I noticed something. There's no detail to the review past a generic "Yup this server is amazing!" followed by an IGN. I know the rules say that it's allowed to offer reward for reviews. You just can't demand a GOOD review, but just like with the game industry (and a lot of other things) the implication still seems to be there.
Who's going to mention the few times some admins were heavy handed, or that there was some extended downtime on a server? Not many people if they have to risk not getting whatever reward they were promised.
This of course scales inversely with the size of the reward. The higher the reward, the less likely someone is to review honestly.
I thought the rule was to encourage more honest server reviews. I have a hard time understanding the difference between actually demanding good reviews in exchange for rewards and the implications in just asking for a review in exchange for reward.
A game reviewer with the promise of free games, invitations to special events, and the like, can see all those rewards disappear if he gives a game the review it deserves or the game publisher/developer feels the reviewer just didn't go far enough in praising the game. This causes game reviews to be skewed.
Game reviewers don't often put their perks (or sometimes their job) on the line by shining too much light on the negative parts of a game. I'm sure everyone can think of at least two games that were stinkers or had issues despite reviews just brushing over them, 'conveniently' not mentioning them at all or at least not until the game's already out and people are already complaining anyways.
What does this have to do with Minecraft servers?
After seeing a few server listing and the reviews for them, I noticed something. There's no detail to the review past a generic "Yup this server is amazing!" followed by an IGN. I know the rules say that it's allowed to offer reward for reviews. You just can't demand a GOOD review, but just like with the game industry (and a lot of other things) the implication still seems to be there.
Who's going to mention the few times some admins were heavy handed, or that there was some extended downtime on a server? Not many people if they have to risk not getting whatever reward they were promised.
This of course scales inversely with the size of the reward. The higher the reward, the less likely someone is to review honestly.
I thought the rule was to encourage more honest server reviews. I have a hard time understanding the difference between actually demanding good reviews in exchange for rewards and the implications in just asking for a review in exchange for reward.