The approach of darkness; dusk.

Recently a few very nice members have emailed me questioning on why/how I rated a particular epinion. It has thus become worthwhile to explain how I rate.

HR - Not only was the article well written, but I a) learned something from the article or b) thought the article was discussed fairly and fully and c) felt that the writer examined both pro's and cons with appropriate 'background' material.

R - The article was well written however it failed to go 'in depth' enough for me to find it useful. Sufficient attention is usually not paid to giving 'perspective' on the product/subject by examining pros and cons.

SR - The article was hastily written, and failed to be informative. However there are cases where the article was well written, and is very informative , but I strongly disagree with the epinion. In this case I -always- write a comment detailing my objections which I try to make as objective as possible.

NR - The article was a waste of my time, the authors time, and does not deserve any attention in order to improve its value.