We noticed that you're using an unsupported browser. The TripAdvisor website may not display properly.We support the following browsers:
Windows: Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox, Google Chrome. Mac: Safari.

sort by # of contributions

United States
Level Contributor
36 posts
450 reviews
Save Topic
sort by # of contributions

There has been much debate on this site about the authenticity of first-time reviewers. Many users feel reviews by persons with just one contribution are just plain fraudulent (especially if they reside in the same city as the business being reviewed).

Why not give some weight to those of us who have many contributions by simply adding a "sort by" button which says "# of contributions" at the top of the review list (next to the "price" and "popularity" buttons).

That way a reader will first see reviews by experienced travelers with no vested interest in stacking the deck for --- or against--- an establishment.

Cabarete, Dominican...
Destination Expert
for Cabarete
Level Contributor
43,383 posts
261 reviews
Save Reply
1. Re: sort by # of contributions

To be honest, I don't think your idea would benefit members. If it is true that there are companies out there posting fake reviews on behalf of owners, what would deter an employee of such company (or different persons using the same member account) from posting a zillion fake reviews and be always at the top of the reviewers list?

Silvia

United States
Level Contributor
36 posts
450 reviews
Save Reply
2. Re: sort by # of contributions

Hmmm.

But, could you not easily check a reviewer's history of posts and easily spot the fake?

Belgium
Level Contributor
1,493 posts
Save Reply
3. Re: sort by # of contributions

Could you elaborate?

I've been to places I've never commented on.

If I were a hotelier, surely I could easily borrow comments from customers about other places far afield, that I've never been to.

I could be in Brussels in the morning and have a customer experience at a restaurant, then another a mere 4 hours later, local time, in Las vegas.

Edited: 30 November 2010, 14:57
Chester, United...
Level Contributor
60,405 posts
69 reviews
Save Reply
4. Re: sort by # of contributions

What makes you think that people with a low number of contributions are not experienced travellers???

People can travel the world and not contribute to TA or similar sites

fti
MN
Destination Expert
for Alaska
Level Contributor
15,520 posts
28 reviews
Save Reply
5. Re: sort by # of contributions

>>What makes you think that people with a low number of contributions are not experienced travellers???

Nothing to do with not being experienced travelers. Those with a very low number of contributions raises suspicions since they so often have very glowing or very negative reviews of hotels. I routinely disregard reviews from such posters except for factual information about the hotel, location, etc ("hotel has a swimming pool", "bus number 45 is two blocks from the hotel").

Sorting by number of contributions would unfortunately make TA admit that reviews by those with a low number of posts aren't quite as valid. That means they would probably get fewer hits and fewer advertising dollars. Thus, though the idea is good, it will never happen.

Chester, United...
Level Contributor
60,405 posts
69 reviews
Save Reply
6. Re: sort by # of contributions

"Those with a very low number of contributions raises suspicions since they so often have very glowing or very negative reviews of hotels"

People with lots of posts can also write very glowing or negative reviews as well

I have met loads of people on holidays who have looked at TA for yonks and have never make a contribution and have decided to write a review this time round. Also more a more resorts are now asking people to join the likes of TA or Facebook and post reviews

fti
MN
Destination Expert
for Alaska
Level Contributor
15,520 posts
28 reviews
Save Reply
7. Re: sort by # of contributions

Certainly what you said is true. Believe what you want. But it is known that many one-post-wonders are fake reviews. Unfortunately most people are like you who don't want to accept that fact. They believe everything they read on the net. Businesses know that. In fact, one business said that TA is the best form of advertising.

tripadvisor.com/ShowTopic-g1-i12104-k4074823…

Of course some businesses would exploit that.

Then you have honest reviewers who are bullied into removing their negative posts, again "TA is the best form of advertising" and they don't want anything negative:

tripadvisor.com/ShowTopic-g1-i12105-k4055577…

Keep your blinders on. Fine with me. I prefer to promote educated and informed travelers, not ones with blinders on.

Chester, United...
Level Contributor
60,405 posts
69 reviews
Save Reply
8. Re: sort by # of contributions

fti

"But it is known that many one-post-wonders are fake reviews"

I presume you have advised TA about these reviews

"Unfortunately most people are like you who don't want to accept that fact. They believe everything they read on the net"

I cannot remember saying that I believed every thing I read on the web

"Keep your blinders on. Fine with me. I prefer to promote educated and informed travelers, not ones with blinders on"

I think you will find that over the past 4 years I have done my own fair share of educating informed travellers and a lot of novice ones as well

9. Re: sort by # of contributions

-:- Message from TripAdvisor staff -:-

This post was determined to be inappropriate by the TripAdvisor community and has been removed.

To review the TripAdvisor Forums Posting Guidelines, please follow this link: http://www.tripadvisor.com/pages/forums_posting_guidelines.html

Our staff may also remove posts that do not follow our posting guidelines, and we reserve the right to remove any post for any reason. Thanks for being a part of the TripAdvisor travel community!

Removed on: 06 December 2010, 20:05
Belgium
Level Contributor
1,493 posts
Save Reply
10. Re: sort by # of contributions

fti, If you've been reporting newbie reviews purely on the basis that they seem, to you, to be glowing or negative, then no wonder it has sometimes being to no avail (-:

The fact, as you have accepted , is that more frequent contributors also commit the same sin, in your eyes.

And it doesn't require a huge intellectual leap to see that if single posts are ghettoized, then vested interests will simply multiply their score of reviews.

All that aside, you said

"... it is known that many one-post-wonders are fake reviews"

I take issue with the expression "known".

By who, exactly?

Ironic, given that you now post a link to a report on a lawsuit for defamation!

Where is your evidence?

It has been frequently mentioned, but that does not make it true.

Is it not just as equally "known" that there are more productive fakers?

Wouldn't ghettoizing single review bring that "known" more to the forefront?

Blinkers indeed, how ironic.