| Msg # |
User |
Message |
Date |
1
|
troglodite (Suspended)
|
This site appears to have been designed as a site not only for porn "users" but also the webmasters of these sites. I would be interested to know if webmasters are allowed to give trust ratings. If I don't like a site and I rate it objectively, I don't want to be viewed as an "untrusted" reviewer because the webmaster decides to vindictively leave a negative trust rating for me.
But by that same token - even if webmasters are not allowed to leave trust ratings, they could just sign up with a regular user account and leave the same ratings anonymously, so I suppose it really doesn't matter there.
But just so that I stop rambling - I think reasons are good to require. If someone doesn't trust my reviews or comments, I'd like to have an idea why.
|
06-24-07 06:47pm
Reply To Message
|
2
|
nygiants03 (0)
|
I think they should ,because I feel that people get angry when someone gives them a bad trust rating. So they would take it out on the person that gave the rating, and give them a negative review without reading any reviews. The anonymous keeps that revenge tactic from ever happening. At the same time, I believe people who give negative trust rating without commenting is bogus.
|
06-24-07 07:15pm
Reply To Message
|
3
|
jd1961 (0)
|
REPLY TO #1 - troglodite :
There's nothing to stop a webmaster or shill from giving an anonymous trust rating, good or bad.
|
06-25-07 12:26am
Reply To Message
|
4
|
jd1961 (0)
|
REPLY TO #2 - nygiants03 :
But if they were so angry that they wanted "revenge", what's to prevent them from giving everyone a negative rating, knowing for sure that they got whoever got them?
|
06-25-07 12:29am
Reply To Message
|
5
|
Khan (Suspended)
|
REPLY TO #1 - troglodite :
Well, I can confirm that webmasters may NOT give Trust Ratings.
In addition, because we require a User to have 5 points prior to having the privilege to leave trust ratings, it's not as easy as you suggest for a webmaster to create a fake user account just to "get even" with a bad review. Also, we have various security measures we use to discourage users (webmasters or otherwise) from posting with multiple accounts.
So while our's isn't a perfect system, we do take steps to ensure that Trust Ratings aren't abused by webmasters.
|
06-25-07 05:19am
Reply To Message
|
6
|
uscue (0)
|
Like earlier, I think that a "Yes" trust rating is fine as is...if someone trusts you then you don't need much more reason. If there's a "No" trust rating, they should be required to fill out a comment telling why, but the author of the comment (and the rating itself) could still be anonymous. You don't need to know who rated/gave you a comment, users would probably just like to know why they received a certain rating/comment to help them in their later reviews.
|
06-25-07 12:44pm
Reply To Message
|
7
|
Gazette Risque (0)
|
I agree with uscue. It doesn't matter who voted what. It's about sharing experiences and sharing them well.
So any sort of criticism on the reviews could be used of course.
Just voting No would be like responding to a "Why-question" with just a "Because".
|
06-26-07 06:57am
Reply To Message
|
8
|
SnowDude (0)
|
I might have already stated this elsewhere, but I think leaving anonymous ratings can be a good thing, especially if someone is concerned that their feedback may receive a harsh response. For me, I decided to not be anonymous from the first day it was allowed. I was nervous at first, but I think if you are fair in your comments you will ultimately be respected even if those same folks disagree with you.
I do, however, think that if you go anonymous and vote no that you should at least leave a response so teh person knows why you felt they were untrustworthy. I always ask folks to tell me why since I'm not perfect and always want to be open to honest and fair criticism, good or bad.
The only problem with the comment thing is how you would compel someone to leave a comment with a no vote. It would be hard to enforce and I think it can only be something you try to instill rather than a hard and fast rule. If someone leaves you an anonymous no vote without a comment, just ask why and see what happens. In most cases when this has happened to me the person has just changed their vote to yes when I really wanted to know what they didn't like!
|
06-26-07 09:30pm
Reply To Message
|
9
|
Monahan (0)
|
There are really two options here.
1 - Should anonymous trust ratings be permitted?
2 - Should all negative ratings be required to include a reason for the negative?
My answer is yes to both...but anonymous negative trust ratings with no explanation accomplish absolutely nothing at all. An anonymous negative rating with an explanation is helpful.
Also it is not the poll question, but I don't feel that webmasters should ever be permitted to vote on a Trust Rating. After all, they are, by their function, biased against any negative comments made by genuine Porn Users.
|
06-27-07 10:52am
Reply To Message
|
10
|
Khan (Suspended)
|
REPLY TO #9 - Monahan :
If you'll check Reply #5 (above) you'll see it's been plainly stated that webmasters are NOT permitted to give Trust Ratings.
|
06-27-07 10:58am
Reply To Message
|
11
|
Monahan (0)
|
REPLY TO #10 - Khan :
Sorry Khan, I must have misunderstood your reply (#5). It sounded like it would be more difficult, but not impossible, for a Webmaster to post a Negative Trust.
If Webmasters are not permitted to post any (negative or positive) Trust Ratings (except by intentional contravention of your rules) that is as it should be.
Thanks.
|
06-28-07 09:18am
Reply To Message
|
12
|
Khan (Suspended)
|
REPLY TO #11 - Monahan :
Yes, they are not permitted to issue any Trust Ratings. Sorry if I wasn't more clear.
While I'll never say it's impossible, it is something they'd have to work considerably to get around the safeguards we have in place. Like you, we wouldn't want Users discouraged from giving their fair opinion for fear of getting a bad rating from a site owner.
|
06-28-07 10:04am
Reply To Message
|
13
|
jd1961 (0)
|
REPLY TO #10 - Khan :
Not as webmasters they aren't...but as Joe Blow they most certainly are permitted and most likely do.
|
06-28-07 08:43pm
Reply To Message
|
14
|
Khan (Suspended)
|
REPLY TO #13 - jd1961 :
But JD, you seem to be skipping the fact that before a User can cast Trust Ratings, they need to have accrued 5 points.
Again, I will not say it is absolutely impossible for a determined webmaster to trick the system, I will say it's not something I can see happening very often as we do have certain safeguards in place.
Not sure what else I can say to convince you that webmasters aren't running around giving out negative Trust Ratings whenever they get a poor review.
|
06-29-07 05:17am
Reply To Message
|
15
|
jd1961 (0)
|
REPLY TO #14 - Khan :
Well, I made a bit of a negative comment concerning a site i recently joined, and that webmaster was on my comment like a fly on sh1t! In other words, they are keeping a very close eye on this site. I think the trust ratings need to be moderated. Trust ratings without a reasonable explanation should be deleted, in the same way you don't give points for reviews that are too simple. Just giving an anonymous no explanation trust rating is too tempting for the abusers.
|
06-30-07 07:44pm
Reply To Message
|
16
|
Schnitzel (0)
|
I think anonymous trust ratings are okay if it's a Yes.. but if someone's going to say that they don't trust a user, then they need to provide some sort of reason as to why.
Perhaps it would be better if anonymous trust ratings weren't allowed.
And as people have said, you're going to get people who give you a "No" vote out of spite.
|
07-12-07 04:01am
Reply To Message
|
