I'm starting to go through and rate a bunch of the reviews I missed rating during the write off and I've come across an issue...

I've noticed a few reviews of similar products (like different colors of the same products) that are almost word for word exactly the same. These are from people involved in the write off who write really great reviews and whom I honestly like. I really don't want to give anything less than a VH, because they are all very helpful. But they violate the duplicate post rule and therefore rightfully don't deserve it, right?

All of these reviews have already received many VH ratings from all kinds of people, including advisors and leads. So who am I to come in with my 38 reviews and 12 people on my WOT to be the only person out of 15 or more to rate NH?

So here I am, a lowly newbie.... wondering what is the right thing to do? Advise me oh venerated epinions gurus!

(and if you recognize yourself in this post... I BEG you to put me out of my misery and go change one of said duplicate reviews by the required 100 words!)

In my opinion it is wrong since you said they are word for word the same. I mean it's possible that someone could write (legitimately) on a product in red and the same product in blue - it's possible they would have very similar wording. But if they are word for word it is blatantly copy and paste - not even an effort to write the second review. That is not good practice :(

**Update: I think there is nothing wrong with reviewing both products, but both reviews should be original - ie you should take the time to write each from scratch. This is why I don't write about two similar products back to back because it's hard to think of new words/phrases the second time. But if you are going to do it, at least write the whole review each time. Don't copy and paste :(

Chances are, the entries were read by Amy and Helen, and either were accepted as entries (or not) already.

W/O aside, though, you could go ahead and email them seperately with your comment (as opposed to having the comment public first) and rate NH on the duplicate (the one that was posted second) and see what kind of a response comes back from your email.

If there is no response after a day or two, I would probably leave the comment publicly and look at some of their other reviews because it probably isn't the first time they've done it.

There are lots of potential reasons why they did it and what their philosophy was, but they shouldn't have a problem explaining them to the membership.

Yeah. Well. Here's how I look at that kinda thang... and it likely doesn't mesh with the view of others, but oh well...

If a product is listed under multiple colors, well, that's just stupid. Nothing changes with each item except that color. Same quality, etc....

Tell me, which color will a consumer look up reviews on first?

No clue? Me either...

I consider the Listing to be duplicate, and personally see nothing wrong with covering the bases of the various colors... having said that, it is within site policy to do this as long as each review be changed by a mere 100 words....

On the other hand... to do that as contest entries is a bit smarmy. (you know, mainly cuz I didn't think of it first...)


SmallStuffDoc

Lotsofjoy, please email me the links to the reviews in question so that I can give them a thorough going over.

It's the same conversation we had recently about reviewing perfume - in different sized bottles. Ask 10 Epinionaters and you'll get 10 different opinions about whether a reviewer SHOULD review the same product (in different size, different color, etc) and if they should, then should the reviews be completely different or is merely changing 100 words adequate. Same conversation here. Same opinion here. Mine's just different from yours, I guess.

Like I said... they are very helpful reviews and the only differnce between the listings is the color. Which is why I am reticent to just down rate it.

*sigh* I'm conflicted.

in the future is please LEADS do not add products like this. I've used this ex. before. In sports there were many body bars all with different weights. I reviewed a few but not all because I ran out of 100 different words to use. I didn't ask for them to be added. Now when I do (medicine balls are an example, they come in various weights so I could have asked that each one be added and reviewed them and changed 100 words but I don't feel good doing that) ask that something like this be added I ask that ONE medicine ball be added. It doesn't matter which one. The ONLY differences are the weight and the colors and that's easily covered on one review.

Do I really have to tell someone that a 15 pound medicine ball is heavier than an 8 pound medicine ball. Just my 2 cents. I agree Doc. It is a database problem as much as anyone's problem. Let's just be careful and make sure the reviews are different enough:) jo

Here's an example:

I have no idea what kind of review this is for, but I just thought of an excellent opportunity to score MAD IS.

Case in point: The Apple iPod Nano.

The nano comes in two different colors and two different capacities. Regardless of color or capacity, functionality is the same.

You could own a 2 gig Black Nano and have all the info you need to review the 2 gig white Nano as well as the 4 gig white and black nanos. All you'd have to do was change a few lines about the color and the capacity of the iPod, and you've got a new review. Sure, you'd be reviewing two different products, but they are basically still the same product.

I could easily come up with the 100 word difference to describe the color and capacity of the iPod. Two paragraphs of the whole review would be different. That's it.

The question is...would that make the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th reviews Not Helpful because I'm still posting the same core review four times? What if somebody was searching for info about a Black iPod, not knowing that they were the same thing as the White one? Your review of the white nano would be basically the same as a black one.

We all know how much IS Electronics reviews rake in, and it would be real easy to take advantage of this. Would your reviews be any less valid?

I'm not saying what lotsofjoy found is wrong or unethical, but I'm just pointing out how it could go both ways. Lots of things on this site are listed by color, especially in the Games and Computer Hardware section, and the products are exactly the same.

I have poked around and found a ton of examples where I think it is okay to post the same information within a review.

I of course am no expert:)

I recently wrote two reviews on accessories for my daughter's American Girl Marisol Doll. The meat of the review is very different, however, I do tell the same story which caused me to purchase Marisol in the first place and why I bought all of her accessories. I did try to tell it in different words, but would struggle if I decided to write any more reviews on Marisol's accessories!!!

I think back ground information is vital for a consumer and because of my belief in back groound information, you are going to find my cute little dumb story in both of my Marisol accessory reviews.

Is this wrong???

I also go on to give some general information about product availability in a seperate section at the end. It is the same or very similar in both reviews.

Is this wrong?

How else do you give a consumer an entire picture without including the vital information (there are only so many ways I can tell my silly background story)?

Happy Tuesday!

Courtney

My opinion: Nothing wrong at all. (As long as 100 words differ so they're "legal") In fact, I would WANT the same story to be told, because, it's the same purchase, so the story SHOULD be the same!

We need to get some of the Electronics leads in here to look at this.

What do you mean by in violation? The same backstory shouldn't be used for multiple products? I'm not sure I understand your premise, but I considered cutting and pasting my backstory on all the method reviews I posted during the w/o. Every single one of them were bought because of my plumbing problems, and I was often so tired I just wanted to duplicate the story instead of writing it in a new way each time. I didn't because it just isn't me, but since the rest of the review about my use and the performance of each product was quite different and way longer than 100 words, how would it be in violation of anything to use the same introduction?

I'm with Patty on this one.

If I wrote on various colors of say ink pens or highlighters, then I'd space it out in time and start from scratch on the review. Some of those actually are quite different (like one shade in the highlighter may be just right and another a bit too dark and hard to read through). But, I'd be really bored sitting down and doing every color at once, and often I don't have more than one color at a time.

On the Electronics board, speaking of MP3 players, one of the Leads called it 'hits harvesting'. Yeah it is, but if it meets the 100 word difference, then I guess it only comes to a matter of ethics.

Here's an idea - Write your main review, then for the other colors post an Express Review with a link bank to your main review. We don't get paid for the Express stuff anyway. Just write something like, 'This is a great MP3 player for the money. Lots of great features. Blah blah blah. For my full review of the White one, please visit http:\\www......'

We know there is nothing wrong with including links to other reviews in your reviews, like when you review a movie sequel and provide a link back to your review of the first movie.

Sometimes I think it's funny when we act like members are not consumers. What we find helpful when reading reviews shouldn't be different from what non-members find helpful. But in this case, I think only members read many reviews of one item. If I am looking for a review of something in a category I don't write in and don't know any of the TRs, I read one of the first three or four reviews on top and then look for one more by someone who had a different opinion to compare. I would never read the reviews on black ipods and then read the reviews on white ipods. I would select the color with the most reviews under it and read that one, even if it under the green ipod when I would plan to buy the orange one.

I'm playing dual roles here.

First, I'm acting like a consumer who wants the best access to the most information about a particular product.

Second, I'm acting like a member who wants to get more reads and earn more IS.

Yes, I do write to help consumers, but I also write to help earn myself some cash. I'm up for anything that both helps consumers and earns me mo' money at the same time, so long as it is within the rules.

I find this to be the lesser of two evils situation. Ok, its probably annoying to a lot of people that some folks are "exploiting the system" to make money on similar reviews. This doesn't bother me that much because the categories I write in aren't really bringing in the big bucks anyway.

However, to me what is worse is having a consumer come into the website and see lots and lots of blank categories, or categories with very few reviews. If there are categories for black, white, purple, and pink widgets (not that there should be, but if there are), I would like to see them all filled with quality reviews so the consumer feels that Epinions has good database coverage. If this results in some folks hitting the IS jackpot, so be it. It doesn't really matter to me if someone went through and rewrote the whole thing or not if the information presented would be essentiallyt the same anyway. It seems silly to require rewriting beyond the 100 word rule just for the sake of rewriting.

Of course, the ideal situation would be to eliminate very similar widget categories, but in the meantime I vote for database coverage.

Michelle

Definitely on board with you magic word search, but not holding my breath.

The problem with Eps indicating a color at all is that most companies discontinue the old colors and add new ones all the time. That's why having all the colors filter into one heading is better for shopping.

They are duplicate reviews in my opinion. If a person has two different colored iPods, they should review either just one, or write two different reviews from scratch.

The TOS says reviews must have 100 different words or something, but I don't think two reviews that are exactly the same except for 101 words should fly either. There is a difference between the letter of the law (100 word requirement) and the spirit (write unique reviews). A category lead did this once, and I stand by my conclusion that it is Not Helpful.

With all the talk about consumer helpfulness, one needs to keep in mind us, the writers as well. We write the reviews, and our sense that the system is being gamed, that IS is unfair, is important too. Maybe by having duplicate color reviews, we get a few more hits. What if it bothered people so much, they stopped writing often on the site or altogether? There's a lot of potential hits for epinions there that could evaporate.

While it may be quite drastic to assume that people would quit the site in protest, people are more likely to write reviews when they feel they are fairly compensated (i.e. we might not get a lot of IS, but we want it to be fair). People are more likely to tell their friends about this site if they think the system is fair. Honestly, I will probably be less compelled to join such a write-off (ones with prizes involved) in the future because of this.

And how different are black and white Nanos? Just the color! I think most consumers are intelligent enough to know that so if they don't find a review for a white nano, they'll read a review on a black one and just keep in mind "The one I want will be WHITE though" and find that review just as helpful. If we're really trying to just be helpful to consumers, just write a blurb "the white Nano is umm...white instead of black. It scratches easier" on the end of one of your reviews. I'm sure most consumers will find it if they try.

And the multiple posts being there doesn't make duplicate reviews alright. The system lets you post the same post over and over and over again in the message board or edit your post's contents to cover up something you said. Doesn't make it alright.

And it's not like there's a dearth of Nano reviews either.

If someone wants to get double the IS, they should do double the work. I'm not saying don't write reviews of something you own in different colors, I'm saying write two unique reviews. Get a little creative with it. I think that's fair.

I'm really surprised that the discussion went this long. Mostly because I find it a really simple issue and a bit because it didn't devolve into off-topicness yet.

Here's what gets me: the general consensus when someone deletes and reposts a review to erase negative comments/ratings is that the review deserves a NH because the user is "gaming the system" (stick with me here).

Now, there is no Epinions rule or FAQ that forbids deleting and reposting a review (we've already established that it generally doesn't fall under the "one per product" rule). In fact, it's necessary in some situations, like turning an express review into a regular review. So the only reason the offending reviews get NH's is because concientious raters use their judgement and common sense to determine the user's likely intent.

In short, what I'm trying to say is that we already have a precedent for rating NH if we think someone is gaming the system.

Excuse my langauge, but OMGZWTFBBQ!!LOLZ1!1! Why are we discussing this at length? We already have an answer; if we reasonably think the user is trying to game the system, give 'em an NH already!

There's one clear example that I can remember, and I believe it was resolved by the user removing one of the offending reviews. Two iPod reviews were written, one for black, one for white. What threw up flags for those is that they both said exactly the same thing -- down to the comparisons of the colors, so neither had any "original content" -- but an attempt was made to mix text around as if people wouldn't notice (as I remember it). It caused something of a stir because it seemed like an attempt to game the system on a high-profile, high-earnings product.

The point here is, it's usually obvious when someone's trying to take advantage of multiple listings for the same product. Let's use our heads more (for thinking) and our fingers less (for typing) here.

Just read the first few and the last few posts on this extremely long thread so forgive me if I'm repeating what's already been posted.

What about magazines? Do they come in on a feed?