|
|
|
Comment |
Sorted by
Date Written |
I think that... (Reply to this comment)
by Zeira
to just give someone a NR or SR just pays them for writing bad reviews. I find that when I find someone like this I usually block them. Why should I pay them for something that offends when most of us take the time to write quality reviews that are worth reading?
Great comment on a touchy subject!
Sharlene
|
Jun 24 '01
2:43 pm PDT
|
|
Yeah, I complained to others (Reply to this comment)
by jo.com
that this is their "new" policy. They want the community to police ourselves:) jo
|
Jun 22 '01
4:43 pm PDT
|
|
A clarification (Reply to this comment)
by pgifford
I'm not particularly concerned about swear words, at least not enough to make a big deal about. The "review" in question talked about how the author (a female) would have oral and anal sex with her father. There are plenty of places on the web where that would be appropriate; I don't think Epinions is one of those places.
Thanks, everyone, for reading the article and participating in the discussion!
Paul
|
Jun 22 '01
4:32 am PDT
|
|
Re: ..... (Reply to this comment)
by andaryl
Epinions response sounds like a load of bull. How many places do you see the phrase "Management reserves the right to refuse admission". It's their site (their property), they pay us, they can do whatever they want with the material. I think they're jsut scared of losing members good or bad.
I reported someone for writing sex stories instead of reviews and a couple of days later they were all deleted.
It does seem like inaction now though, someone copied someone else's review and by mistake I sent the abuse as "duplicate reviews". They told me duplicate reviews are no longer red-flagged.
Another irritation over the past 2 weeks has been gymnast16, someone who has posted over 200 reviews, all NH, but because of the quantity had 1500 hits. I wrote and told epinions that there's nothing against the TOS but they need to stop this. They should not pay for a NH rating. It can't be difficult to apply a formula that counts H's and VH's instead of hits.
Maybe they should fire their lawyer, or did he go in the last round of layoffs?
|
Jun 22 '01
1:24 am PDT
|
|
..... (Reply to this comment)
by teddiec
I don't know the extent of the member you addressed's offensiveness, but I do remember a time when Epinions did remove some accounts based on offensive content-though only those that specifically aimed thier vitrol at other members. (Adolph_Hitler, Nazilover, etc.) They know they are within their rights to make these decisions and I think the refusal to has less to do with legalities than it does the lack of manpower. (and unfortunately I agree with the other commenter-they just don't really care).
You (almost) have to pity these members who think they are really putting it over on the world by writing trash and getting a few pennies-if only Epinions would pay for rates instead of "hits" it would put a stop to most of it..
Ellen
|
Jun 21 '01
9:19 pm PDT
|
|
Rating system works well enough (Reply to this comment)
by e_mustafa
If you don't like a review, give it a NH. I think this system is just fine, and there's no need to censor someones work, because once you start doing that, the question remains: where do you draw the line?
|
Jun 21 '01
9:17 pm PDT
|
|
Why... (Reply to this comment)
by sherrylee
...don't you try typing the 'F' word into the Epinions search engine? Or how about 'sh*t'? There are many products (mainly books & music, which are protected by the 1st Amendment) in the database with these words as part of the product name. The database also lists pornographic movies, magazines and books plus many 'how to' sort of sex manuals for review.
No one ever said Epinions was a family site. Besides, content blocked by the community is unavailable on Search Engines. Reviews that are blocked to non users are also blocked to search as blocked reviews are password encrypted; you need an Epinions account and password to access them.
Just for giggles, I typed the name of a highly rated review of one of the dirty word books into Google; it came up. I also typed the name of a low rated dirty word book review, and it did not come up. But, because I was able to link to Epinons by using the 'f' word in a search, do you also think Epinions should not list these books/records in the database? I think I may have read one of the reviews you are talking about, and I agree it is the worst kind of trash. Once, however, you start this kind of thing, where do you stop? There are some well respected reviewers here who write many reviews on adult content movies and videos; it's hard to write a review of this sort of thing without getting a bit offensive to someone. But it is in the database. Everyone is offended by something; I find reviews of ultra violent childrens entertainment (like the WWF) to be more obscene than reviews of "Playboys Babes of Baywatch". I'm sure there are many who would disagree.
People who are really worried about their kids reading dirty words should get filtering software or monitor their kids when on the internet. They can see one heck of a lot more offensive stuff elsewhere online.
I respect your opinion, and agree that the people who write this garbage are offensive. On this kind of site, however, where such a wide range of topics are available to discuss and review, I think that content cannot be policed to any large extent. There could be no possible general consensus as to where to draw the line. In context, I don't find sexual content or dirty words to be obscene. You probably do. See? No consensus.
Sherry Lee
P.S. In the past, the 'obscene' clause has been used to remove racist content, which I believe is something considered obscene by everyone (except the racists).
|
Jun 21 '01
8:26 pm PDT
|
|
Maybe they're thinking like a business? (Reply to this comment)
by DrDad
Another point to consider is that Epinions may be trying to function as a business, and a profitable one at that.
Epinions may have weighed the cost of offensive posts against the cost of removing offensive posts. Perhaps they determined that writing the code or hiring the personnel to remove offensive posts costs more than it saves.
However, that doesn't mean they want offensive posts at their site. The solution they offer is to give members the strength to make those posts invisible to non-members and almost invisible to members.
I do think you're right to care about this situation, and I too wish Epinions would take a stronger stand against abusers, but not if it hurts the company financially.
You end your last comment with "Why should I care more about Epinions than Epinions does?" I think Epinions cares, but about different things. I get the feeling that Epinions has bigger fish to fry in its attempt to avoid becoming a dead.com company. Thus, they leave the small fish (abusers) to us.
What would hurt Epinions worse than the abusers would be the departure of upstanding members. If we as caring members get fed up with the abuse and leave, then the abusers win. Because I don't want that to happen, I hope you will continue to care and use the rating system and block list to help Epinions.
(Wow, that last sentence sounded like something Nirav would have said. I better shut up now or you'll think I'm a company lackey.) :)
Anyway, you've written a very thought-provoking, discussion-inducing article, and I was taken by your title and intro. Well done.
Bret
|
Jun 21 '01
7:50 pm PDT
|
|
911. (Reply to this comment)
by DrJ008
I agree that Epinions needs to start policing the site to a better degree(along with the user agreement clarifications). But, I also think that simply NH-ing a review is also sufficient in dismissing these would-be offenders.
Sure the occasional profane dumper might slither through the cracks, but the majority are policed by the members themselves. Considering the state of Epinions at the moment and the pathetic time-table they see fit to adhere to, I don't think we can realistically ask the Epinions staff to do this at the moment.
They can't even send out E-mail alerts, for god's sake, how are they going to peruse every review and essay for "obscene content"? I understand that these crass writings are reported, but considering the fact that Epinions is picking up new hacks, left and right, along with internal down-sizing, this site is becoming terribly cluttered with a staff that appears to be overworked.
Some nice food for thought, though.
Regards,
DrJ008
|
Jun 21 '01
7:27 pm PDT
|
|
I do think epinions needs to do more (Reply to this comment)
by susiee
However, if a review has an overall rating of SH or NH, it is not shown to non-members, so only members will see it. Not quite sure how that works when doing a search.
|
Jun 21 '01
7:25 pm PDT
|
|
Re: The lawsuit issue is a non-starter... (Reply to this comment)
by pgifford
You wrote: "The bigger issue is, why do you care? Is there some word or string of words that is so bothersome it could actually cause damage to readers looking for product advice. The lame reviews with obscenity will be knocked out of visibility for non-members"
The review I read goes beyond bad words. Heck, I've seen plenty of bumper stickers and shirts with swear words on them and while I think they're pretty low class I could deal with my kids seeing them (when they're old enough to read). In my opinion, the review was pornographic. That's one (of many I'm sure) no one needs to see.
Why do I care? I care because I don't think it belongs here and degrades the community as a whole (and the whole thing about kids coming across it...the review may be buried but the user isn't). I care more that Epinions doesn't care. Maybe you're right, maybe I shouldn't care. After all, why should I care more about Epinions than Epinions does?
|
Jun 21 '01
7:15 pm PDT
|
|
Amen, brother! (Reply to this comment)
by Greatpilgrim
I loved your beginning...it's neither here nor there, but I'll bet you'll get hits!...but what I actually wanted to say was that you are taking a great stand on this issue. You're bold enough to say that 1st amendment rights DON'T give people the right to publish their obscene junk in a public forum; and you're also bold enough to call Epinions for what they are - doublefaced. Very good point - why bother to put "obscene, child pornographic, offensive" at all in the TOS if they aren't going to follow up with it? Excellent essay!
Victoria
|
Jun 21 '01
7:14 pm PDT
|
|
I very much agree... (Reply to this comment)
by iarlin
I was heavily involved in writing and reading opinions here at epinions.com for quite some time. I actually have over 600 people referred by me to this site. But a while ago I started coming less often, because I started to find those few members who are truly sick.
I and many others were quick to report these members to the epinions staff, expecting to have the problem solved in a matter of days. As you found out, that didn't happen. I have told the epinions people that the site is really theirs. They have the right, under the rules they wrote, to change the policies at any time. They can simply say any profanity, any content that they arbitrarily decide to remove can be, as they have ownership of the site. If someone posts a message on property belonging to me, they do NOT have first amendment rights.
Unfortunately, with everyone suing everyone, people are afraid of being sued even when they are in the right. I recently advised someone NOT to patent an idea. Why? Because under their circumstance, most likely someone would see the public information about the patent, steal the basic idea, patent a few similar ones, and sue the original patent holder for infringement. That's actually become a common situation in the US.
So the epinions staff decided to ignore their own policies, and just let anyone do what they want.
It is sad. Maybe someday there will be a different staff.
Thank you for writing your opinion, and taking the time to read my comment.
|
Jun 21 '01
7:13 pm PDT
|
|
The lawsuit issue is a non-starter... (Reply to this comment)
by Mr.Eyore
a dodge, a ruse. There's nothing illegal about epinions ermoving whatever they want from the site and anyone who tried to sue on it would have their case dismissed, with costs. It's a private company, and there is no 1st amendment guarantee in this situation. But not wanting to do legal research is nothing new for epinions. Nor is not wanting to have to police the site every time someone doesn't like what a particular opinion has to say.
The bigger issue is, why do you care? Is there some word or string of words that is so bothersome it could actually cause damage to readers looking for product advice. The lame reviews with obscenity will be knocked out of visibility for non-members, and even for members, after the review garners its 15-20 hits right off the bat (the same number it would get in the amount of time it would take epinions to pull the review), nobody will ever read it again.
|
Jun 21 '01
7:02 pm PDT
|
|
Does profanity represent Epinions? (Reply to this comment)
by secondmidnite
It is to my understanding that any company can decide what type of content they think will be best representative of the overall site. That's what the terms of use is supposed to state. If someone can post profane remarks then why do they even bother with a usage greement?
Get some backbone.
~ SM
|
Jun 21 '01
7:00 pm PDT
|
|
|
|
