Suggestion for system wars( what to do about reviews)

I see alot of people arguing over whether we should use just GS review or whether we should go to game rankings or metacritic. Maybe we can come up with a simpler solution that would please both the people who think we should stick with just GS and the people who want to use gamerankings. Instead of using GR maybe we should use an average score from GS and another website we can agree on. My suggestion would be ign but am open to other websites. Doing it this way the review score we would use would not be just one person yet would not have the inflation of scores from GR or metacritic from exclusive mags(or having a random bad review bring the score down alot) and the fact their score changes all the time makes it hard to use. I think this would be the best way to go for system wars because it still puts a large bias toward GS reviews because theyare usually the harshest reviwers but also leaves a bit of flexibility for the occasional "bad" review.

an example would be say a game scores 9.0 on ign but scores a 8.0 on GS makes the score we use 8.5 that way once both reviews are out we get our SW score and define its AAA status of if its a flop etc..

anyway what do you guys think?

If we use this system(using gs and ign score average) it would make a game like ratchet AA(8.45 rounded up to 8.5) and MAss effect AAA(8.95 would roundup to a 9) we would obviously round up or down the average score because it will rarely come out to an exact number.

For SW arguing purposes the only thing to use is GS reviews, after all it is their site and we are guests.

But tbo the whole subject is moot for me because I don't really believe that industry professionals really represent my personal taste and when I do use reviews to affect my purchase decisions I only use them as a general guideline and always check Metacritic to see a collected average of the scores.