I do look at lvl. Religiously. I just skim to get a sense of whether the level is worth the download, and if it is I play it and then look back at the review to see how my own impressions compare. I do the same thing with uwf's review. 

I have over 650 SPQ1 zip files in my collection - some of which are multi-map episodes (perhaps I"ve played as many SPQ1"s as Shambler - I"ve been downloading since editing for Quake began.) I relied on review sites (Matt Sefton, Quake Map Hotel, Only the Best (cough) Quake Levels, Talon"s Strike, Crash, Ethereal Hell, TSQLR and others I"ve forgot) to screen maps to see if they were worth the download. This was far better then randomly grabbing stuff from CDROM.com, playing it and then seeing how my impressions compared to the reviewer"s (although I like to reread reviews after I"ve played to compare notes.) The volume of maps produced now is only a trickle but nonetheless, I still like to get a sense from the community on the general quality of the map. For that reason, I"d hate to see surprises given away. A good review will set the stage (metal, medieval, tech, custom etc.) and tell you how good that stage is and some strengths and weaknesses but it won"t reveal surprises or secrets that belong between the mapper and player only. I love suspense and surprises in well designed levels.