I hope you don't mind a bit of concrit (and I hope you don't take this the wrong way or anything), but I'm a bit worried about the way you worded that review to MeerFall (and the way you word reviews like it). You know how you say that a structure/rhyme scheme/grammar/insert something else here aren't too good, but you don't really expand upon it? That can actually be taken as an insult by sensitive writers. To avoid that, it'd be best to point out specific parts of the poem (lines, for example) that you felt could be improved or at least describe in detail what you mean. (For example, if you want to say that a rhyme scheme isn't too good, describe what is a good rhyme scheme and what the difference is between what they're doing and what you think they should do.)
Don't tell an author that what they're doing isn't too good, especially if you're not going to elaborate much. You can say that there's room for improvement or that they might need to polish things a bit, but saying that something "isn't too good" or "has a few errors" (especially without saying what you mean) tends to make them think they're not good at poetry, period, you know? I know MeerFall and you are good enough friends that she'll know you don't mean she's a terrible writer or anything, but a newbie might not take that quite as well.
(I also know that you've been reviewing this way for awhile, but even so, it's risking stirring a fuss. That and pointing out specifics will help a person figure out what they should do to improve. Just saying "the rhyming isn't too well done" could mean a lot of different things, so it doesn't really help too much, at the risk of putting things a bit too bluntly.)