I assume you mean the "usefulness" rating of the review - not the "star" rating of the product itself.

I don't give a negative review rating just because the reviewer did not like the product, even if I did. Different strokes you know...

I only give negative review ratings when the content of the review is poorly written, hard to understand, not useful, etc.

Nope. But it does bother me if I see someone write a negative review for a product and imply that it's the worst product ever without taking into account previous reviews that rated it very highly. For example, I reviewed a toy that didn't work for us but I mentioned that previous reviews rated it highly, so it may work for some but not others.

I think as long as they're balanced in their negativity, they can be just as useful as a glowing review. If they just ramble about how the toy/company/material is THE WORST THING EVER without any real coherent thought, then yes, they'd get a low mark. If they explain why it didn't work for them, though, they could mention something that I don't usually like in a toy either, and save me some money and from disappointment. Toys definitely follow that different strokes bit, as Happy Lady said.

I agree that reviews should really only be rated a low usefulness if they're not written clearly or generally inspire a "...what just happened?" type response.

I try not to but sometimes I just don't vote on items that I feel really strongly about and someone else disagrees. Sometimes it's hard for me to be objective so I just skip the voting.

@J's Alley yeah, I've had some products where I had to go through quite a bit of fuss to get it to work as advertised- but I did, and I still wrote the review and rated it properly.

It's hard not to be clouded by circumstances surrounding the toy but the fact is no matter what the toy is made of or how big/small it is you have to confirm it before it is shipped to you, even for surprise assignments or description reviews. So when someone just says "Oh this has something I don't like in it" it really really miffs me. Then again, I am also of the opinion that the pthalates thing is a bit overblown, as well as the "Oooh, pores" because I'm obsessively clean with things and if you're reasonably clean there's no reason to worry that nasties will take root in your things. If my vagina falls out in 50 years I will keep you all updated, though

In any case, I have actually seen, earlier today, a toy which was largely well received and the bad reviews were rated less useful than the positive ones. At the same time when a toy seems to be universally disliked people will rate up the bad reviews. I think it depends a lot on how popular the toy is- and a lot of people impulse vote on things, so maybe someone would feel insulted that someone else doesn't like their favorite toy or something? On the other hand the extremely negative reviews do often turn into useless bashing that tells you nothing about why the toy is bad... It's a conundrum, for sure.

If a review is sincere and honest, it will most likely contain both positive and negative elements. As long as these are justified and explained, it paints a clearer picture of the product.

However if a review is negative, in the sense that the reviewer did not like or have a good experience with the product, and then proceeds to just trash it without any justification... then this is not a helpful review, and should be rated and voted on accordingly. The flip-side of this is a review that is nothing but empty praise, telling how great the product is but not why. This is also not a helpful review.

Most of the time the person reading the reviews has not used this product, or even a similar product. A good review takes the 4 or 5 product photos and few paragraphs of text, and turns the toy into a three dimensional object that the reader can imagine touching, feeling, and using.

I agree with what most people have been saying here. I always base my vote on how well the review is written, how much detail it contains about the toy, and how "real" the reviewer was able to make the toy in my mind's eye. If I can read a review, and immediately understand the toys function/structure/usa ge/strengths/weaknesse s/details/etc, and imagine how well it would work for myself and my wife knowing our specific bodies/preferences/lik es and dislikes/etc, and doesn't leave me with any questions about it at the end, I give it an excellent vote. If it leaves me with one or two questions that I would like more detail on, I still usually give it a useful-extremely useful vote.

The only times I give really poor votes, are when a review gets posted that has not had any time or thought put into it, such as reviews where the writer is unable to convey to me how a toy works, or doesn't discuss WHY they liked/disliked certain aspects of it.

I would never penalize a reviewer for writing a review on a toy they didn't enjoy. Instead I think it's important that they've shared what they perceive as downfalls, in a well-thought-out manner. They should be rewarded equally as much as a writer who was able to express their thoughts equally as well, for a toy that they DID enjoy.