Quote:
Originally Posted by Sliver
You don't think a 3-star review is an attack. It is in the mind of a business owner. If you don't believe me, ask literally any business owner if a three star is a net positive or a net negative for your business. Without exception - and as supported by every business owner in this thread - it is a net negative. I interpret negative reviews as attacks and so do other business owners.
|
Just because 3-star reviews can have a negative effect doesn’t mean they’re an attack. Treating them as such isn’t healthy. A healthy approach is to assess the rating and criticism.
If it’s not legitimate, if there’s nothing you did wrong or could improve, then chalk it up to the vagaries of dealing with the public. And take comfort in the fact that your competitors get the same unfounded ratings, and they should even out in all probability.
If the criticism has merit - if you did screw up or aspects of your business can be improved - then take the criticism to heart and find ways to do better next time. If you do improve, then you’ve reduced the likelihood of getting similar negative reviews in the future.
But you seem to believe all business operators are always honest, competent, and efficient. That they’re doing customers a favour just by existing. But business owners are no better (or worse) than the general public. Some are dishonest, lazy, or unpleasant to deal with. And some just aren’t as good at delivering a service to customers as their competitors are. So why shouldn’t the public share its experiences to sort the good from the bad and the mediocre from the excellent?