Changes to the listing of reviews

Just wondering if everyone else has this problem or if I'm just 'set up wrong' with my profile on Ciao.

Each time I look at my review list or anyone else's, they are listed with the oldest ones first instead of the newest (as it used to be).

Is it just me? It's really annoying.

It's not just yours, it seems to be the same on all profiles. And what's that silly diamond doing lurking at the top or should I say bottom of the review list? It looks a mess. I hope it isn't intentional on Ciao's behalf.

Nope, it's not intentional. I sent Ciao an E-mail on Weds and they relied to me on Thursday saying they were aware of the problem and their tech team were working on it...they assured me it would be fixed by Friday. .............And here we are Saturday and it's still the same !!! There are lots of other things, for example The video reviews, if you award E or VH the author will receive minus 12 points....and blue dots have mysteriously turned gold overnight !!

For the sorting, you could just click Date to sort it the usual way until it's fixed.

The dot changes sounds interesting.

Here was me thinking it was a way for Ciao not to fork out as much cash and also level us all as in general everyone starts with bad reviews!

very annoying especially since i actually managed to write a review!

Deru wrote:

For the sorting, you could just click Date to sort it the usual way until it's fixed.

The dot changes sounds interesting.

Yes, I think we all know that.

But that's not the point. Ciao is presenting reviews in the reverse order and 9/10 people write better stuff now than they did when they started.

There are definitely people using this as an excuse to get their own back on others. It hasn't happened to me but some of the more 'controversial' members seem to be getting plenty of hits and low rates on the stuff they wrote years ago.

Rating people's early stuff is an oft-used way of getting a subtle and non-punishable revenge. It's happened to me in the past but normally it sticks out that someone had to go looking for the bad reviews. As Ciao is currently presenting them, those less honourable members have the perfect excuse to take a pop at other's old reviews because they are sitting there waiting to be shot like fish in a barrel.

Well I AM one of those members !!!! Not too bothered really to be honest, I just find it amusing....all my SH rates on my review rthat is showing at the top at the moment are from Revenge raters both in the past and in recent days. Whilst I just look and laugh I can understand others getting really frustrated.

The biggest problem is when new people come along and rate you, of course they will just look at the first on the list and rate that one. I do hope Ciao sort it out soon though.

All my work is award winning so I'm not affected by this.

I think this calls for an Aaron like comment:

"Ciao are a bunch of mooks governed by monkeys."

When a review is published it's there to be read (and be rated) not just today but in the future. Sure, members might have improved their writing abilities, but I don't see why people should look into this (rating the old stuff) so deeply, after all, it's only community points - what are these worth? Nothing.

I find it surprising how desperate members can be so that others don't miss their latest - er no thanks I think I'll read this spreadsheet instead.

I agree but think the issue here is when you write a new review, unless people click on the link then they are more likely to read an old review of yours than the latest one.

You can't rely on alerts these days. What a waste of time if you have to do all that clicking to find out if your favourite writers have done something new.

It doesn't bother me...as all my reviews are there to be read...if I am not happy with them then I could always edit them.
I like to think my writing has improved and seeing my first reviews reminds me how hard it was being that little white dot in a sea of know alls.

It never ceases to tickle me how people who give out so many low ratings refer to return low ratings as revenge rates...and not just that their own work is not of such a high standard in someone else's eyes as it obviously is in their own......

jekka wrote:

It never ceases to tickle me how people who give out so many low ratings refer to return low ratings as revenge rates...and not just that their own work is not of such a high standard in someone else's eyes as it obviously is in their own......

I hope you aren't referring to me because I don't think I need to defend any low ratings I've given.

I described the process of hunting down old crappy reviews as a form of "subtle and non-punishable revenge" because users who don't like a rating they've received go looking for an early inexperienced review that they can justifiably give an SH or an H (yes, let's not start the 'H is positive' debate again). It's entirely intentional and done to get back at the rater but it's also completely within Ciao's 'so-called rules'.

If I honestly believed that someone who'd received a low rating from a particular user 'just happened' to be looking for a dishwasher/camera/cakebar of the same model that they'd reviewed and just happened to find that person's review just after they objected to a rating then that would be OK. But that's not the way it works.

Sometimes we do get unexpected reads on old reviews that are purely due to someone looking for a particular item and coming across the review. But more often than not there's a very clear sense of 'cause and effect' associted with rating of old reviews.

When I made my comment earlier about this I was thinking of Averilla but didn't want to mention names. However, as she's raised it herself, I think the current situation has opened the floodgates for people who want to take a pop at those they disagree with. Fortunately I know Av won't give a stuff and will find it all rather funny.

Gosh no! I was merely commenting that a h rating isnt always a revenge rating.
I think all will be glad when this error is fixed...
but I think for now it should humble some high and mighty members who think that everything they write is exceptional or very helpful (or else why is a H a revenge rate?) yet only give out H themselves (well except to friends obviously)
Hopefully they will see from their early reviews that they weren't always as perfect in every way as they are now :-)


I have had people deliberately rate my reviews low...(as in off topic) but just left it, as I think that people will see it for what it is....I dont run off to rate their stuff old or new and as for reporting it...hahahahahahahaha ha

LOL....No problem, I do find the whole thing funny. and Yes Jekka I have high standards when I read other's reviews and to be honest I fully accept that my first few ratings were not worthy of anything more than helpful, however there are a select few that jump on the chance to land a SH on my earlier reviews purely out of revenge...(I have never considered H to be a low rating). Thing is on a couple of my reviews the only people rating lower than H were revenge raters.........anyway personally as Koskha says and is completely right I don't give a stuff, but others will.

My main point (once again) is not the revenge rating but new reviews. As they are not at the top of your page then new readers not following alerts are unlikely to read them, bear in mind the renumeration on some reviews changes , therefore anyone writing a new review could also be missing out on what little renumeration there is because by the time Ciao have sorted this out (if ever) those reviews may no longer be worth the same renumeration they were when you wrote the review ...if you get me !!

jekka wrote:

Gosh no! I was merely commenting that a h rating isnt always a revenge rating.
I think all will be glad when this error is fixed...
but I think for now it should humble some high and mighty members who think that everything they write is exceptional or very helpful (or else why is a H a revenge rate?) yet only give out H themselves (well except to friends obviously)
Hopefully they will see from their early reviews that they weren't always as perfect in every way as they are now :-)


I have had people deliberately rate my reviews low...(as in off topic) but just left it, as I think that people will see it for what it is....I dont run off to rate their stuff old or new and as for reporting it...hahahahahahahaha ha

Not too sure that anyone has actually complained about H ratingsand classed them as reveng during this glitch have they ???? I personally have only really noticed the SHs flying around.....I am perfectly happy and always have been to receive H, particularly if it is a renumerated review !

It is sad that people will take pleasure in "revenge" rating even though the rating in question might refer to a review which is fiveyears out of date and it is undeniable that some members will hide behind the "H is a good rating" argument...as a be all and end all reason as it will not be removed and most members know this. while there is nothing wrong with rating appropriately, bullying and abuse by certain members on grounds like this when in fact there was no genuine reason to even read in the first place (and there are some horrible examples) make Ciao a rather unpleasant place to be.

Dooyoo is much better in that respect.

Anytime you get a revenge rate - whatever that might be..... blah blah blah but let's face it they DO exist - a quick mail to Jared will generally sort it out.

If you get an NH from some moron who wrote a non-review asking for lipotim advice and didn't like you pointing out that dooyoo isn't a 'forum' for dieters, the rate might not be intended as revenge but is based on someone not having read what the site is and how to rate. If NH is short for 'not helping me with my diet' rather than 'not actually helpful to someone who might want to know about the hotel/book/film etc then dooyoo take those off pronto.

Ciao will generally remove the NHs as well

it is the devious rates, where people hide behind the usual excuses that are more bullying or revenge than the NHs i.e. rating people lower purely because of who they know, the same people who complain that people rate too high because of who they "know" apparently...madness! I don't think the problems on ciao are necessarily the fault of the people who are blamed at times i.e. newer members

Averilla wrote:

LOL.... to be honest I fully accept that my first few ratings were not worthy of anything more than helpful,

so all the rest are VH and E?

*retracts claws*

*giggle*

btw...I agree with most of the rest.

Looks like they've fixed it, seems kinda odd now it's the right way lol.

Personally, l didn't mind the reversal ~ but, then, l write fewer reviews; my "paying" reviews are updated when l notice; so l don't mind so much people increasing my overall reads on early reviews.

sometimes l wonder if people have become complacent about early reviews ~ if this reversal occurs again, will they be any more ready?