I do not feel that sencorship is the way. It is completely at odds with the very nature of sites like this, where people are encouraged to enter and talk about subjects that, to most people (primarily politicians) would be viewed with disdain and a lack of understanding. So sencoring someone for saying something that you don't agree with about something that you do seems quite wrong to me. That said, the scores are important to the authors as they give a nice indication of the level of appreciation that people have for the hard work that you have invested in your creation.

My sugestion therefore, is to allow the poor review, but also to give the author the chance to appeal against the score. At the moment, although you can reply to the reviewer, you can not appeal against the score. It might be useful if you could set your concerns before a site moderator and ask them to adjudicate for you. Both parties could then post their arguments to a third party and, for grossly unfair review, have the score ammended, with a foot note on the site that this had happened. In this manner, while deserved negative reviews would re-inforce the power of critical reviews, the power to use the same medium to publically overturn an unfair rant. In this manner the reviewers would have to consider their reviews as much as the authors have to consider their story content.

Rubberwolf