unethical business experience *LONG READ*

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by mikephoen

All reviews (good or bad) should drop off the rating after some period of time. Maybe 3 years or so for most businesses and probably 1 year for restaurants.

Who cares if a place was clean and had great service a decade ago or if it had a crappy manager a decade ago. Neither is relevant to it's current level of service. Restaurants in particular change chefs, managers and wait staff quite often and that can have a huge effect on the quality.

IMO, I'm OK with them never going away. However, I agree that anyone putting up 1-2 star reviews should be required to provide a minimum level of detailed explanation for their reasoning.

I also think that drop off ratings aren't necessary. However, something like an average rating over 12-24 months vs life time rating should be available/by default.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by DoubleF

IMO, I'm OK with them never going away. However, I agree that anyone putting up 1-2 star reviews should be required to provide a minimum level of detailed explanation for their reasoning.

I also think that drop off ratings aren't necessary. However, something like an average rating over 12-24 months vs life time rating should be available/by default.

So you're thinking like the aggregate star score displayed at the top would just incorporate the latest year or whatever? That's an interesting middle ground. Not far enough, IMO, but an improvement on the current way.

I can see why you're okay with them never going away entirely, though. You're not the victim.

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by Sliver

So you're thinking like the aggregate star score displayed at the top would just incorporate the latest year or whatever? That's an interesting middle ground. Not far enough, IMO, but an improvement on the current way.

I can see why you're okay with them never going away entirely, though. You're not the victim.

Something like:

Average 24 month rating: 4.7
Lifetime rating: 4.4

Honestly, no, that's not true. The business I work for gets ratings as well. The owner honestly just doesn't care about the online rating. We're a victim of bad reviews too, but it's not detrimental for us. We aren't crippled and paralyzed every time we get a bad review. We work hard enough and provide a service at a level that we have more than enough work and take on new clients mainly via a referral system. We don't rely on the ratings to drum up new clientele. We frequently have to turn away work if they aren't referrals.

Last I checked, we had a few 1 star ratings for things that were super dumb. Like someone who walked in, demanded to have their stuff done on the spot for less money than other larger companies in our industry. We politely turned them away and referred them to another business who would be able to finish it on time (we legitimately would not be able to fulfill their request on time). So this guy puts up a review claiming bad business practices for not taking him on and "easy profit". Our clients submit their stuff on time, why would we let some rando off the street budge our clients who followed the rules? We were polite about it. We weren't dicks. It was a trash review.
Another said the service was terrible, but put the name of a completely different company on it. One said he was looking for someone that provided services like ours, randomly looked us up online, but our location was too far from him (Cochrane). One dude gave 1 star because he couldn't get exact pricing for what he needed (our services are not one size fits all and customized. Fee is determined after an initial meeting which is on the website).

We didn't lose sleep over a 1 star rating that seemed like we could do no right anyways. I mean, we did what was mentioned in this thread. We discussed the rating, discussed improvements and changes and moved on.

We also saw a ton of our clients giving us ratings and explaining in detail what we do for them and how appreciative they were. Weirdly enough, a few even went as far to comment about other reviews that made no sense so I guess they defended our honor on Google reviews? Our overall rating was decent, but it literally had no merit on how we operate. We are lucky.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Thank you for listening to my perspective.

If I've given the impression a, say, three or less star is crippling, that's not what I meant to do. It merely has a negative effect. When people are giving three stars (general review discussion here; not FG's specific case), I would like them to know a business owner interprets them as harmful.

If you are giving three-star reviews and think you're not hurting a business, please reconsider your review. A business owner will not appreciate that. Especially if your experience is satisfactory - three stars do not help a business and if you're not helping, you're hurting. If you're generally pleased with an interaction/service/product, every single business owner would prefer you don't review them at all if it's that or three stars.

This thread would have ended a hundred posts ago if you had led with this.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

This thread would have ended a hundred posts ago if you had led with this.

Well, I had a lot more to say.

For me, the biggest eye opener of this thread was when The Yen Man said, if reviews weren't meant to rate business, what was their purpose? (or something to that effect)

I was really surprised people didn't realize review infrastructures are meant to benefit tech companies at the expense of businesses. It helped me understand why people are so casual with negative reviews since they basically know not what they're doing.

[timun]

Originally Posted by FurnaceFace

As an aside, in the corporate world individual yearly reviews and evaluations are mostly done on a 5 point scale too and a 3 means something like “meets expectation”. A 3 gets you your full bonus. These reviews are often on a bell curve too so most people get something around a 3, few people get a 4, and rare people get 5 or something close to it. If we’re used to this scale then I can understand people thinking a 3 for a small business is a good review.

Our employee evaluations are:

1 = "does not meet expectations"
2 = "partially meets expectations"
3 = "fully meets expectations"
4 = "exceeds expectations"
5 = "outstanding"

Everyone's scores are "calibrated" to a bell curve. 0-5% of employees get a '1', about 5% get a '2', 65-70% get a '3', 15-20% get a '4', and 0-5% get a '5'. I know of no one—including myself—who's ever had a '5'.

3 or better means we're definitely keeping you around, and 4 or better generally means a candidate for promotion. '2' is basically "we still want to keep you around but there are things you really need to work on", and '1' is "shape up or ship out".


I definitely think of online reviews by the same metric, or similar anyway. 3/5 is perfectly cromulent, 4/5 is exceeding my expectations, 5/5 is wildly exceeding my expectations. Like others have said, I barely pay any attention to reviews, and when I do I tend to discount the 1s and 5s entirely anyway.

[you&me]

Originally Posted by timun

Our employee evaluations are:

1 = "does not meet expectations"
2 = "partially meets expectations"
3 = "fully meets expectations"
4 = "exceeds expectations"
5 = "outstanding"

Everyone's scores are "calibrated" to a bell curve. 0-5% of employees get a '1', about 5% get a '2', 65-70% get a '3', 15-20% get a '4', and 0-5% get a '5'. I know of no one—including myself—who's ever had a '5'.

3 or better means we're definitely keeping you around, and 4 or better generally means a candidate for promotion. '2' is basically "we still want to keep you around but there are things you really need to work on", and '1' is "shape up or ship out".


I definitely think of online reviews by the same metric, or similar anyway. 3/5 is perfectly cromulent, 4/5 is exceeding my expectations, 5/5 is wildly exceeding my expectations. Like others have said, I barely pay any attention to reviews, and when I do I tend to discount the 1s and 5s entirely anyway.

I agree and would estimate your breakdown for employee scores roughly equates to my experiences with businesses - the majority are 3s, finding a 4 is nice and a 5 is rare.

[Stampede2TheCup]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Thank you for listening to my perspective.

If I've given the impression a, say, three or less star is crippling, that's not what I meant to do. It merely has a negative effect. When people are giving three stars (general review discussion here; not FG's specific case), I would like them to know a business owner interprets them as harmful.

If you are giving three-star reviews and think you're not hurting a business, please reconsider your review. A business owner will not appreciate that. Especially if your experience is satisfactory - three stars do not help a business and if you're not helping, you're hurting. If you're generally pleased with an interaction/service/product, every single business owner would prefer you don't review them at all if it's that or three stars.

I fully agree with this, but I think the proportion of people that have this misconception is relatively small in people that use reviews. Has anyone in this thread has been saying 3/5=good?

Running into these reviewers is basically down to random chance. I don't think there's much to do to remedy these reviewers. All things being equal, it should affect other businesses the same. So all you can do is play the hand you're dealt and move on. If you get too worried or distracted about bad luck, you'll use be using thoughts, time, energy and emotions that could be better directed elsewhere. It's like road rage. Even if you are wronged, getting angry and reacting to it will never help the situation.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Sliver

So you're thinking like the aggregate star score displayed at the top would just incorporate the latest year or whatever? That's an interesting middle ground. Not far enough, IMO, but an improvement on the current way.

I can see why you're okay with them never going away entirely, though. You're not the victim.

Can a customer be a victim?

[Stampede2TheCup]

Can a large business be a victim?

People can get fired or have their location closed and lose their livelihood just the same as small business. They can't always just work in other locations.

[calgarywinning]

Last time I checked there are no ratings for google or microsoft or many of the large untouchable companies.

The other thing is that google review ratings are for people who only have gmail accounts and are in googles spyware platform of creepy email scanning, free word processing software to to add to your "profile" of their scanning. No one without a gmail can't hand out stars on google.

It's seriously one of the most flawed systems where a company has free domain to manipulate and impact small local business. Also, it's a direct affront to a livelihood where in Calgary small ethical business is really not afforded any considerations or benefit of the doubt.

It is sheer market manipulation, as reviews are used now as a primary indicator for choices and google has a stranglehold on it.

Google will not take down reviews that personally attack individuals. These are the worst.

1 star reviews are punishing. They are equal to 10 five star reviews. How do I know this? I log it. Because after many conversations with google and their secret algorithm, I've got a full calculation. How creepy is it that people who go by google reviews are manipulated by their creepy algorithm. 10 5 stars is equal to 1 1 star. 3 star is equal to 0. 4 star is .5 and 5 star is 1 measly point of 100th a fraction. 1 1 star is 10/100 of the review algorithm.

As Sliver is indicating a 3 star review by my log is 0 stars in the equation from the people only with gmail accounts. It's mind boggling the manipulation the tech companies are able to get away with. Have one of the major email accounts, you will not be able to weight in. Google has become a dangerous tool for small business to be punished.

So while, this persons complaint and review on google is 100% valid, there are so many reviews that aren't 100% valid. Or late night 1 star drops or attacks without attempting to contact the company for resolution. The techs have manipulated and will not be transparent about the algorithm, because they use it to their benefit. The dishonesty and inaccessibility of the platform should be the tell tale sign.

My advice to the OP would be to validate the quote against the delivered product (photos). Go downtown to small claims court and file for the current cost $50 to $100 and take the owner to task if he is not willing to resolve. Being forced to show up and mediate is the most powerful tool, next to having visa/mc/amex pull the credit card charge.

Small ####ty businesses do have a place in hell, but as a society, we need to realize there are so many good people out there. Whether the trades, retail or food just trying to get by. In our company if we screw up we damn well do our best to make it right, apologize and if it's out of our control bend over backwards to get things going in the right direction.

Large companies that escape review of the consumer that are a necessity like internet providers, etc should be reviewed as harsh as small business.

[Fuzz]

You are wrong on one point, I didn't check the others, but Google has a rating of 4.2:

https://goo.gl/maps/gcQSQsLoaiR7jM528

Looks like they just leave their negative reviews up without responding.

This is my favourite:

Humberto Torres
6 reviews
3 months ago
i can search everything up, but foot lettuce keeps popping up. cmon do better

And this one is meta:

ryan fields
10 reviews

4 months ago
I used Google reviews to give Google 1 star. Checkmate.

[Fuzz]

Also, if you say a 3 star is really worth zero points, doesn't that just prove that everyone voting 3 for a place is an "average" rating, and not a net negative for the business?

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by calgarywinning

Last time I checked there are no ratings for google or microsoft or many of the large untouchable companies.

The other thing is that google review ratings are for people who only have gmail accounts and are in googles spyware platform of creepy email scanning, free word processing software to to add to your "profile" of their scanning. No one without a gmail can't hand out stars on google.

It's seriously one of the most flawed systems where a company has free domain to manipulate and impact small local business. Also, it's a direct affront to a livelihood where in Calgary small ethical business is really not afforded any considerations or benefit of the doubt.

It is sheer market manipulation, as reviews are used now as a primary indicator for choices and google has a stranglehold on it.

Google will not take down reviews that personally attack individuals. These are the worst.

1 star reviews are punishing. They are equal to 10 five star reviews. How do I know this? I log it. Because after many conversations with google and their secret algorithm, I've got a full calculation. How creepy is it that people who go by google reviews are manipulated by their creepy algorithm. 10 5 stars is equal to 1 1 star. 3 star is equal to 0. 4 star is .5 and 5 star is 1 measly point of 100th a fraction. 1 1 star is 10/100 of the review algorithm.

As Sliver is indicating a 3 star review by my log is 0 stars in the equation from the people only with gmail accounts. It's mind boggling the manipulation the tech companies are able to get away with. Have one of the major email accounts, you will not be able to weight in. Google has become a dangerous tool for small business to be punished.

So while, this persons complaint and review on google is 100% valid, there are so many reviews that aren't 100% valid. Or late night 1 star drops or attacks without attempting to contact the company for resolution. The techs have manipulated and will not be transparent about the algorithm, because they use it to their benefit. The dishonesty and inaccessibility of the platform should be the tell tale sign.

My advice to the OP would be to validate the quote against the delivered product (photos). Go downtown to small claims court and file for the current cost $50 to $100 and take the owner to task if he is not willing to resolve. Being forced to show up and mediate is the most powerful tool, next to having visa/mc/amex pull the credit card charge.

Small ####ty businesses do have a place in hell, but as a society, we need to realize there are so many good people out there. Whether the trades, retail or food just trying to get by. In our company if we screw up we damn well do our best to make it right, apologize and if it's out of our control bend over backwards to get things going in the right direction.

Large companies that escape review of the consumer that are a necessity like internet providers, etc should be reviewed as harsh as small business.

Internet providers have some of the most terrible reviews out there. Take a look at Comcast reviews one day.

I get privacy concerns with Google as a whole, but it's pretty easy to set up a gmail account and only use it for reviews if that is a big concern.

You guys haven't convinced me that Google is encouraging bad reviews or intentionally trying to hurt small businesses. This isn't Facebook encouraging controversy to get more traffic. I'd imagine Google's goal is to make ratings as accurate and useful as possible, because that is what drives people to use and trust them. Google will remove organized review attacks from people who obviously haven't been to the business.

I'd imagine that Google reviews are a net positive for most well run businesses.

[Stampede2TheCup]

Originally Posted by calgarywinning

Last time I checked there are no ratings for google or microsoft or many of the large untouchable companies.

The other thing is that google review ratings are for people who only have gmail accounts and are in googles spyware platform of creepy email scanning, free word processing software to to add to your "profile" of their scanning. No one without a gmail can't hand out stars on google.

It's seriously one of the most flawed systems where a company has free domain to manipulate and impact small local business. Also, it's a direct affront to a livelihood where in Calgary small ethical business is really not afforded any considerations or benefit of the doubt.

It is sheer market manipulation, as reviews are used now as a primary indicator for choices and google has a stranglehold on it.

Google will not take down reviews that personally attack individuals. These are the worst.

1 star reviews are punishing. They are equal to 10 five star reviews. How do I know this? I log it. Because after many conversations with google and their secret algorithm, I've got a full calculation. How creepy is it that people who go by google reviews are manipulated by their creepy algorithm. 10 5 stars is equal to 1 1 star. 3 star is equal to 0. 4 star is .5 and 5 star is 1 measly point of 100th a fraction. 1 1 star is 10/100 of the review algorithm.

As Sliver is indicating a 3 star review by my log is 0 stars in the equation from the people only with gmail accounts. It's mind boggling the manipulation the tech companies are able to get away with. Have one of the major email accounts, you will not be able to weight in. Google has become a dangerous tool for small business to be punished.

So while, this persons complaint and review on google is 100% valid, there are so many reviews that aren't 100% valid. Or late night 1 star drops or attacks without attempting to contact the company for resolution. The techs have manipulated and will not be transparent about the algorithm, because they use it to their benefit. The dishonesty and inaccessibility of the platform should be the tell tale sign.

My advice to the OP would be to validate the quote against the delivered product (photos). Go downtown to small claims court and file for the current cost $50 to $100 and take the owner to task if he is not willing to resolve. Being forced to show up and mediate is the most powerful tool, next to having visa/mc/amex pull the credit card charge.

Small ####ty businesses do have a place in hell, but as a society, we need to realize there are so many good people out there. Whether the trades, retail or food just trying to get by. In our company if we screw up we damn well do our best to make it right, apologize and if it's out of our control bend over backwards to get things going in the right direction.

Large companies that escape review of the consumer that are a necessity like internet providers, etc should be reviewed as harsh as small business.

Very interesting stuff.

What do you mean when you say “you log it”? Are you monitoring the reviews of one business? Working in SEO? Do you think you have the algorithm more or less figured out in the area of reviews?

When you are talking about points and punishment, are you referring to the reviews’ effects on how high the business will rank in the Places section of Google search results? For example, where each restaurant will rank when someone searches for something like “Chinese food near me”?

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Can a customer be a victim?

Of a bad review that brands them permanently with no recourse or defense and no option to opt out of getting reviewed against their will? No.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Can a customer be a victim?

There are exceptions but generally speaking the business has all the power in the customer - business relationship. The customer pays money or locks into a contract and expects the product or service to be what they expected. The review system gives the customer a little more leverage and also allows the customer some visibility into other customer experiences. If you want to do business with the public, that seems a fair ask to be exposed that way. Giving all 5 star reviews makes that system useless.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

There are exceptions but generally speaking the business has all the power in the customer - business relationship. The customer pays money or locks into a contract and expects the product or service to be what they expected. The review system gives the customer a little more leverage and also allows the customer some visibility into other customer experiences. If you want to do business with the public, that seems a fair ask to be exposed that way. Giving all 5 star reviews makes that system useless.

Do you believe some businesses deserve five stars if they're to be rated at all?

I do. And I don't give five stars unless five stars is warranted.

But I don't give less. If I get less-than service, I don't rate the business at all. It's literally the golden rule, so it's not like some off-the-wall thing I've come up with.

And the business has all the power?! OMG, what?! Every customer is my boss. Like, if we don't give you want you want, you're not going to pay me. You're out nothing until you're satisfied, but I'm paying materials, labour and overhead up front just to be ready and waiting for you should you decide to do business with me.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Do you believe some businesses deserve five stars if they're to be rated at all?

I do. And I don't give five stars unless five stars is warranted.

But I don't give less. If I get less-than service, I don't rate the business at all. It's literally the golden rule, so it's not like some off-the-wall thing I've come up with.

And the business has all the power?! OMG, what?! Every customer is my boss. Like, if we don't give you want you want, you're not going to pay me. You're out nothing until you're satisfied, but I'm paying materials, labour and overhead up front just to be ready and waiting for you should you decide to do business with me.

It depends a lot on the type of business we are talking about. I don't think any business is probably perfect nor expect them to be. If I'm about to make a big investment, say hiring a general contractor to build a screened in porch, I have to take a big risk in putting $50k+ into it and would like to hear all their customers good and bad stories, and how the contractor dealt with them, because I'm sure it's not going to go smoothly every time, no matter how good he is.

When researching companies, I don't look for 5 star or nothing. 4.5 and aboves seems like it usually going to be a good experience. In industries I know well, I can't think of any business irreparably harmed by one or two bad reviews, but I can think of a few torpedoed because their owner lashed out at customers reviews and accused the customers of not knowing what a good product is. It seems every time that happens, the owner's product didn't really ever have the reputation of being as good as they thought it was.

It doesn't really seem like there's material damage to a business from a bad review if they have 50+ positive reviews, and a bad review with a thoughtful response from the business is usually more positive than negative to a business. So what is the actual damage, just hurt feelings and embarrassment?

[calgarywinning]

Originally Posted by Stampede2TheCup

Very interesting stuff.

What do you mean when you say “you log it”? Are you monitoring the reviews of one business? Working in SEO? Do you think you have the algorithm more or less figured out in the area of reviews?

When you are talking about points and punishment, are you referring to the reviews’ effects on how high the business will rank in the Places section of Google search results? For example, where each restaurant will rank when someone searches for something like “Chinese food near me”?

Yes, I monitor one business and log all the reviews and have calculated the .1 of a star system for three years and can predict the total number of reviews required to move the needle.

Points and punishment is very much related to where you will rank and place on the google places map, in search etc. Most notably is the preferential to businesses at 4.5 and above. They do use current reviews as relevancy.

My point is the system is punitive because ONLY people with google accounts may leave a review yet EVERYONE using search will use the rating to make choices and evaluations. Secondly 1 and 2 star reviews are ranked significantly higher then a 5 star review in they're wait on that score.

Specifically google will not telly about their algorithm because they are not weighting reviews fairly. 1 1 star should have the same wait of 1 5 star.