4 ms·

They don't like their platform being manipulated by organized downvoting. Not rocket science.

fastball 6y ago
Manipulated? I just gave a 1-star review on the iOS app store and am currently pulling all my money out of my RH account, because I don't like how RH is behaving. People all thinking something is shit is not manipulation, its just collective agreement.
- kinkrtyavimoodh 6y ago
  To play the Devil's advocate here, my personal intuition is that App reviews should be for how the apps perform, and shouldn't be used as proxy for reviewing those businesses. If the app is buggy or broken or whatever, it makes sense to give a low rating. I am not sure it makes equal sense if people suddenly realize they don't like the company who has made the app.
  - fastball 6y ago
    That's a fair point, and I agree with you – I hate it when reviews don't give me (the reader) an accurate picture of the experience I'll have with this app. Two problems though: 1. That's not how people treat reviews (people will leave a positive review if they love the business but the app is crap), so it's misleading to only enforce such an ideal here, with negative reviews. 2. In this case, the business effectively is the app, at least from the user's perspective. The app wouldn't let me even look at GME/AMC today, much less buy it. That's not what I want from a stock trading app, because it's an annoying experience that leaves a sour taste in my mouth, so 1-star it is.
  - olyjohn 6y ago
    What if an app functions perfectly, but doesn't do what it promises? That's what seems to be happening here.
  - read_if_gay_ 6y ago
    If it is not letting you sell when you want to sell that’s a pretty shitty performance for a trading app. This is different from a subjective dislike of the parent company.
  - bonoboTP 6y ago
    xkcd #937. It's all great if the app isn't buggy, but if it doesn't do what it's advertised to do it deserves even more bad reviews.
  - gmanley 6y ago
    The functionality of the App and the policies and choices of the business are intrinsically tied. In this case their choice directly affected the functionality of the App: I was unable to buy or even view certain stocks. In my opinion that is, without a doubt, App functionality that should be subject to user review and rating. It's one thing for the company to make choices that people disagree with but don't affect the actual functionality of the App. This could be environmental policies, partnering with a controversial government, using tax loopholes, etc. People going on brigades to review bomb an App for these types of issues are what should be protected against. Mass shifts in public opinion due to actual changes in how the App behaves should not be protected against.
- matthewrobertso 6y ago
  I'm in the process of doing something similar. If you are as incensed as I am you might want to consider leaving a small amount of money < 1 USD in your account and opening an unused credit card with them.
  - fastball 6y ago
    Wait what does this do?
    - lostmsu 6y ago
      Presumably puts some burden on them? Like they have to maintain your credit card, review it once in a while, etc?
happytoexplain 6y ago
What does "manipulation" mean here, and why is it bad? What does "organized" mean here? I personally left a 1-star review detailing why I think the app deserves it before I heard anything about the review bombing. If a significant portion of it is "organized", why is that bad? You're making many large assumptions, not to mention framing them antagonistically ("not rocket science").
- sangnoir 6y ago
  This is brigading - people were not reviewing the app (which the app rating is supposed to measure), but retaliating against a (valid) slight from Robinhood. Seen in that light, the recent mass voting is noise.
  - sthnblllII 6y ago
    Whats the difference between the app and the service the app provides from the perspective of a user of the app?
    - sangnoir 6y ago
      There are multiple ways to access the Robinhood service. The service itself may be great (e.g. via website), but the app terrible (crashes, bad UI, slow, etc).
  - gmanley 6y ago
    In this case their "slight" directly affected the functionality of the App: I was unable to buy or even view certain stocks. To me that is clearly App functionality that should be subject to user review and rating. Mass shifts in public opinion due to actual changes in how the App behaves is not brigading nor retaliation and should not be protected against.

Manipulated? I just gave a 1-star review on the iOS app store and am currently pulling all my money out of my RH account, because I don't like how RH is behaving. People all thinking something is shit is not manipulation, its just collective agreement.

kinkrtyavimoodh 6y ago
To play the Devil's advocate here, my personal intuition is that App reviews should be for how the apps perform, and shouldn't be used as proxy for reviewing those businesses. If the app is buggy or broken or whatever, it makes sense to give a low rating. I am not sure it makes equal sense if people suddenly realize they don't like the company who has made the app.
- fastball 6y ago
  That's a fair point, and I agree with you – I hate it when reviews don't give me (the reader) an accurate picture of the experience I'll have with this app. Two problems though: 1. That's not how people treat reviews (people will leave a positive review if they love the business but the app is crap), so it's misleading to only enforce such an ideal here, with negative reviews. 2. In this case, the business effectively is the app, at least from the user's perspective. The app wouldn't let me even look at GME/AMC today, much less buy it. That's not what I want from a stock trading app, because it's an annoying experience that leaves a sour taste in my mouth, so 1-star it is.
- olyjohn 6y ago
  What if an app functions perfectly, but doesn't do what it promises? That's what seems to be happening here.
- read_if_gay_ 6y ago
  If it is not letting you sell when you want to sell that’s a pretty shitty performance for a trading app. This is different from a subjective dislike of the parent company.
- bonoboTP 6y ago
  xkcd #937. It's all great if the app isn't buggy, but if it doesn't do what it's advertised to do it deserves even more bad reviews.
- gmanley 6y ago
  The functionality of the App and the policies and choices of the business are intrinsically tied. In this case their choice directly affected the functionality of the App: I was unable to buy or even view certain stocks. In my opinion that is, without a doubt, App functionality that should be subject to user review and rating. It's one thing for the company to make choices that people disagree with but don't affect the actual functionality of the App. This could be environmental policies, partnering with a controversial government, using tax loopholes, etc. People going on brigades to review bomb an App for these types of issues are what should be protected against. Mass shifts in public opinion due to actual changes in how the App behaves should not be protected against.
matthewrobertso 6y ago
I'm in the process of doing something similar. If you are as incensed as I am you might want to consider leaving a small amount of money < 1 USD in your account and opening an unused credit card with them.
- fastball 6y ago
  Wait what does this do?
  - lostmsu 6y ago
    Presumably puts some burden on them? Like they have to maintain your credit card, review it once in a while, etc?

happytoexplain 6y ago

What does "manipulation" mean here, and why is it bad? What does "organized" mean here? I personally left a 1-star review detailing why I think the app deserves it before I heard anything about the review bombing. If a significant portion of it is "organized", why is that bad? You're making many large assumptions, not to mention framing them antagonistically ("not rocket science").

sangnoir 6y ago
This is brigading - people were not reviewing the app (which the app rating is supposed to measure), but retaliating against a (valid) slight from Robinhood. Seen in that light, the recent mass voting is noise.
- sthnblllII 6y ago
  Whats the difference between the app and the service the app provides from the perspective of a user of the app?
  - sangnoir 6y ago
    There are multiple ways to access the Robinhood service. The service itself may be great (e.g. via website), but the app terrible (crashes, bad UI, slow, etc).
- gmanley 6y ago
  In this case their "slight" directly affected the functionality of the App: I was unable to buy or even view certain stocks. To me that is clearly App functionality that should be subject to user review and rating. Mass shifts in public opinion due to actual changes in how the App behaves is not brigading nor retaliation and should not be protected against.