@CarinCarpenter said:

Hi.

Hi. Thanks for your thoughtful comments.

I think the current format of the .net reviews (one 'official' review and then comments) creates a divide that lends itself to people who disagree with the review to feel like their opinion is less-than-important and that a middling review of a show they had a great time at somehow devalues their experience.

That is a relevant point, though I'm not sure there is anything that can be done about that. Phish shows are FUN. It's the point, right? :-) People have a great time – I've had a great time at every Phish show I've ever attended, even the ones that were less than awesome performances. But reviews aren't intended to validate the personal experiences of attendees. If they were, they'd be really short! And, frankly, sorta meaningless... "Wow! Awesome! Raging!" etc. Not that anyone is *trying* to be critical, of course. But here is the thing: nobody is trying to define, influence, or comment on anyone's individual experience. In fact, the person writing the recap often went to the show and, regardless of how they sized it up in the cool light of pixels, also had an awesome time.

I humbly propose that a return to a more anarchistic review page (a la http://phish.net/reviews/archive/) be considered.

That is an AWESOME idea. I wish we would have thought about that. Oh, wait... we DID think about that! :-) Go to any setlist, scroll down, and you'll see a review archive. Anyone can post to it, they stay there forever, and are sorted according to their popularity via their score. It is a great resource for the community and allows anyone to voice their opinion, good, bad, or indifferent. It is the very existence of this resource that makes us (well, me, at least) scratch my head when people get bent out of shape because one person's review didn't match their experience, given that the site is structured to allow *everyone* to share *their* experience.

The main point is that (from what I can tell) the .net reviews are for people who weren't at the show to make a determination as to whether or not it is worth their money and time to download and give an attentive listen to a show.

THIS. X1000! This is precisely the intent (again, at least my intent, I can't speak for others). Because here is the thing: whether you were having the time of your life at the show, dancing your ass off with your best friends, falling in love, having great seats, meeting cool people, etc – all of the "experience" components – none of those things will be available to the person making a decision about whether or not to listen to that particular show. So we take a slightly more objective, analytical approach. Again, if you want to hear how every note descended directly from the hand of God, there are options out there.

I hope this background helps. We're really not a multi-headed "Wilson" around here... sometimes I think that the negative flak commenters imagine us standing around with arms crossed, clipboard in hand (well, ok, that is one of us, but still :-)), shaking our heads, etc, whereas the reality is that we all love Phish, and have every bit as much fun at the shows as everyone else. Many of the commenters take us WAY more seriously than we ever take ourselves, which is 'not much'. Each recap is just one person, sharing their perspective on one show, in the relatively sober light of day. If that is helpful to folks, and we'd like to think that it often is, awesome. If that isn't helpful to you, that's cool, too.

This site is set up for maximum participation. Use it. Ideally, while doing so, remember that the reason that we love Phish is because it isn't the same every night, and it is sufficiently complex and different that we're all not going to have the same reaction to every gig. If we did, it would be a "fan club" and how f-ing boring would that be?

Cheers...