Damned Useless Review, So It Is!! (Rating other's reviews: on dooyoo and beyond)

Member Name: kenjohn

Product:	Rating other's reviews: on dooyoo and beyond
Date:	29/11/07 (558 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: I rate according to my own beliefs and conscience

Disadvantages: Not all people would agree with my policy

Well, there's a coincidence if ever there was one.
This is my 500th review here at dooyoo, and it damn near coincides with my 7th birthday at the site, which I joined way back on the 7th December, 2000. So my 500th little offering really *HAD* to be something dooyoo/opinion site related, now didn't it?

So what better than something *ALWAYS* guaranteed to stimulate some debate, and sometimes even raise some hackles; rating other member's reviews.
I'm currently an active member of three opinion sites. Dooyoo, (of course) Ciao, and over in the good old USA the first of them all, Epinions. Of the three sites dooyoo has always been my personal favourite, and it's still here where I tend to post my reviews first and spend most of my time. So I'll primarily write about the rating method I use here at dooyoo, but it would be practically the same for all three sites, the only exception being the "exceptional" and "off topic" ratings which exist over at Ciao but not here at dooyoo.

For a ordinary consumer review, and for that read a review that is about a product/service/movie/DVD etc, then my personal rating method differs little (if at all) from what is recommended by the dooyoo opmeisters. These recommendations used to be listed here at dooyoo, but a quick glance through the current "Help" section of the Community Pages shows they appear to have been removed during the recent revamp of the site. (If I'm wrong, then do tell me in the comment box)
Basically, rating is a relatively straightforward process, at least for a consumer review. If it has loads of detail, has plenty of personal user experience, and is well written I generally will give it a "very useful" rating, unless of course some of the actual detail itself is incorrect. Slightly less info or personal user experience gets a "useful" rating. The other two ratings, "somewhat useful" and "not useful" are generally reserved for very short reviews with little or no detail whatsoever, or for copied or off topic reviews.

Where I differ somewhat from the generally accepted rating guidelines is when it comes to rating opinions/reviews in the Speaker's Corner Category. I served a fairly long spell (2 years plus) as the Category Guide at Speaker's Corner and during this time I followed the accepted norm for rating a SC review. If it was well written and articulate, then I would rate it as very useful even if I disagreed vehemently with the content or opinion being expressed.
During this period I even recommended such opinions to dooyoo for consideration for Crown awards. I did this as I was then the Guide for the category, and didn't want my own personal opinions about a topic or subject to be even slightly instrumental in causing a review not to be awarded a Crown. Now before you all go jumping down my throat, I *KNOW* that it isn't simply a Guide's recommendation that is considered when a Crown award is being handed out, but I have to be honest and say that in all my years of Guiding I don't think I can ever recall an occasion where a review I recommended *DIDN'T* get a wee jaggy bunnet. (Crown) So the simple truth is that a Guide's recommendation carries a lot of weight with the dooyoo opmeisters. I suppose that's why they are appointed as Guides in the first instance.

Anyhow, back to the present. A while back I reconsidered my position on SC reviews, and now I rate these *NOT* on the quality of writing or whether or not it is articulate, but purely on the basis of how I personally feel about the subject.
Let me explain why. For instance, I personally am a practicing Christian, and take my spiritual well being very seriously. Let's say that somebody writes a review advocating the practice of devil worship. I realise that's a fairly extreme example, but in all conscience I couldn't bring myself to rate a review of that nature as anything other than "not useful", no matter how well it was written or how persuasive the argument put forward. For me, it would *ALWAYS* be "not useful".
Now some of you might say that that goes totally against the normal rating guidelines, and I suppose to a certain extent you would have a valid point. But for me I see it simply as rating according to my own personal beliefs.
For starters, a review in SC is *NOT* a consumer review, and is hardly likely to result in any sales or loss of revenue on the part of dooyoo or any manufacturer because I happen to rate the review as not useful.
I will always leave a comment for the writer telling them exactly why I have down rated their review. In fact, I often engage in some *VERY* lively debate in the comment box, both on my own opinions and on those of other writers.

Conversely, I don't expect any reader of my own SC reviews to rate them highly if they go against their own personal beliefs or viewpoint. If you think I'm talking through a hole in my body rather than my mouth, then have the bottle to say so, and rate my review accordingly. In fact, I'm never happier than when one of my more controversial SC reviews gets a poor rating, as to me it shows it has made people think. And I'm always more than willing and able to enter into debate on the subject with someone in the comment box. For me, this is part of the attraction of dooyoo, and a part of the site I really thoroughly enjoy.

So let's be having your comments.

~~~~~~~~~~

© KenJ November 2007

~~~~~~~~~~

Summary: Speaker's Corner reviews are *NOT* consumer orientated, and should not be rated as such.