4 ms·
Like a Buzzfeed "journalist," I don't think a reviewer has a right to be shielded from the consequences of their speech. There's nothing that says you can under
by legerdemain 5y ago
Like a Buzzfeed "journalist," I don't think a reviewer has a right to be shielded from the consequences of their speech. There's nothing that says you can undermine a business owner or harm an establishment with your exaggerated or even false claims, and then expect to be treated like a king. Just because you had a less then stellar time once doesn't mean that the average shopper doesn't leave satisfied. So the next time you show up at my shop to buy some wood screws or whatever, be prepared to be shown the door while I meaningfully tap the sign that says that we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone.
- kennywinker 5y agoThis doesn’t really seem like the situation linked above. This situation is amazon blocking his reviews as “fraudulent”, not the vendor refusing to do business with him for leaving a bad review.
- legerdemain 5y agoWhen someone leaves a damaging review, the seller has the right to ask Amazon to investigate the reviewer. In this case, the reviewer was found to be fraudulent. We haven't seen his reviews and we don't have the seller's perspective, so we can't really judge. I'm generally on the seller's side in situations like these.
- kennywinker 5y ago> I'm generally on the seller's side in situations like these. That seems like the wrong bias to me. Some random dropshipper selling garden hoses bought off alibaba on amazon has no real incentive to be an honest player and plenty of incentives to be dishonest, while on the other hand some random person who bought a garden hose has no real incentive to lie. Either way, if you think there is potential for one party to abuse the system (in your case you're suspicious of the buyer, while I'm suspicious of the seller) the actual problem here is with amazon being an un-accountable middle-man. I doubt the seller would have had much better luck contacting amazon and appealing the judgement, if amazon had sided with the buyer in this case.
- Cipater 5y agoThe right to leave a negative review in your mind is expecting "to be treated like a king"?
- legerdemain 5y agoNo, you have the right to leave your negative review and I have the right to show you the door. "Treated like a king" is thinking you can hurt my business and expect to be treated as if nothing had happened.
- fred_is_fred 5y agoI'm really confused by your take here. "Just because you had a less then (sic) stellar time once doesn't mean that the average shopper doesn't leave satisfied." The average experience is the sum of all reviews - not each review is the average experience. That's how reviews work.
- legerdemain 5y agoScumbag reviewers leave damaging and often false reviews out of spite, without having experienced your product or service fully, and often without having experienced it at all. I think this is well understood, as well as the fact that they are often paid for and organized by bad competitors looking to drive honest business out of the market. See examples of Amazon itself copying products to offer in its Basics line.
- fred_is_fred 5y agoI don't disagree about that - about fake or manipulated reviews and even paid reviews. However I do disagree that the solution is to ban all negative reviews. I don't know the correct fix however, certainly the way Amazon does it doesn't work.
- legerdemain 5y agoThere is no goal to "ban negative reviews." That is an absurd interpretation of what I wrote. You are free to write negative reviews, for any reason, including being a shill who is paid to write fake negative reviews. Do it on a merchant's website, do it on your own blog or YouTube channel, do it in your local paper or at a bar with friends. Do it on a boat with a goat, where permitted by law. Businesses are then free to deny you service, suspend your account, investigate your activity, sue you for slander, etc.