Forum
Comments:
-
- on Tue 09 Feb 2010
- 08:27:58 AM UTC
Re: Contradictory and Potentially Harmful WOT Ratings
The reputation is computed from ratings, not comments, and it seems the vast majority of the ratings for this site are good.
-
- on Tue 09 Feb 2010
- 09:38:18 AM UTC
New users
No matter what the WOT staff does to highlight comments are NOT ratings, and I certainly think a substantial effort has been made (i.e. the scorecard notice directly above the comments section, "Comments provide more information, but do not affect ratings.", not to mention frequent posts that pretty much scream it, the Wiki, etc,), new folks are perpetually going to misunderstand this until they become more familiar with WOT.
It's just human nature to interpret red or green comments as ratings. And particularly confusing when the site itself shows the opposite color.
It IS bothersome to see this happening all the time, but if we remember what it was like when we first discovered WOT ourselves, I'd bet that a lot of us had the same reaction/misunderstanding when we saw red or green comments for the first time,
My suspicion is that Sami, and some members of the WOT community, have a "standard" cut and paste response to these things. Often that's the best that can be done, but it requires a good degree of patience and understanding, particularly when a post title begins something like "Contradictory and Potentially Harmful WOT Ratings" . . . and we've all seen titles like that.
9 times out of 10 in posts with titles like that, the OP thinks comments are ratings,
So, my compliments to Sami for taking the time and patience (frequently) to clarify.
-
- on Tue 09 Feb 2010
- 10:56:05 AM UTC
Wrong?
How can a comment be judged "wrong" when it's a users opinion? You may disagree with it (and there's provision for that), but an opinion by definition ("An opinion is a subjective statement") cannot be "wrong".
"Off the wall", weird, crazy . . . maybe . . . but "wrong" NO. Only objective statements may be considered as "wrong" (and remember, "opinions" may not be based on fact, so digging results that show otherwise notwithstanding, it is still an opinion). If I say "there are 11 inches in a foot", that can be "proven" as "wrong", but if I say "I think that ruler is pretty", how can you "prove" that is wrong? It's my opinion, and as such may or may not be based on fact. If you disagree with a comment (an opinion), you are free to not only disagree but to leave your own comment stating why you disagree.
Edit: But removal of an opinion is tantamount to censorship. Who would we appoint to be the censor? And that means that we would have to agree with their opinions, and thus become a closed group a la Jim Jones and Guyana. Only a person with messianic tendencies would want to be a censor, and I don't think we have any of those types in the community or WOT staff (at least I hope not).
Now if by "wrong" you mean vulgar or hateful or criminal, then I would agree.
-
- on Tue 09 Feb 2010
- 10:56:40 AM UTC
I Get That
But if I or you owned a site and someone left a comment saying viruses don't go their.And you and me and most others know it to be a lie.As a site owner you may think that comment may put people of visiting my site.Even though you are rated green.I always look at comments if I am really interested in something on a site.So would you not agree that it could ,one be unpleasant for the owner and if few comments perhaps put of a customer.I am talking hypothetically of course.
-
- on Tue 09 Feb 2010
- 11:17:15 AM UTC
Has happened
"But if I or you owned a site and someone left a comment saying viruses don't go their."
That has happened and will continue to happen as long as there are comments (for example it happened to Frank's TechJaws site and Colins security blog . . . both safe sites). "Bad things happen to good people". A truism that unfortunately is part of life,"And you and me and most others know it to be a lie"
That's why WOT provided the agree/disagree function."unpleasant for the owner"
Yes, but once again unpleasantness is a fact of life.At the end of the day, an owner can complain about a comment and the community takes a look at it and "votes" it up or down depending on their own opinions. (For example, if you take a look at the TechJaws scorecard, on page two there you will see a red comment by Evindr . . . notice that there's a whopping 21 disagreements with that comment and there's a whopping 18 agreements with a positive comment by Galaxyfox on page 1).
Contradictory and Potentially Harmful WOT Ratings: hubpages.com
I was searching Google for reviews on a free satelite tv website. Of course I checked WOT's ratings first, however, although it had a green WOT icon, it only had 1 comment, "Listed in Delicious."
One particular "review", by hubpages.com,, appeared quite suspicious although it also had a green WOT icon. Instead of a review, hubpages.com had downloads for free satellite tv. Again I checked WOT's comments on this website and this time I was utterly surprised!
Every Reputation Rating had a green icon with ratings in the 80's. Yet right across from these ratings ALL of the Comments by Category were in RED: Adds or Popouts; Bad Customer Experience', Phishing or Other Scans; Malicious Contents; Browser Exploit; Spyware and Adware.
I hope someone at WOT will take the time to investigate hubpages.com.
. .