An open letter to the Community Manager - reviews
Dear Rowena,
I think the time has come to press you on the issue of comments made on reviews. I know you are very busy but the situation is becoming rather discordant and inconsistent.
You have posted some information concerning the content of reviews recently but I can see nothing from you regarding the posting of comments. David Klyne, in the thread titled Reviews, posted some words on the subject on 04.08.19 and my post (pictured below) seeking further information was also reported to you in an effort to establish clarification. Unfortunately, I’ve not seen a response from any source.
Yesterday (10.08.19), a new review appeared which was clearly in breach of the Community Guidelines and several of us commented explaining how the Guidelines answered the poster's question. Seemingly legitimate responses were subsequently Deleted User fairly quickly yet the review remained until early afternoon today when it was quite rightly removed. Can you imagine the confusion this caused?
I have no intention of querying moderation here but, obviously, different people have different views on what is acceptable and what is not and it is that very difference and lack of guidance relating to comments which is causing a less than standardised approach.
Therefore, may I please ask for a definitive clarification of what is, or is not, permitted in comments on reviews to be included in the Guidelines? We, as posters, need to know what is acceptable to yourself and the moderators so that we can all sing from the same song sheet.
Regards.
TW
Comments
-
No problem from me with your letter and time spent writing it.
My opposite view to yours, 😁, if reviews state, " Nice site, nice wardens" then it follows negative comments about wardens, provided they are not abusive etc, are permitted.
Also I think this forum has become a very sterile environment, maybe part of the reason for reduced posters.
I will not post further on this thread so as to respect your approach and not to diminish in anyway your efforts.
(Open to a general chat about the subject mind🙂)
1 -
Thanks, Brit. All I seek to do here is to obtain clarification regarding comments, not the review itself as that has already been given. I’m not intending this to be a debate of the rights and wrongs of the Guidelines. 👍🏻
2 -
Having worked in the public eye all my life it's obvious that everyone can recognise and acknowledged friendliness if they try hard enough. Problem is that even a saint with all patience and approachability can be painted as unfriendly by some who don't get their very own way! That's when comments about those attempting to do their jobs can be deliberately constructed as negative in a most unfair way. Such negative comments don't have to be abusive to be incorrect.
7 -
Hi Tinwheeler,
Thank you for your post and I apologise for any confusion.
With regards to reviews we have always said we would like other members to be able to comment however the intention wasn't for the review to turn into a discussion as we have the forum for this type of conversation. This however has been happening more frequently. Because the conversations can often be about sites that people love they can understandably get quite heated when there are negative comments and arguments can happen when people have strong differing views.
We always want people to be able to review a site they have stayed at with their honest opinion about the site and their experience. We will remove reviews if they contravene the guidelines i.e. are offensive to Club Staff as we have a duty of care or if they may potentially be libellous. However wherever possible the Club will try and post a response. We do also ask that reviews aren't complaints and that complaints are sent directly to the Club to investigate via our complaints and compliments procedure. We do get a lot of reviews that are just a complaint about staff and do not actually review the site. If complaints are sent via the right channels they will be investigated so leaving a review is not the best course of action.
We haven't had guidelines in place before about comments on reviews other than the Club's standard Community Guidelines as we haven't needed them specifically in the past however we do feel this needs to be reviewed in light of the way they are turning into discussions, which unfortunately we do not have the resource to moderate. Ideally responses should only be from someone who has also recently stayed or regularly stays on that particular site. As such we may need to remove the option for commenting in the future. However for now we would really appreciate it if members could avoid turning reviews into discussions and if there is a review you feel needs a response from the Club or that contravenes the guidelines please report this to us.
I hope this helps clarify and I will look to update the 'Guide to Club Together' and 'Community Guidelines' for further clarification.
3 -
I think that the recent problem has been using a review to start a discussion. Indeed there seems an element of spamming with three so called reviews addressing the same point. I would hate to loose the ability to comment on a review solely because of this.
0 -
I don't think that is true, if the site has a problem then state it, for example continuous road noise, unclean facilities, grass not cut or cut too often, bins not emptied... Remember how people complained about early bin emptying and it got changed?
However stating that the wardens are unfriendly, aggressive, rude... is not allowed and rightly so as these are all subjective (and may arise from people not getting their own way or being asked to follow rules) and also could be unfounded and affects wardens. The club has a duty of care to its staff.
Also the best way to deal with complaints is to write in, then it will be investigated fully. And if founded in truth the wardens can be held accountable. Far better than on a review. Surely a formal letter can hardly be sweeping things under the carpet, quite the opposite I would say?
Either way these are the rules we have to abide by.
3 -
‘Not have enough resources to moderate’, comments have been Deleted User regularly, positive & negative ones. The resource seems to be there.
2 -
+1
0 -
These have been moderated by volunteers in their own time rather than Club staff. We want to use Club resource to be there to respond to comments rather than moderate discussions on reviews.
0 -
Please be assured this is most definitely not the case and we appreciate feedback from members which has often been used by the regional managers to make improvements. However we do ask people are not offensive to staff and there has in the past been offensive language and terms used which is not acceptable on our website.
1 -
Thank you for the reply👍🏻
0 -
Perhaps , before any of us become keyboard warriors , we should take a deep breath ,think about it logically . Have i had that extra glass of wine ? Do it next day ,when youve calmed down . Just a thought .Derek
0 -
Hi, Rowena.
Thank you for your response and for re-opening the thread.
I understand completely what is allowed in reviews as it’s made quite clear in the Guidelines, although what is evident is that many reviewers don’t seem to have read those Guidelines.
Comments, which is the topic which prompted my OP, are altogether different as you acknowledge and this is where confusion occurs. You say that ideally comments should be from someone with experience of the site but sometimes it’s not a site specific issue that gives rise to a comment. I see nothing wrong, for instance, with a member pointing a reviewer towards the Club's rules or information leaflets or advising how to make a complaint when that member obviously has more experience of the club than the reviewer. Surely that is aiding the reviewer? I’ve been astounded when helpful replies along those lines have been Deleted User.
We have had a spate of 'unfortunate' reviews over the weekend and I’m sure I’m not the only person to have recognised them as being in breach of the Guidelines and to have reported them. You see, we do self moderate to a certain extent here!
I think from your post at the foot of page 1 you mean that club staff should be able to deal with constructive comments made on reviews while the volunteer moderators clean up the streets, so to speak (no offence!). That makes sense but I think an element of common sense needs to apply both on the part of posters and that of staff/moderators. For instance, I saw some really inappropriate comments made by members earlier today but, equally, I’ve witnessed the deletion of factual and helpful information by moderators.
Things aren’t always black and white so can we say, at least for now, that comments in an ideal world would be from someone who knows the site but that there are a lot of cases where restricting comments in this way would be counterproductive? I think that will allow sensible comments on the review to stand if you and the moderators accept that helpful and informative comments are not the sole preserve of those who have stayed on a particular site.
Thanks again for your input.
3 -
As said,
Good site good warden, is permitted, therefore it follows, good site bad warden is too. Language appropriate.
I can see it though from all sides, so my solution would be simple.
People like and want in today's age to vent their anger immediately, but with as said limited resources to police, image to uphold, and then just tardiness of the site these are issues.
Perhaps a solution is limiting replies to 3 or a number as to be low enough to satisfy the above. ( I can see the obvious, but that would have to be )
Then if a reviewer or indeed another member wishes to carry on with the debate, then the general forum can be used, where resources appear to me to be adequate.
As a note, to have a system that frustrates a person into not complaining doesnt help any party.
There are email addresses on the web site for complainants to use, but who in anger is going to look for them?
1 -
Just for info and apologies for brining up over there, but if you submit a review via ACSI they scrutinise it prior to posting and on occasions they censor them, I know cos a couple of mine have been altered. This seems to be common practice
0 -
To your second paragraph, no because it is all about protecting staff from possibly untrue allegations which may besmirch their reputations. Wardens have no right of reply. The club has stated it has a duty of care to all of it's staff. Complaining on here about the site being untidy... is one thing and should/could be done while complaints about being aggressive, rude, unfriendly... is simply cyber bullying.
The club (like schools) can only act if there is a written complaint, usually that sorts outs the real complaints from the 'insincere'
3 -
TW
I think a better course of action if you feel a review goes against the Guidelines/T&C's would be to link the review here without comment (by all means also report) and that would allow the mods here to hide the review until it can be dealt with by Rowena and her team. It is often the action of making the initial comment that kicks off a discussion which Rowena has clearly indicated she does not want to happen. I think you are laying too much store by thinking you are being helpful to the reviewer by pointing out the guidelines as I suspect, in truth, they don't much care what you, or anyone else, thinks and are only interested in their own point of view. That also assumes, of course, that they ever come back to read the comments which in most cases I doubt they do?
0 -
The problem is two fold. Firstly, as with any business, occasionally there are some vindictive, malicious, downright bullies who come along and vent their unreasonableness towards individuals who they know do not have a direct right of reply. Secondly, they get away with it because the checking of such reviews is hardly picked up due to lack of time/ resources/etc.... Hence the reason why on here, many readers are concerned for the welfare of such staff and bring such instances to the attention of those who can, eventually, do something about it.
Any intelligent person can write a negative review about their experiences without resorting to petty personal insults and name calling. Bullies are seldom up to such a task, and it tells the reader more about the reviewer than what or who is being reviewed. Genuine bad experiences are better taken up at a higher level than a public forum. If one has the capacity to be able to do it in an objective, honest manner.
6 -
As I’ve stated before, David, reviewers often do come back to their reviews and, as I have also said previously, I have been thanked by them for pointing them in the right direction.
Let’s let Rowena decide how things should proceed shall we?
0 -
Frankly I am appalled at the criticism of wardens in reviews and equally appalled at the responses they receive. It is all so totally unnecessary but if visitors want to complain about wardens via a review rather than make a formal complaint direct to HQ, I really do not have a problem with that but it really should not provoke the discussions it does.
The facility to comment on reviews is really unnecessary. Members should only be able to make comments on previous reviews only by adding a further review when the have visited a site.
peedee
1 -
+1 totally.
I don't think mods have the authority to make such recommendations? or do they? Either way any such rules I think should come from Ro and then the mods implement them in a consistent impartial manner.
0 -
again totally agree, fully with both paragraphs.
It is all too easy to write a basically cowardly anonymous allegation, knowing there is no comeback, but once a formal written complaint is asked for, all allegations, except for the sincere ones, seem to evaporate.
many readers are concerned for the welfare of such staff
It amazing to me how may posters appear not at all concerned, but thankfully the club treats its staff far better.
0
