I don't quite understand why there is so much disapproval of the word count I put up (which is not really strict as I explained, just a rough guide) associated with the voting exchange given that most of the exchanges had been more or less based on roughly equal word counts?
(Okay, I can't swear to this being so in court but I distinctly remembered there were instances when the author made it known that it was a long piece they requested a vote on and whoever read it offered another long piece in exchange which is more or less this principle of fairness that my request was based upon)
To be honest, I've often wanted to read a longer piece of Strolen but in my experience, I seldom find the motivation to actually do so (there are pieces I keep tagging into my favourites and they sit there gathering dust for years). And when I comment, it is always my intention for it to be constructive and helpful, or at least an accurate representation of my thoughts on the piece. With longer pieces, the latter is always a struggle because I find it hard to read in one session. When I read them in multiple sessions, then I keep getting the feeling that my vote would be biased. I would hate to skimp read and comment like the status quo for things on the RVE (all right, I sometimes do it but only for pieces with loads of votes b/c I'm conscious of massively downgrading the existing score of a piece). So I'm not really putting up walls but it is part of my efforts to make sure I do a good enough job at holding up my end of the bargain.