As it stands from a technical aspect of the site, yes. If I then post the same review on my profile, is this still true? No. It's my review. I wrote it. If the author doesn't like it, too bad. For the third time, I understand the issues that would be involved in doing this. It would be a pain in the ass and probably require different software and a buttload of moderators to investigate every whine, I mean, complaint. I wouldn't wish that on anyone. However, that isn't my point. From a reviewer's perspective the system is worthless.
It's not even remotely the same. A writer removing a review he/she doesn't like is like Cartman shouting "screw you gahs, I'm going home" as a debate tactic. As it stands now, "If your story wasn't that awesome, you grit your teeth and work on improving" in reality means "remove the review and cry about meanies in your profile". Hypocritical? Hardly. There's no point in writing reviews if they can be arbitrarily removed by the author. Imagine if you read the reviews and instead of nothing but "omg i lik YxZ" there were actual reviews. As in, "adverbs are not a substitute for description", or "What are you showing in X; you need to describe it better", or even "this is very poorly written with bad spelling and horrible punctuation". Except most of the authors that receive these kinds of reviews immediately delete them. The system doesn't work.
As far as finding out if a story is good to me, I take the unimaginable task of actually reading it. Usually takes less than a few seconds to find out if the egg is rotten.