For someone that writes as much as you do, you are a very poor reader. Please read what i have written, and don't try to find hidden meanings or assume hidden agendas.
Take it at face value.
However, you don't write reviews for authors, instead you write them to help readers pick stories to read. Thus there's little sense dumping on a decent story, just because a novice author is struggling with the craft, or their editor is ill.
And why would someone want to read a story, no matter how great the plot or characters, if it's unreadable?
If the errors are numerous, but you're still able to enjoy the story then fine, score the Quality low and the Plot and Appeal highly. If there are only a few errors, but they significantly impact on the enjoyment of the story then score the Quality highly and the Appeal low.
How is accurately and honestly scoring the Quality low- when it is low- dumping or trashing or harrasment or flunking an Author? Seriously?
Your job as a review isn't to hold anyone accountable, you job is to help readers evaluate stories, rather than giving them a grade on their basic skills.
If the reviewer isn't meant to grade their skills, why then is there a score for Quality?
And i know i would be very unimpressed if i went to read a story that had high scores for Quality yet i'm unable to get through the first pages due to all the errors. Being accurate & honest in the score for Quality is necessary.
If someone goes in to a story knowing that the Quality isn't all that great then they can't complain about the Quality as they were forewarned, and if they don't have high expectations then the issues won't impact their enjoyment of the story as much as they would have.
Few readers care that much whether an author uses a serial comma or not, so grading them harshly on your own pet peeve is disingenuous.
And people can always check out other reviews by a particular reviewer & determine if they agree with their scores. Or maybe they can read the written part of the review, and see what it is the reviewer based their scores on?
I've seen stories with high scores for Quality, yet i found unreadable. Others marked down for Quality, yet i found the quality to be quite good.
Reviews are the opinion of the reviewer. And any scores they give will also be based on their opinions, and level of education. Just as the score readers give a story are.
If you're so eager to flunk someone's honest effort, then go back to school and get a $18,000 job harassing students.
Interesting that you consider teachers trying to teach students harassing them. I guess you'd rather let them express themselves but not correct their mistakes as that might discourage them? Of course it would make it easier for people in the future to be able to read what it they produce if their mistakes were corrected early on.
But you're deciding a few errors overrides anything else in the story isn't giving your readers a fair shake
Once again, you need to read what i post, not what you think i'm posting.
I'll say it again, because the previous times i've said it appear to have been ignored or mis-interpreted.
If a story has quite a few errors, but they don't significantly impact on the reading of the story, then score lower for the Quality but up for the Appeal. If there are only a few errors, but they significantly impact on the reading of the story, then score up for the Quality, but down on the Appeal.
Notice nothing at all being mentioned about the written part of the review.
How is honestly and accurately scoring the Quality of a story dumping on or trashing a story? Seriously?
If in the written part of the review (which hasn't been what i've been commenting on, i've been commenting on the Scores in the review but you keep bringing the written part in to it for some reason) they continually harp on about the spelling, formatting etc errors then that's dumping or trashing or harassment or flunking them. But just giving a score that accurately reflects the Quality? Seriously.
Sigh! No where did I ever suggest giving any ten scores, let alone handy them out like lollypops. However, the purpose of a review isn't to pass judgement on a story's 'technical' merits, it's to highlight stories worth reading.
Did you read what you typed there?
You say it's "not to pass judgement on it's technical merits, but to highlight stories worth reading." Yet one of the scores is for Quality. Another for Personal appeal.
Poor technical merits can adversely impact the Appeal. If there are quite a few errors, but it doesn't impact the Appeal, then you score it appropriately. The written part of the review allows the reviewer to say why they scored the way they did- be it use of the serial comma or the fact that it might have been written by someone for whom English is a second or 3rd language. If the Quality is good overall, but there are issues that significantly impact the enjoyment of the story, then score the Quality & Appeal appropriately.
it merely points out your own flaws as a human being
An you, not reading what I type but what you think I I've typed shows one of you flaws as a human being.
I've repeated myself many times in this post in the hope you'd catch one.
Once more for luck.
If there are quite a few errors in the story, but it doesn't affect greatly the readability or enjoyment, then score down on the Quality, but up on the Appeal. If there are only a few errors in the story, but they do impact on the readability, then score up on the Quality, but down on the Appeal.
See, once again, no mention of the written part of the review (till now).