| Msg # |
User |
Message |
Date |
1
|
jd1961 (0)
|
I think the change in the rankings brought about by this policy shows that it seems to work quite well. The previous rankings, marred IMO by shills, seemed bizarre to me.
|
08-23-07 02:50am
Reply To Message
|
2
|
exotics4me (0)
|
Very much agree, noticed a recent review of Twistys that has two major false statements in it. "Daily download limit" and "No exclusive material" those are deal breakers for many people.
|
08-23-07 05:24am
Reply To Message
|
3
|
Denner (0)
|
Just changed my vote from Not sure yet to Yes.
My main reasons:
1) I put my money on the fellow users I've got to know through their reliable reviews.
2) There has been some strange reviews where sites gets 98-100 from completely new users - it stinks of webmasters
3) exotics4me has a good point about the Twisty-review and the false statements.
|
08-23-07 07:29am
Reply To Message
|
4
|
apoctom (0)
|
There are enough changes in the rankings to show that this policy change made a difference, like jd said. Also, it has a two-fold effect on the members: 1) put up more reviews, so you stop being a "newbie" and 2) you can place more trust in your fellow reviewers.
I like the policy.
|
08-23-07 08:06am
Reply To Message
|
5
|
nygiants03 (0)
|
I have no problem with it. It seems there are to many of those people that leave a review or 2 then never return.
|
08-23-07 10:22am
Reply To Message
|
6
|
Drooler (Disabled)
|
I had to check the FC Nudes site reviews and see how our newbies Markus and Crazy were doing. Yep, they were newbies in April and they still are, their scores are absurdly high, their reviews are brisk but glowing, and their trust scores from other users are well into the red.
But their scores no longer apply to the official ratings for the site.
That's one example of the policy working as it is intended to. I think it's a good idea, and of course it can be modified as needs dictate later.
|
08-23-07 02:16pm
Reply To Message
|
7
|
User (0)
|
I voted yes because while it does not expose webmasters all the time, it gives the longtime members the opportunity to make a more intelligent decision when a high rating comes in from just one person who has little credibility elsewhere.
|
08-24-07 07:30am
Reply To Message
|
8
|
kkman112 (0)
|
It does, for now. It seems to have hindered the 'shills' pretty well, as long as they don't find some another loophole.
|
08-24-07 05:35pm
Reply To Message
|
9
|
SnowDude (0)
|
I think it's a very good step and perhaps they'll find ways around it, but for now I think it addressed the "shill" issue quite well. At the very least, it shows how responsive PU is to our comments and questions about the site. Good work folks!
|
08-29-07 12:51pm
Reply To Message
|
