Forum
Comments:
-
- on Thu 08 Jan 2009
- 12:04:11 AM UTC
I suppose it's alright to
I suppose it's alright to rate the information using Vendor Reliability if the site is not actually selling anything or providing a service. I would only give a site like that bad vendor reliability if the information is potentially dangerous or following it could lead to dangerous consequences for example: instructing you to take a battery apart.
-
- on Thu 08 Jan 2009
- 07:55:15 AM UTC
Definition
The word "vendor" generally means an entity that is selling something. However, loosely defined I suppose it could mean "selling" advice and not something physical.
In that sense then, a tech forum offering advice on how to troubleshoot can be considered a "vendor", and Rob's post would be accurate since this would be "providing a service".
Nevertheless, WOT's definition of this category is "Vendor reliability tells you whether the site is safe for buying and selling, or for business transactions in general. A "poor" rating indicates possible fraud or a bad shopping experience."
That might be interpreted to mean that an actual physical item is for sale, and NOT a service. Plus, my example of tech forums may not fit because generally the advice is free.
The question remains, however, if advice for sale fits this category. The issue seems to be a gray area. Perhaps the WOT folks could clarify. Does "advice" fit this category? If it's for sale, I would think so.
If it's for free, then I would think the reliability of the information (as the OP asked) would fall within the "Trustworthy" category: from WOTS definition there . . . "Can it be trusted?"
-
- on Sat 10 Jan 2009
- 08:20:10 PM UTC
Re: Definition
Perhaps the WOT folks could clarify. Does "advice" fit this category?
In my opinion, any service the site provides fits the "vendor reliability" component. It certainly doesn't have to be a physical item they're selling.
-
- on Sat 10 Jan 2009
- 09:30:46 PM UTC
Free or not?
So any service, whether it's for free or at a charge, fits the "vendor reliability" category?
That makes sense to me. But in the definition on the support page, "buying and selling, or for business transactions", implies that cash changes hands. Maybe you guys would want to change that definition to make it appear more inclusive if it includes free stuff.
Or if it's for free, does it fall into the trustworthy category instead?
Probably splitting hairs here, but it may make a difference in certain sites NOT getting rated in the category that they should have.
-
- on Sun 11 Jan 2009
- 03:30:40 PM UTC
Vendor reliability
If someone is giving away free advice or freeware etc it is still a form of a transaction.If you think the advice is good then it should be green,same goes for the goods.If someone is selling stuff I often find it hard to determine reliability as unless you have visited the site a few times or you or someone you knows has bought something its hard to determine if they are reliable.I usualy choose to leave this blank if this is the case.I would not like to give a good reliability report to someone I do not know and then have someone get ripped off.
-
- on Tue 13 Jan 2009
- 04:33:08 AM UTC
Selling or telling..?
codhead: "If someone is giving away free advice or freeware etc it is still a form of a transaction.If you think the advice is good then it should be green,same goes for the goods."
Yes, it is still a transaction. But of a quite different kind. If I sell you something, you have a right to complain if the product did not 'deliver the goods'. But, if it is a free site, we are exchanging ideas and opinions - not products or services. Quite different situation in my opinion: maybe you agree or disagree with my ideas or opinions, but you cannot ask for your money back; you still have your own opinion intact; you have not lost anything...
PS: It may be a grayzone but still; there are many levels of gray...
-
- on Tue 13 Jan 2009
- 11:50:02 AM UTC
Vendor reliability
We at WOT are aware of the fact that vendor reliability isn't relevant for all sites, because not every site sells stuff. The challenge is that there is no easy way to categorize sites into commercial and non-commercial. For example, a museum can sell stuff over the Internet, and act as a vendor, although that is not the site's main purpose. As Sami said already, it doesn't matter if you sell a physical product or a service, vendor reliability applies to both. If you are rating a site that is not selling anything, you can simply ignore the vendor reliability component.
-
- on Sun 11 Jan 2009
- 04:16:05 PM UTC
Question of categry
It's not so much whether they are rated or not (and I DO rate them . . . these free sites), it's an issue of which categories to use.
-
- on Tue 13 Jan 2009
- 09:28:11 AM UTC
I wonder if you've rated the "Sharing File Hosts"?
I've seen some sites like Megashare and Letitbit which I wouldn't hesitate to categorize as "Rip-Off Artists".
Let me give you my own personal experiences here.
These people have their "Agents" who go around throwing their links in Forums for "shared stuff". Now, the moment you click on the link, you get to a page which tells you that "The quota for your Country is full. Please buy a "passport" to download this item." or, it gives you a teeny part of the download free and you have to pay for the rest of it.
Needless to say, I've not fallen for this gimmick. Like Confucius says - "The Wise Man learns from the mistakes of the Fool and the Fool, from his own." So, I went asking around to people I met on the Net and I found that those who had bought the download had got gypped!
Problem was that most felt that it was too much for them to do something about this [which, unfortunately, is the general attitude] and that the money wasn't too big, so why bother?
Now, I haven't lost a penny here to these kinds, but, my posting my experience has made these wankers go on the defensive.
However, what I'm sad about is that their WOT ratings are still GREEN!?!?
I really think that WOT is a great Community Initiative and that effectively, we can make a difference and make life miserable for these Internet Rip Off Artists. God knows there are too many of them going around here for comfort.
What I do feel is that we need to have more people ready to report these kinds of things here and have all of us give these sites a bad rating to make them learn that they need to mend their ways.
Before someone says that file-sharing, itself, is wrong [it's not "illegal" for those who don't know that, per se and is a very complicated process to establish mala fide intent in it; though the Large Corporations who want us to pay mega-bucks will differ] I'd like to say that it's something that's a boon to the poor people of the Third World Countries who cannot afford the luxuries of their richer counterparts, but, get no concessions or assistance which justifies, in my book, their resorting to this.
The focus, however, here is not that, but, the fact that people like MegaShares and Letitibit indulge in what we wouldn't hesitate to call extortion and fraud, in the real world and I feel that we have a responsibility to warn our Community about it.
PS.
I just checked the whois on Megashare and found that it's got a lot of votes already done for their reliability, which is what I've seen their "Agents" do in the Forums where I've criticized them. Fun of it all is that there would always be the same guy posting and the same guys defending him and Megashare.
Their Method of Operation or Modus Operendii was always the same, too. Where they'd say that it was well worth paying for!
Also, a close look at the Countries and Cities shows that the majority of the "Users" are from the Indian sub-continent where most of them do the free part of the download and give up.
The ones that I met on the Net told me that they felt it was a waste of time and well, they didn't buy, so, what the heck?
The ones that said their experiences were bad were the richer Westerners., though.
However, the strange thing is that this is the only site I've seen with positive ratings rigged; because the legit sites don't have so many votes going at all!
Must say I'm beginning to admire this Crew.
Letitbit doesn't even record an owner?
Strange.
Live and learn, I guess.
-
- on Tue 13 Jan 2009
- 03:24:18 PM UTC
Anony Mouse, suggest you make a new thread . . .
That was an excellent post. And though it does relate to the topic, I might suggest that you start a new thread with this same post, and title it something like "Megashare and Letitbit Ratings".
Instead of burying it down here, you might get more responses to it if it has its own thread. And it looks like you put a lot of effort and time into composing it, so it "deserves" some responses.
Vendor reliability?
Hello everyone.
Does vendor reliability apply only to online purchasing or can it also be used to rate how reliable the information in the site is?
Thanks!