Up rating.

Good lord, Peace is breaking out in the forum!

Hold the front page - someone just agreed with Aaron.

I told you, K. Everyone agrees with me sooner or later. I do speak sense.

I dunno why everyone is so surprised to find out that I'm right...

Ciao's Favourite Member wrote:

Chuchy wrote:

I write my reviews for the consumers and not for the members. Ciao pieces are for the members.

What's that got to do with you rating? I write for myself and anyone that has similar needs and requirements to my own, be they member or non-member, but that's a fairly irrelevant point.

Chuchy wrote:

When you rate a product this line appears above the rating buttons:

"How helpful would this review be to someone making a buying decision?"

It doesn't say how helpful do you personally find this review, does it?

I don't see how you can claim to be able to rate for other people. As I've said, someone, somewhere will pretty much always find a review E or VH, just as someone will find it H or SH or NH. How do you pick which of these ratings to give out in your "voice of the people"?

We've been down this path before...

I would interpret what Chuchy is saying as that he rates from the point of view of a consumer obviously based on what he (as a consumer) would find useful. That would not mean rating everything E.

It's almost the same as saying that you rate everything on how personally you would find it useful BUT in some circumstances for instance when you read a review of a book that you have already read the review might not be that useful to you personally BUT you can still rate it from the point of view of someone who as not read the book etc.

I disagree. You could rate from the perspective that YOU had not read the book, but not someone else. Even with product knowledge, it's still more accurate to rate for yourself than A. N. Other.

I can't rate reviews for you or Claire or K. I can only rate for myself.

Ciao's Favourite Member wrote:

I disagree. You could rate from the perspective that YOU had not read the book, but not someone else. Even with product knowledge, it's still more accurate to rate for yourself than A. N. Other.

I can't rate reviews for you or Claire or K. I can only rate for myself.

NO, you don't disagree

YES, of course it always has to be from your point of view and it has to be your idea of what a consumer (ie you) would be looking for.

You would have to say IF I wanted to read this book, IF I wanted to buy this car, IF I wanted to buy this pair of shoes etc.

I quite often rate things lower, I am just being honest, could be that I am a harse critic. Some times I think loads of people see two or more people rating at VH and everyone else follows so not to look bad when it is cleary only a H review.

I have no hesitation in rating a VH review not helpful or off topic if need be no matter how much effort someone puts into it. Luckilly I rarely have to do this.

Mauri wrote:

NO, you don't disagree

YES, of course it always has to be from your point of view and it has to be your idea of what a consumer (ie you) would be looking for.

You would have to say IF I wanted to read this book, IF I wanted to buy this car, IF I wanted to buy this pair of shoes etc.

That's not what you said, though. You said that it was possible to rate as "someone", not "yourself". It might only be a small difference, but it's a significant one.

Ciao's Favourite Member wrote:

Mauri wrote:

NO, you don't disagree

YES, of course it always has to be from your point of view and it has to be your idea of what a consumer (ie you) would be looking for.

You would have to say IF I wanted to read this book, IF I wanted to buy this car, IF I wanted to buy this pair of shoes etc.

That's not what you said, though. You said that it was possible to rate as "someone", not "yourself". It might only be a small difference, but it's a significant one.

You're splitting hairs here....

I said "BUT you can still rate it from the point of view of someone who as not read the book etc." I didn't actually say not yourself...

And I stand by that... of course you can rate as 'someone else', a consumer if you like as long as that consumer shares your views about what makes a useful review.

You really can't do anything else really, if you rate honestly.

To put it another way...

You are saying that you should always rate as yourself...

I'm saying that you should always rate as yourself but sometimes you have to rate as not as 'your personal needs' BUT AS IF you were a potential consumer for that product...

For example I rate car reviews BUT I'm not looking for a car, I don't want to buy a car at the moment BUT I do have firm idea about what I would look for in a car review if I were in the market i.e. if I were 'SOMEONE' looking for a car.

koshkha wrote:

Hold the front page - someone just agreed with Aaron.

Just for the record, I don't actually agree with the negative ratings themselves in many cases, but I do accept the explanation of why some people would rate lower than the majority.

Ciao's Favourite Member wrote:

I told you, K. Everyone agrees with me sooner or later. I do speak sense.

I dunno why everyone is so surprised to find out that I'm right...

Oh dear. Agreeing with you......well that's like.......halfway to almost slightly liking you.

I think I'd better go and have a lie-down.

Seriously though, I think a lot of this 'do I rate as me or do I pretend I'm someone else and rate as if I were them or do I take method acting classes and 'become' that person looking for a plumber in Tyne and Wear or do I think about what someone else might find helpful' is all a bit much ado about nothing. We all just try and rate on a general view of helpfulness - to you, to me, to the man down the road, to the woman in the moon'.

I think a lot of hairs are getting split over not that much.

koshkha wrote:

Seriously though, I think a lot of this 'do I rate as me or do I pretend I'm someone else and rate as if I were them or do I take method acting classes and 'become' that person looking for a plumber in Tyne and Wear or do I think about what someone else might find helpful' is all a bit much ado about nothing. We all just try and rate on a general view of helpfulness - to you, to me, to the man down the road, to the woman in the moon'.

For me the biggest reassurance is when someone goes through the hassle of signing up to Ciao just so that they can leave a note of thanks on my review. Nothing can beat that - and it will cancel out any negative ratings from other members, in my head anyway.

I guess Im repeating what a lot of others have said; Ive found myself out on a limb rating a review E when everyone else thinks its VH; but again its an individual rating and how the review in question appeals to you. Ive done that recently with a certain member's household appliance review; all the info I NEED is there for me to consider a future purchase AND the piece evokes personal experience which has ADDED humour and/or has a highly personal take on it - perhaps something I would identify with when the thoughts of actual purchase takes place; similarly I rated a piece of work VH on the opposite scale when the review had dozens of E's..and felt very alone!!

Chuchy wrote:

For me the biggest reassurance is when someone goes through the hassle of signing up to Ciao just so that they can leave a note of thanks on my review. Nothing can beat that - and it will cancel out any negative ratings from other members, in my head anyway.

Wait until you get them creating accounts just so they can come back and OT you because they don't agree. It happens!

koshkha wrote:

Wait until you get them creating accounts just so they can come back and OT you because they don't agree. It happens!

That sounds pretty nasty.

koshkha wrote:

Good lord, Peace is breaking out in the forum!

Hold the front page - someone just agreed with Aaron.

Actually I just think Aaron has set up two user accounts on the forum so that he can demonstrate his powers of persuasion.

I think that highly unlikely. He didn't even set up the one he has !

(I said on another thread about writing) wrote:

This is the whole point that people seem to miss about review writing. You are writing a review on YOUR experience of using the product. Not what you perceive other peoples experiences to be.

If you are not alergic to something, you have not got an experience of an alergic reaction. Therefore why would you write about it?

When people are rating it, if they are not alergic to something, they do not NEED to have the info there and would rate VH (supposing the rest of the review was worth it). If someone IS alergic to sommit, it is an important bit of info to them and therefore the correct rate for them would be H - regardless of how good the rest of the review is as to them, it is not as helpful at it would have been.

.... and I think it works the same in reverse. If you can't write about sommit properly without having that actual experience, then how can you rate sommit by pretending that experience matters to you when it doesn't?

koshkha wrote:

Ciao's Favourite Member wrote:

I told you, K. Everyone agrees with me sooner or later. I do speak sense.

I dunno why everyone is so surprised to find out that I'm right...

Oh dear. Agreeing with you......well that's like.......halfway to almost slightly liking you.

I know, K. It's like eating 2 litres of lovely double chocolate ice cream when you're on a diet. It's a guilty pleasure and you don't want anyone to know, but it's just so satisfying.

Chuchy wrote:

Just for the record, I don't actually agree with the negative ratings themselves in many cases, but I do accept the explanation of why some people would rate lower than the majority.

Man, you really hate "negative" ratings, don't you?

Ciao's Favourite Member wrote:

Chuchy wrote:

Just for the record, I don't actually agree with the negative ratings themselves in many cases, but I do accept the explanation of why some people would rate lower than the majority.

Man, you really hate "negative" ratings, don't you?

Only when they appear to be unjustified. I always get a bit suspicious when I see loads of E's and VH's and just one single SH. But like you said, those ratings simply reflect real life. There will always be an awkward customer out there who will not find my review very helpful, for whatever reason. A single negative rate on an otherwise predominantly VH review simply reflects this minority of "difficult" people prevalent in any community. I have to learn not to take this personally.

Chuchy wrote:

Only when they appear to be unjustified. I always get a bit suspicious when I see loads of E's and VH's and just one single SH. But like you said, those ratings simply reflect real life. There will always be an awkward customer out there who will not find my review very helpful, for whatever reason. A single negative rate on an otherwise predominantly VH review simply reflects this minority of "difficult" people prevalent in any community. I have to learn not to take this personally.

You're not going to succeed with that attitude!

Just because someone doesn't give you a VH or whatever, doesn't make them "awkward", they just have different requirements. I find it hard to believe that you see these "unjustified" ratings when it's fairly hard to prove deliberate malicious rating that's not NH. By the sounds of it (and from looking at your threads/posts here on FOIB), you're viewing every single non-VH rating with suspicion, possibly with anger. That's really not healthy.

Funnily enough, you don't seem too bothered about the over-rating that inevitably goes on.

Chuchy, you also really need to understand that SO SO many people on ciao refuse to rate against the grain. Just because there are loads of other VH's or E's simply doesn't mean that the review is worth that.

The previous ratings should not be shown UNTIL you have picked your rate. Then we would see people having to rate from what they actually think.

You know Drew, this is one of the things that draws me in on Helium. You get two reviews side by side, no idea whose they are and all you have to decide is which is best or if you have no opinion. That to me is fair rating.

drewboy wrote:

Chuchy, you also really need to understand that SO SO many people on ciao refuse to rate against the grain. Just because there are loads of other VH's or E's simply doesn't mean that the review is worth that.

You're quite right, of course. People are intimidated, even when the author doesn't come demanding re-rates or other bullying or aggressive behaviour.

drewboy wrote:

The previous ratings should not be shown UNTIL you have picked your rate. Then we would see people having to rate from what they actually think.

I agree here, too. I don't think that rates should be private on either site, but previous ratings should be hidden/invisible until after you've rated. I don’t think it would solve the problem exactly, but it would give a more accurate picture IMO.

Thingywhatsit wrote:

You know Drew, this is one of the things that draws me in on Helium. You get two reviews side by side, no idea whose they are and all you have to decide is which is best or if you have no opinion. That to me is fair rating.

Not seeing that myself… at least, not on Ciao. It might work on the site you mewntion, but as far as Ciao is concerned, that'd be a no-goer. Eventually you'd be figuring out which 5000 word epic is the better as members strive to be the most useful.

Ciao's Favourite Member wrote:

Just because someone doesn't give you a VH or whatever, doesn't make them "awkward", they just have different requirements. I find it hard to believe that you see these "unjustified" ratings when it's fairly hard to prove deliberate malicious rating that's not NH. By the sounds of it (and from looking at your threads/posts here on FOIB), you're viewing every single non-VH rating with suspicion, possibly with anger. That's really not healthy.

Funnily enough, you don't seem too bothered about the over-rating that inevitably goes on.

I'm not talking about non-VH rates in general. I'm specifically talking about single SH rates on reviews that are otherwise predominantly E/VH. And yes, I use to be very angry about it because I took it personally. Then, thanks to you, I realised that I shouldn't take it personally. There's nothing wrong with my review, it's just that some people on Ciao apply a different set of criteria than the norm, which could also happen in real life if consumers were to rate my reviews. They might rate it SH or even NH just because they couldn't find one particular detail, even though they might have found 125 other useful bits of information. To me, and to the majority of the people, that review would still be VH or at least H. For the awkward customer it would only be SH or NH. And I accept that now. These people exist and we have to learn to live with them.

And yes, I would notice overrating if it was a case of 98% SH ratings against one single VH or E. That however, never happens. I've never seen it anyway, have you?

Chuchy wrote:

There's nothing wrong with my review, it's just that some people on Ciao apply a different set of criteria than the norm

Who decides what a 'norm' is? People who work to norms, ignore far too much IMHO.

Quote :

To me, and to the majority of the people, that review would still be VH or at least H. For the awkward customer it would only be SH or NH. And I accept that now. These people exist and we have to learn to live with them.

Who defines a majority? It's not about people being awkward, its about getting what they need from a review. That could be a disabled person who needs to know about access, which an abled body person wouldn't (rightfully) put in a review.

Quote :

And yes, I would notice overrating if it was a case of 98% SH ratings against one single VH or E. That however, never happens. I've never seen it anyway, have you?

I have, on a few occasions.