Reviews should have minimum 100 words

Is the minimum 100 words constriction needed in Jazz Music Archives too?
Maybe in PA it is necessary in order to restrict the influence of  the redheads who throw 5* or 1* without too much judgement  or in order to influence the tops
But here we don't have tops yet, and maybe people's conduct will be more mature.
I think that people should argue why they like or dislike an album but it shouldn't be limited to 100 words.
In the modern era we don't always have the time to read or to write long reviews, and anyway, unlikeprogressive music, for jazz you can find professional reviews for most of the album.
On  Amazon It never bothered me that sometimes people write one or two rows about an album as long as they argue why they like it or dislike it


Edited by idlero - 10 Apr 2011 at 3:53am

Generally,I agree with Jonas there. There are some different reasons why people write reviews, and one of most common of them is they just want to put their opinion on paper. Nothing is wrong with this, but if there are just few sentences,like "I like it because..." or "I hate it because..." , I am not sure the readers are really interested too much in it. Why should? I expect the reader wants to see some real information, some analyses, but not just bold opinion. 100 words aren't much I believe,if you have something to say. 

Edited by snobb - 10 Apr 2011 at 6:20am

UMUR wrote: Personally I disagree. If JMA is to follow the concept ( which is think is Max and Phil´s vision) of PA and MMA, it´s the streaming reviews on the frontpage that´s the backbone of the site. The eye catcher too. I don´t think people are interested in reading reviews that are shorter than 100 words. And c´mon 100 words really isn´t much.

so much to like -
kind of blue
when it's all over