| REVIEWER | RATING & REVIEW |
 | lmorovan (19)
05/06/2008 | And how will you ever enforce it, unless you make it impossible to rate without writing a review? I have shown a clear situation where a member has over 3000 (three thousand) ratings and not a single review. Where did those rating go to?
Funny? Maybe. But true.
(1 voted this helpful, 5 funny and 0 agree) |
 | irishgit (155)
04/23/2008 | Define "artificial." When there is one or two items of value on list otherwise comprised of dreck, its entirely legitimate to rate some '5' and the rest '1'.
Personally, I don't see the big deal. Its not like the fate of the world hangs in the balance on the rating order on any of these lists.
(2 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | VirileVagabond (38)
07/10/2006 | Most of the other comments seem to reconcile with my gut reaction to RateItAll preventing reviewers from raising an item on a list by giving items above it a 1 rating, namely that any possible cure would be worse than the disease. Without a confession, RateItAll has no reasonable way to determine if a one star rating is made in good faith or merely to lower the item on the list. The real world often relies on good faith and discretion, and I'm afraid that this site is not immune.
(4 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | numbah16tdhaha (162)
07/26/2005 | Another common offense and the number one source of ones given out here, I'd bet. People low ball other items to make their favorite higher on the list. A wierd, obbsessive kind of mentality, but suprisingly common.
(7 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | kamylienne (84)
11/10/2003 | I'm just a little (okay, REALLY) ticked about one incident of artificially DEFLATING a particular item out of childish spite. As nauseating as it is, I can deal with the EastEnder fans writing about their lost love; I can deal with their negativity towards the BBC, to some extent. I can't, however, see any good reason why they'd trash the DISCOVERY CHANNEL just because of its minor affiliation with the BBC. If you've got beef with someone, do you take it up with their neighbors, too? If they really disliked the Discovery Channel, fine, I can accept that, but their sole reasoning is their connection to the BBC. That severely pisses me off.
(5 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | AndrewScott (73)
11/10/2003 | I'm all in favor of promoting RateItAll to friends. However, directing an army of likeminded people how to vote for a specific item isn't that much better than the individual who stuffs a ballot box personally. Other people may be holding the cans of spray paint, but the graffiti was still the will of someone orchestrating deliberately unbalanced, deceptive list results. The worst manipulators occasionally appear to be part of a promotional team, possibly having been paid to blitz the Web to create internet buzz (Example: the vomit-worthy Justin Guarini debut CD). While there are gray areas to negotiate, I have no qualms with the RateItAll staff exercising their right to clamp down on the most annoying blitzers.
(5 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | magellan (179)
11/10/2003 | This is another gray area. How do you define artificially inflate a ranking? Are the hundreds of people who have been on the site protesting the cancellation of eastenders artificially inflating its ranking? If they really feel that way, it's hard to call it artificial. However, you have to admit the fan clubs who come in and rate Ricky Martin a 5 and everyone else a 1 are pretty irritating... that's you end up with bands like the Rolling Stones with a bad rating - it detracts from the credibility and integrity of the site. I'm not really sure how to handle this one...
(7 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
| 1-7 OF 7 | View All |
