Welcome Lisna! Nice to have you here, if only in passing.
US, I'm not trying to dictate to anyone but if the last week proved anything it's that we need a fistful of reasonably dedicated members here to make sure the albums are all reviewed and properly rated. I know we're all just having fun but we should have serious fun: if we want to do this correctly and not have it disintegrate due to lack of interest we need the rules to change.
Anyone is of course always welcome (Hi Lisnaholic!)
but I would like to know that there are some people we can depend on to review the albums no matter whether they like them or not. There have been a few here I have not enjoyed but I've still given it my best, and take pride in making sure I never miss a review (unless it's unavoidable). If only one or two of us does reviews this club will quickly fall apart, and I think at the moment it's doing ok so I'd hate to see it fail.
There's no point in having, say, ten people review an album one week, which then gets a high score, and the next only four do it. That skews the result. So we need to only be counting the ratings of those who we know will be reasonably certain to keep reviewing and who we can rely on. Then we know that, for instance, each album will have at least six members reviewing it, and the averages shouldn't vary too much.
Does that make sense?
Oh also, Lis: I do like instrumental albums. I just find that they need to be quite good ("Oxygene", "Oceanic", "SKY 2" etc) to keep my attention, as generally I tend to listen more to lyrics. I am of course a big classical fan so it's not that I don't like instrumental albums --- I've reviewed one or two in my journals, including a classical one --- but they need to be very good indeed. This I found was good, but not
very good.