Questionable and Inappropriate Posts [Site]
2010 Jul 19
The thinking is that the experienced members of the site are free to exercise their own judgment. If your post gets flagged as questionable by one person inappropriately there should be a host of others who are ready to undo that. Each "gold" user gets one vote (thumbs up, down, or none) in this case. The principle is the same as the thumbs up/down vendor rating -- in the long run, opinions average out to be correct.
The only unfavourable reviews that I've seen marked inappropriate were those that contained vague or hyperbolic statements (e.g. "worst food i've had in my life!" or "the steak tasted like crap").
Please don't let it stop you from posting your reviews. It really comes down to the "respect" part of the posting rules. Write your comments with a modicum of tact and nobody will ever flag them. :)
The only unfavourable reviews that I've seen marked inappropriate were those that contained vague or hyperbolic statements (e.g. "worst food i've had in my life!" or "the steak tasted like crap").
Please don't let it stop you from posting your reviews. It really comes down to the "respect" part of the posting rules. Write your comments with a modicum of tact and nobody will ever flag them. :)
2010 Jul 19
For me I flag a post as inappropriate if it is as FF mentioned - hyperbolic. Or someone does nothing but lash out at a vendor with vitriolic menace. Calling out the bad points of an establishment is completely in order as long as it is a balanced report - either citing things that happened to be good, or in those cases where it was a completely negative experience, balanced by the appearance of levelheadedness in the review. So even a completely miserable experience being reported would not necessarily be flagged inappropriate by me, as long as the person reporting has an appearance of levelheadedness.
I've also marked things as inappropriate when someone comments on another person's inappropriateness, in what appeared to me to be simply a difference of opinion. i.e. If person A reports something, and Person B flags it as inappropriate and then offers their own comment on why. I have flagged Person B's comment as inappropriate when it appeared to me that they were only flagging Person A because of a difference in opinion, and that there did not seem anything wrong to me with Person A's original comment.
I've also marked things as inappropriate when someone comments on another person's inappropriateness, in what appeared to me to be simply a difference of opinion. i.e. If person A reports something, and Person B flags it as inappropriate and then offers their own comment on why. I have flagged Person B's comment as inappropriate when it appeared to me that they were only flagging Person A because of a difference in opinion, and that there did not seem anything wrong to me with Person A's original comment.
2010 Jul 19
I will often flag as inappropriate if they comment on the following:
1. Claims that food made them sick. This is usually not provable, so don't say it.
2. Negative reviews that don't talk about the food ( will flag sometimes ) This is a food site... if you had an argument with the owner... you need to frame it as part of your whole eating experience, and not just a whine-fest. Normally we keep the whining to the forums ;-)
3. Negative reviews that end with a recommendation of another vendor. This guideline is stretched from time to time, but the reason behind it is to easily ferret out vendors that place negative reviews of competitors, while recommending themselves. We can't stop them from doing it, but we can stop them from being stupid about it.
4. I will sometimes flag as inappropriate, postings that have the odour of 'shill'. Some examples from this site were employees or ex-employees who were trying to pump, or disparage establishments.
All of these rules are applied less stringently, the more posts you have, and if you have a real username (i.e. not 'New User 2045')
1. Claims that food made them sick. This is usually not provable, so don't say it.
2. Negative reviews that don't talk about the food ( will flag sometimes ) This is a food site... if you had an argument with the owner... you need to frame it as part of your whole eating experience, and not just a whine-fest. Normally we keep the whining to the forums ;-)
3. Negative reviews that end with a recommendation of another vendor. This guideline is stretched from time to time, but the reason behind it is to easily ferret out vendors that place negative reviews of competitors, while recommending themselves. We can't stop them from doing it, but we can stop them from being stupid about it.
4. I will sometimes flag as inappropriate, postings that have the odour of 'shill'. Some examples from this site were employees or ex-employees who were trying to pump, or disparage establishments.
All of these rules are applied less stringently, the more posts you have, and if you have a real username (i.e. not 'New User 2045')
mark_ottawa
Mark