Okay... After wading through ALL of the sludge in the last 3 pages and 1 post, since it seems to have gone from reviews on bad fic to the ability to delete reviews, lemme break it down.
Cause: FF.Net became draconian.
Effect: AFF.Net was created to give true freedom to both the authors and readers.
Cause: AFF.Net is against any subjective quality control.
Effect: Authors can post anything that they like and so long as it's not just an AN and doesn't fall into our definition of a troll/spam story. Even then it takes ALOT for us to take down a story and when I say alot, heaven forbid you could see some of the discussions re: troll/spam stories that happen in the background.
Cause: AFF does not quality control
Effect: People post stories that not everyone wants to read, or feel should have a place in an archive.
Effect: People with thin skins post work and get crit they may or may not like.
While it's not ideal for everyone, that is what the site was created for. I should know, I was the one Ayla handed the site off to and before she did, we have many many long conversations about the creation and her dream.
I think the issue that people are forgetting is that we welcome anyone and everyone over 18 so long as they follow our rules. Because of this, you will have writers that feel entitled to post drivel. That's why we exist. Readers have the right to review or not review. If a writer doesn't like it, they can delete it. That's up to them. It's then the readers right to never read another story they post and never review them again. This site is all about freedom and as such, it will be staying that way. Until someone can give me a well thought out, valid argument as to why I should remove a writers freedom to control what gets posted on their review board, it stays.
Think of it this way: You write a blog. As the owner of the blog you can remove comments if you choose. Now will a good percent of responsible blog writers leave up all comments unless they are flames? Yes, but some will get pissy and take them down. Some blogs even moderate comments so some comments may never even make it through if they are too harsh. Readers can either keep visiting and commenting, or go elsewhere. That is how I consider stories and the review boards attached.
Now, before I continue, let me put things into perspective. These stats are according to Alexa:
FF.Net: Ranked 1,519th (US only traffic rank - 933)
AFF.Net: Ranked 12,766th (US only traffic rank - 6,769)
TtH: Ranked 74,968th (US only traffic rank - 22,176)
Dokuga: Ranked 153,036th (US only traffic rank - 28,748)
Now unfortunatly, the only site other than FF.Net that was used to illustrate a point is TtH, so for my purposes, I will be using that site. My apologizes to those that write for it, work for it, etc.
So please keep in mind when you are comparing a site such as TtH to AFF, we get almost 6 times the overall traffic that TtH does. AFF has 113,939 stories currently posted, TtH according to thier site has over 14,000. Some other interesting stats? AFF has 456,194 chapters posted and 1,361,274 reviews posted.
I don't know much about TtH other than what has been posted here and what is available on the site rules, but if I had to hazard a guess I would assume that it was created specifically with the rules that are outlined. They may have been adjusted over the years, but are most likely the same. This means that on average TtH will have good quality fics which means that TtH likely has responsible authors. This translates to the authors being able to handle concrit and therefor TtH admin/mod staff wouldn't see a large percentage of reports on reviews.
AFF has over 8 times the amount of stories that TtH does - Assuming that the ratio for reviews needing to be removed would be the same, for every 1 review TtH reviews and removes, we would have to review/remove 8. On top of the moderators daily sweep for issues, reviewing stories for corrections, handling communication with users and moderating the forums.
Some more AFF history? I remember when authors couldn't delete their own reviews and before the captcha went up. I remember digging through the database cleaning off spam and trolls and other such reviews. I remember having to handle reports from whiny authors and yes, back then we did explain the difference between concrit and flame, but it was so very time intensive.
Quite frankly, trying to compare the sites (or AFF to any other archive) is like comparing apples to oranges. They are both fruits and round, but completely different in texture, how you eat them, taste, etc.
Final verdict: Authors can and will be able to delete reviews as they see fit.
Personal note: I think it's childish, but I'm not here to judge. I'm here to help maintain the site and keep it open for everyone.