While I don't post a lot, I do write a review once in a while. I tend to stay away from stories I find "offensive" or that are not well written. By that I mean a "trite" storyline, piss poor grammar, homonym synonym usage. One of the biggest is shudder vs shutter. The powers that be, do not want "negative" reviews, even when they offer ways to improve. Their reasoning is they want to encourage the writing. Who cares about plots, spelling, grammar, etc.? All they are doing is encouraging mediocrity and perpetuating bad word usage.
I agree a totally vicious review should not be posted, I do believe there is room for an objective, less than flattering, review. By not allowing a critical review, they are less than honest.
This is a great site that allows ALL types of writing and subjects. I was glad to see the sister site opened. This opened a new path for authors. I would like to see a lot more honesty in allowing reviews. If all you allow are reviews that praise the story/writer, how are they to know what to improve?
I will be the first to say not everyone likes what I do/write. I will also be the first to say "Take your best shot". When you do, offer a suggestion to make it better/correct a deficit. Just saying something is wrong without a solution is just whining by someone who has no talent.
Until the review process is allowed to be honest, we'll be inundated with mediocre offerings. The quality works of folks like Al Steiner, Jay Cantrell, Argon, RLFJ, will be lost in a sea of sludge.
Just Sayin'