I myself, tend to stay away from review shops. I don't like review shops that much, but sometimes they are useful when someone wants an opinion on their story.

It is someones choice if they want their fic to be reviewed or not.

I don't much have problems with the review shops, but more of the reviewers themselves. Trust me, I don't hate them or anything haha but a few, and im saying like a few, are kind of y.

I have read a review once, and I actually got mad haha because the reviewer was just way too harsh. And I checked out this author who wanted to be reviewed, and they had just joined aff, and just made their story with basically no experience.

I understand reviewers try their best to help out the person with the fic, but is it really necessary to take off points if they hate the font, times new roman, because its too "boring". Is it necessary to take off points because the fonts too big? Or because the author's note in the beginning of the chapters are too long, and will "anger" the readers? Or maybe just because their text is written in bright blue or pink. And i'm serious, I have seen reviewers do this and it just kills me so much T^T

And im not done, taking off points because apparently, mpreg is "stupid and shouldn't even exist."

I am not blaming the reviewers at all, like no, because it was the author's choice to get his/her story reviewed.

And then there are the hypocrites. haha, I wont even talk about them.

Really, everything is an opinion.

I think it lets the author take a look at what a reviewer would want, but I would aboly hate it, if the author changed the entire story, because of the reviewer, of course it is their decision.

But, there is always something called self-improvement.

For me, I was a really nasty writer haha and I considered having someone review my fic but I was wayyyy too scared too ;A; I read fanfiction workshops on aff, but never really take things into consideration. sorry if I offended you/ T^T

I agree...as a reviewer, and a grammar nazi, I tend to focus more on the grammar. But I also give a lot of attention on the story's plot. I actually refer to Aristotle's The Poetics while doing my reviews. And although the poetics is mainly for tragedies, I add some of my own guidelines as I go.
But AFF, being the site it is, has it's own standards in reviewing. Certain readers are attracted by the graphics, so sometimes graphics play a very important role in reeling in readers before they can get to the story itself. I think this is why some reviewers choose to focus on the appearance.
I dunno, this is just my opinion. And if the writer asked for the review, maybe the scores and grades aid them in some way or another.

(2/2) Reviewers may not ever know the true intent of the writer when reading their work; they can only examine the effect of their writing and how that effect reinforces their work. Scores/grades could mistakenly convey that the opinions of others are facts. As such, a high score might give the writer the impression that their writing does not need further improvement, causing writers to grow complacent. However, a low score might discourage a writer from continuing to write.

I agree that writers need to be exposed to different audiences and should be open to different interpretations of their work. In the end, I think the only thing that matters is whether or not you think the review is a true description of you and your work. It all depends on how you take criticism, and for me, I like to believe that I write well enough to merit a decent score, but at the same time, I'm mature enough to handle a little criticism and bad-mouthing.

I appreciate your intelligent blog post, though. It was really thought-provoking, and a necessary discussion for aspiring writers, fanfiction or not.

(1/2) You pose a very legitimate argument here, and there is definitely a measure of truth in your opinion. I agree that reviewers should focus on the words; they should be paying attention to the devices that the writers employ to effectively tell their story as well as how the mechanics of language are used to enhance it.

It does bother me somewhat that different reviewers let their tastes stand in the way of delivering faithful reviews. I, myself, have my own pet-peeves when it comes to writing (for example, I loathe and form of the verb "to be" when used in formal writing.) But the point is that reviewers should refrain from allowing their little pet peeves to get in the way of their review, and they should avoid using cookie-cutter criteria when grading/scoring a story.

While rubrics are helpful for seeing point-allocation and pointing out areas of strength and weakness, I'm not really a fan of using a point-system to come up with a score. I think I'd rather use categories like "grammar/spelling" and "plot originality" to point out the good and bad in a story, but when thinking about a score, I would look at the story holistically.

As per the question of whether or not scores/grades help an author improve... well, yes and no. There are definitely qualifications to such a statement. On one hand, receiving a peer-reviewed score/grade on a piece of writing helps a writer improve by allowing him/her to see areas of weakness that would otherwise go unnoticed by a writer who might be too invested in their work to be distracted by their mistakes. By finding areas of weakness, the writer could improve on them. Having others point out areas of strength could also encourage a writer and inform them of which areas of writing they can cultivate even more.

On the other hand, writing is a highly personal and intimate act and only the writer herself can be truly aware of his or her progress, and only the writer can truly know their intention in writing.