Everything is covered by ads, especially the fixed bottom footer, which covers the Google captcha.

(Feel free to reach out if you want the specific username, but I'm sure you're already aware of this person. Hint: they review a lot of metal acts.)

---

A certain AllMusic user has posted over 41200 reviews since November 9, 2019—that is, nearly 30 reviews a day for 3.8 years. With few exceptions, the reviews are content-free and negative/dismissive. Almost none of them demonstrate even a cursory engagement with the album they're supposed to be reviewing. Instead, they generally follow one of a set of obvious templates, coupled with a seemingly arbitrary rating. Some of the most common templates include:

The band's [YEAR] album, [ALBUM_NAME],
- isn't any different from the rest of their discography.
- is continuation of their usual style.
- is a (rehash|replica) of their (past|previous) (works|discography).
- is a (rehash|replica) of the (past|previous) (one|two|three|...).
- is a replica of their debut.
- is indistinguishable from their previous efforts.
- (continues|shows) the band's compositional stubbornness.
- shows their little relevance among their niche.

Roughly 13300 (>30%) of their reviews follow the above pattern.

[COUNTRY]'s [ARTIST_NAME] are a clone of [ARTIST_1], [ARTIST_2], ..., and [ARTIST_N], as shown by their [YYYY] (album|debut|EP), [ALBUM_NAME].

About 4200 (>10%) of their reviews follow that pattern.

In several thousand other cases, this user's reviews dispense entirely with the pretense of being a review. A random sampling from a few pages of the "Album Reviews" section of their profile, with accompanying star ratings:

- "Their first EP." (1 star)
- "Their second EP." (1 star)
- "A stop-gap EP." (1 star)
- "Their only album before disbanding." (1.5 stars)
- "One of its albums." (3 stars)
- "Self-explanatory." (1 star)
- "Fourth EP" (1 star)
- "A cash-in compilation." (1 star)
- "An early-years compilation." (1.5 stars)

Please notice those star ratings. Over 37000 (~90%) of this user's 41200+ reviews are rated two stars or fewer. Often this user makes their way through a band's whole catalog, burdening each release with an excessively negative rating that, as I've hope I've managed to establish, is based on nothing. 

I'm not sure what this user's deal is, but whatever their intent, the result is that they're making your site a less useful, less welcoming place to visit. Their valueless, mean-spirited reviews show up as the highlighted review in User Reviews sections across your site, sitting right alongside AllMusic's official (and generally far more thoughtful) reviews—and in cases where AllMusic hasn't supplied an official review, the reviews stand as the only review of a given release.

I've used and enjoyed the AllMusic Guide for something like twenty years at this point. I (and I'm sure many AllMusic users) would really appreciate it if you could do something about this issue. I have to believe this kind of low-quality, artist-bashing spam cannot be what AllMusic had in mind when they implemented user reviews.

It should at least provide a proper error status.

Oh, and autoloading more crap when I'm looking for the "contact us" or "feedback" link in the footer is not very helpful either. Why do you insist on reinventing that which does not need reinvented, just properly implemented?

Demaning I sign up just so I can tell you something. And not say so up front either. Your arrogance keeps mounting.