When it comes to ranking people's reviews maybe it should be anonymous to prevent retaliation. It has never happened to me but I think it's a good idea to prevent it.
Make Votes anonymous!
02/22/2012
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
I've been thinking about this for a few minutes since I read the comment on the other thread, and I'm still going back and forth. On one hand, it might encourage more honest voting. On the other, it would make dealing with people who abuse the system a lot more complicated.
02/22/2012
They used to be annonymous and I don't think that worked out very well.
I like it the way it is to be honest with you.
I like it the way it is to be honest with you.
02/22/2012
Quote:
They were anonymous, and there was a lot more retaliation because there was conflict in the community. I'm totally content with the system we have now. At least those who are "retaliating" can be reported to JR. I have no interest in having votes made anonymous.
Originally posted by
socceras
When it comes to ranking people's reviews maybe it should be anonymous to prevent retaliation. It has never happened to me but I think it's a good idea to prevent it.
02/22/2012
As other have said, it used to be this way and there were more issues than there are now.
02/22/2012
There are ways to deal with people who are voting reviews down when they don't like the votes they received on their reviews and that is to send JR a message or an email and let him know the following:
1) Which reviews were downvoted - include the links
2) The review you downvoted that sparked the retaliation - include the link
Making voting anonymous does not encourage people to be honest or to stand behind their votes and actually opens the door for people to downvote others just to get ahead.
1) Which reviews were downvoted - include the links
2) The review you downvoted that sparked the retaliation - include the link
Making voting anonymous does not encourage people to be honest or to stand behind their votes and actually opens the door for people to downvote others just to get ahead.
02/23/2012
Yeah, I started reviewing shortly after they made voting public and it's really helped as far as voting goes. With the public voting we have ended up with some over inflated votes (in my opinion) but we've had a lot less random downvoting than there was before the votes were made public and that's with so many more people using the site. There will always be people who downvote, and there will always be people who upvote, and there will always be a person who thinks that your honest vote is a downvote because they think you should have voted better.
Neither way is perfect, but public voting seems to be the lesser of two evils and I'm happy with it. It's a lot easier to see who's deliberately downvoting now and be able to report it.
Neither way is perfect, but public voting seems to be the lesser of two evils and I'm happy with it. It's a lot easier to see who's deliberately downvoting now and be able to report it.
02/23/2012
I appreciate the accountability it requires, but it makes it awkward to give honest negative votes. For example, I wrote a review and later re-read it. I found a bunch of typos that I had missed the first time (completely my fault, of course), and an area where a sentence was just plain awkward. I voted on the editing job, but felt really hesitant doing it because I didnt want to make anyone look bad (and again, the typos were my fault to begin with, although that's what the editors are for anyway). All in all, public voting is good, but I think there are many negative or non-extolling votes that aren't being cast for fear of "making enemies."
03/01/2012
I don't think votin should be anonymous, but it is frustrating when someone gives your review a poor vote, but does not explain why. Maybe a brief explanation or reasoning should be required when a review is voted less than Useful. I would be happy to do this, and also believe it would help members strengthen their reviews. It could also prevent folks from giving a review a negative vote 'just because' or out of retaliation because they would have to give a valid reason for their vote. Just an idea.
03/02/2012
I like the public voting.
It kind of keeps people on their toes and honest. It holds some accountability for those that choose to retaliate.
There is one reason I don't like public voting. If you read a really bad review, what do you do?
It kind of keeps people on their toes and honest. It holds some accountability for those that choose to retaliate.
There is one reason I don't like public voting. If you read a really bad review, what do you do?
03/04/2012
I like it this way. I wasn't around when it wasn't this way, but I can see how this keeps everyone honest. If it's a point farmer that's downvoting just send in to JR. If it's retaliation then send it to JR. No harm no foul.
03/04/2012
I am with the others on this, public voting makes it so you have to stand behind your vote.
03/04/2012
Agreeing with everyone who appreciates public voting for making us accountable. Retaliation doesn't seem to be terribly common, either, but maybe I'm wrong?
03/04/2012
I like the votes being public in that it prevents abuse. But, sometimes I feel like if I thought a review was "useful" and everyone else thought "extremely useful", that I shouldn't vote down at all. I think this is the only problem with voting being public, but it's really not a big deal (not enough for me to be concerned about it, anyway)
03/05/2012
Quote:
I suggested this once is a similar thread and someone pointed out something very true and important. If we were required to comment when we vote "Somewhat Useful" or below, people would just post "" and similar things. They wouldn't actually say why they thought that the review deserved that vote because there would be no reason. They're were just point-farming or retaliating so of course, they wouldn't be honest. When I give someone a "Somewhat Useful" or below, I list everything that I remember that they did wrong and/or left out in the review so they know. Plus, I'll usually suggest the Mentor Program, even if they're an Advanced Reviewer, since it's impossible not to be one anymore.
Originally posted by
SkylarrStarr
I don't think votin should be anonymous, but it is frustrating when someone gives your review a poor vote, but does not explain why. Maybe a brief explanation or reasoning should be required when a review is voted less than Useful. I would be
...
more
I don't think votin should be anonymous, but it is frustrating when someone gives your review a poor vote, but does not explain why. Maybe a brief explanation or reasoning should be required when a review is voted less than Useful. I would be happy to do this, and also believe it would help members strengthen their reviews. It could also prevent folks from giving a review a negative vote 'just because' or out of retaliation because they would have to give a valid reason for their vote. Just an idea.
less
@ geliebt: If you feel that a review isn't as good as everyone else claims it is, VOTE HONESTLY. A lot of people are far too nice, especially to newbies, and encourage crappy reviews by giving them votes they don't deserve. Someone who is/was up for voting for Advanced Reviewer status (I won't say who) got 4 Useful votes and 4 Extremely Useful votes on their horrible review that was filled with misinformation, such as saying a toy is made of silicone when it's made of TPR silicone and not even saying how to clean it. Etc. etc. etc. I won't go on because it just makes me mad but you get my point. Honest voters NEED to give bad reviews honest votes and explain what's wrong so that people can learn and not be fine with pushing out terrible reviews.
03/05/2012
Quote:
You'd be surprised. Most people don't do it because they're decent human beings but the people who DO retaliate go all out. I'm very close to reporting some people, even though it didn't happen to MY reviews, because it just makes me so mad that people are so childish. I thought we were adults. If they can't act like they're adults, they shouldn't be on this website.
Originally posted by
Positwist
Agreeing with everyone who appreciates public voting for making us accountable. Retaliation doesn't seem to be terribly common, either, but maybe I'm wrong?
03/05/2012
I say we should stick with public voting. They may not be totally honest when voting but at least you can track it if they are downvoting for spite.
03/05/2012
I gave a review a score of "somewhat useful" once and got an email from the reviewer. They were very polite, merely asking what I thought they did or didn't do or did wrong to get that vote, which I politely explained my reasoning and never heard back from them, which is fine. But it made me a little leery to give lower votes on reviews for fear of someone not being as polite... I totally agree about the accountability, but I wonder how many people are just voting "extremely useful" just to avoid anyone getting upset...
03/05/2012
Total posts: 18
Unique posters: 17