No.

Because when they released a patch for the game get better, the game sites don't grow up the review scores. So why they should downgrade the scores after they already give the score? it doesn't make sense.

It would be crazy to actually update every single game's score over time as more things are added. The problem being that (save for these online issues) scores would only go up as things are patched. And I don't think a 8.0 game's scores deserve to go up just because they implemented some additional content. Fixing all the "problems" with your game and giving us more random content does not make your game eventually deserve a 9 or a 10.

A game should get an initial score uninfluenced by any future developments. Any DLC should be scored separately, free or paid.
In this case where they could not know about the server problems until launch I don't know what to say. I'm alright with them lowering the score temporarily in order to encourage a swift remedy, but I think this could just be done by putting a temporary big disclaimer at the top of the review about the game's current broken state.

 Skyrim was reviewed primarily on Xbox. So theres bo point in lowering 360s score because of PS3.

Or they should stop being traffic whores and release their reviews when they can play the game in a normal environment. It's just like Battlefield 4 last year where gaming sites reviewed the game before they even had a chance to play the game with the general public to see how the servers would perform.

They said that they will raise it when it gets better. But I think if it takes too long to fully fix it shouldn't go up by much.

That is not an excuse. I'm sorry.

Well its a bit harsh but I think its fair. The game didn't work at launch, and that's when its most important. More games should get bad reviews if they are broken.

Polygon was funded by Microsoft.  As long as they give shit reviews to PS4 exclusives they will be fine.

Yes, in fact, I think more reviewers should evolve their scores based on online/server experience.

I dont mind reviewers taking into account network stability, as long as its a part of their review criteria and each game is tested accordingly.

Similarly, with regards to review scores getting updated, i dont mind it as long as the reviewers are consistent with dealing with all games in the same way. In this case that would be updating every review that needs updating.

So as long as the reviewers are consistent in criteria and evaluation, then anything goes really. If they not consistant then it becomes a problem.