I think you overestimated my intentions. Never do I intend, or really appreciate others who get super defensive about there work. There is a history here, and perhaps my comment was without some context. All the time we (admins/mods) have had to deal with comments and reactions. 1 and 2 star ratings without comment, extremely harsh comments, faneditors attacking reviewers because they "don't get their art," and faneditors PMing us because of ratings. Whether people see it as a community or not, it really is, and it has to function that way.
I don't like when faneditors get super defensive about their works, and argue every point made by a reviewer, and on the flipside I don't appreciate an extremely harsh review/rating on a fanedit (If its on FE, it almost surely is impossible to get a 1 star). Do we have either of those cases here? Absolutely not. I can't change Mr. Mollo's reaction to the film. What he saw and experienced is it. Thats how it works. It simply didn't work for him. Really thats how it should be. There should be no "level of disbelief" crap. A fanedit should be viewed exactly like a film. And I don't think his review was all that bad. But there is a number attached to it. And I think your school-grade analogy was a good one. 5 is 50%. Which is a fail. To me that means the plot, entertainment, technical audio and video editing skill, authoring, and presentation all had to be bad. And I do think that is bullshit. I'm sticking with that word.
Like i said, this all seems a bit of big deal for what it is, but there is a story/history behind everything.