Thread: Need your input: Should who reviews a product be regulated?

I am kicking around the idea of adding some new policies for the review section. I have it down to 3 options;


1-no change
2-Reviewers must list the circumstance under which they came to review/own the product.
3-Users who post reviews may not directly profit from the sales of the item being reviewed or have received compensation for the review AND Reviewers must list the circumstance under which they came to review/own the product.

This was brought up when a user wanted to review an item they sell.... there is currently no rule on this because I never even thought someone would want to review their own item. But the scope of this goes beyond reviewing your own item.... the idea of disclosing under what circumstances you got the item will also help when people are given items in exchange for a review.

Please vote for which ever option you think would work best.

IMHO Reviews should be done by someone that is independent and not a paid promotional person or someone that is involved with the sale/MFG of the product.

Originally Posted by Hoser

IMHO Reviews should be done by someone that is independent and not a paid promotional person or someone that is involved with the sale/MFG of the product.

spoke with MichalenaELS so disregard previous text. I have no opinion on this subject. Thank you.

Originally Posted by Hoser

IMHO Reviews should be done by someone that is independent and not a paid promotional person or someone that is involved with the sale/MFG of the product.

I am in total agreement with this.

A person who reviews an item they sell is biased and will not be willing to identify possible cons to an item in comparison to a disinterested third party.

If I read a product review of an item a person is selling, I am more likely to go and discount that review as beyond useless due to the fact that the topic is tainted. NO chance of me purchasing said item off that review.

I think option 2 is best - that way, if someone says that they sell the product they're reviewing, people can take the info with a grain of salt, without putting unnecessary restrictions on reviewers. People should have all the information they need to make a good choice on something they want to buy, so if a reviewer gives a highly favorable review of a product, they can think about how the review is favorable, so they can guess whether the reviewer's just trying to make a buck, or if it's genuinely a good product.

I fully support the people's right to idiocy - so if a product review is clearly done with the intent to sell a product, and someone gets the product anyway and it turns out to be junk, that's their problem. They can post a bad response if they want to, but if they'd put any thought into it they would have noticed that the reviewer was just trying to make a profit.

While it is very likely that someone who was paid for a review will not likely give an objective review, it is not certain and the likelihood is not enough to justify the restriction in my opinion. However, I do believe that when a review is posted, the person should have to both disclose the circumstances leading to the review and disclose any and all goods, services, and monies given to or received by the manufacturer and any employees or agents of that manufacturer within the past six months.

Also, IMO the disclosure should be at the top of the original (first) post (this is obvious but if it isn't stated then eventually it won't be there), should be in a font and color as highly visible as possible.

My $0.02

Personally I think JUST the disclosure part should be added. I don't think a person who was given a discounted price, if they purchased something, or even given for free should be held against a person doing a review. I understand people will then think that the person is biased but there are MANY MANY people out there who review items day in and day out because it's what they do and are able to give un-biased points on items.

Companies give out products left and right because A) They believe in their product and want people to experience it and B) They want the average joe to go through the product and give their OPINION on the product. They believe in their product so they want it to be out there in the hands of people to not only give feedback but to show people the product. Now this should not include people selling their OWN product, that is where bias would live. I don't believe if someone was to be given a product or a discount on a product should not be allowed to post a review of that product. I know for one if I received a product that I know didn't live up to the standards that was promised I would write that. I know that, especially if I paid for even a little bit of the product, I would be able to give an un-biased review on that product. Just how I see it.

I can see where Fluffy is with that and wouldn't have a problem with an independent reviewer that was given a product/or discount to check out and review.After all it takes time to check it out and write a review. But its still remain unbiased as the person is not really going to profit from future sales of it.

Originally Posted by nerdly_dood

I think option 2 is best - that way, if someone says that they sell the product they're reviewing, people can take the info with a grain of salt, without putting unnecessary restrictions on reviewers. People should have all the information they need to make a good choice on something they want to buy, so if a reviewer gives a highly favorable review of a product, they can think about how the review is favorable, so they can guess whether the reviewer's just trying to make a buck, or if it's genuinely a good product.

I fully support the people's right to idiocy - so if a product review is clearly done with the intent to sell a product, and someone gets the product anyway and it turns out to be junk, that's their problem. They can post a bad response if they want to, but if they'd put any thought into it they would have noticed that the reviewer was just trying to make a profit.

That was kinda my opinion too...... that way I don't have to enforce who is posting reviews, but people can see the conflict of interest if it exists.

Originally Posted by Fluffy126577

Personally I think JUST the disclosure part should be added. I don't think a person who was given a discounted price, if they purchased something, or even given for free should be held against a person doing a review. I understand people will then think that the person is biased but there are MANY MANY people out there who review items day in and day out because it's what they do and are able to give un-biased points on items.

Companies give out products left and right because A) They believe in their product and want people to experience it and B) They want the average joe to go through the product and give their OPINION on the product. They believe in their product so they want it to be out there in the hands of people to not only give feedback but to show people the product. Now this should not include people selling their OWN product, that is where bias would live. I don't believe if someone was to be given a product or a discount on a product should not be allowed to post a review of that product. I know for one if I received a product that I know didn't live up to the standards that was promised I would write that. I know that, especially if I paid for even a little bit of the product, I would be able to give an un-biased review on that product. Just how I see it.

Whenever I write a review I fully disclose anything that could be construed as swaying my opinion (i.e. the company gave this to me, I got it at cost, I'm being paid to write the review, etc). I feel this is a good practice.

Not only should the person have to disclose the circumstances around getting the product, they should follow a set format of some sort. There should be a template to follow...i.e.

Packaging: pictures and descriptions of how the item was packaged from the manufacturer
size of item
description of item (lightheads, # of LEDs, wiring particulars) with photos
reviewer's opinion of construction (solid, flimsy, etc)
daytime and nighttime video
lots of still pictures, a few of which should be attached to the site, the rest hosted

The reasons why I'm suggesting this:

easy format to follow when looking at reviews
more consistency to make sure all points get covered
video for somewhat accurate representation of light output, as opposed to saying (It's way brighter than X lights)
pictures attached as some agencies restrict youtube and many internet photo hosting sites.

Originally Posted by BigWil

Not only should the person have to disclose the circumstances around getting the product, they should follow a set format of some sort. There should be a template to follow...i.e.

Packaging: pictures and descriptions of how the item was packaged from the manufacturer
size of item
description of item (lightheads, # of LEDs, wiring particulars) with photos
reviewer's opinion of construction (solid, flimsy, etc)
daytime and nighttime video
lots of still pictures, a few of which should be attached to the site, the rest hosted

The reasons why I'm suggesting this:

easy format to follow when looking at reviews
more consistency to make sure all points get covered
video for somewhat accurate representation of light output, as opposed to saying (It's way brighter than X lights)
pictures attached as some agencies restrict youtube and many internet photo hosting sites.

Some sort of format would help. We would need a hack to make it appear in the new post window automatically.

Originally Posted by JohnMarcson

Some sort of format would help. We would need a hack to make it appear in the new post window automatically.

John, I never give suggestions without willing to help implement them. If you decide to do something like that, I'd be willing to go through the old reviews and update them to a new format.

Originally Posted by BigWil

John, I never give suggestions without willing to help implement them. If you decide to do something like that, I'd be willing to go through the old reviews and update them to a new format.

I will start working on a rough format.... I'll see how it looks.

The following are the new review rules



Reviews

• Users must disclose the circumstances under which they have come to review the item/product. This includes, but is not limited to, disclosure of compensation.
• Must contain-Name, brand and model number of item
• Must contain-A detailed description of the product including how it is used.
• Must contain-A "rating" of the product
• Should contain-Links to the manufacturer web site
• Must contain-Pictures and/or videos required
• Must be formatted according to information provided in/on reviews section
• Posts in this section require mod approval to show up. Please allow time for your post to be review.

While I am sure you already thought of this, just doing my civic duty, since you have a lot on your plate, to request to make sure to update the current posting in the Equipment Reviews Section with these new guidelines!!

Thanks again, glad to see it is getting a bit more concise!!!

How to post a review READ FIRST

Quick question regarding the new rules.

What if the light you are reviewing does not have a name on it and also there is no website for that item?

Say someone buys a unknown light on ebay and the light has no marking on it to tell you where its from. Can you still post a review on the light?

Then you have the problem that you bought a new old stock light that is no longer listed on the manufacturers website.

Originally Posted by SireLite

Quick question regarding the new rules.

What if the light you are reviewing does not have a name on it and also there is no website for that item?

Say someone buys a unknown light on ebay and the light has no marking on it to tell you where its from. Can you still post a review on the light?

Then you have the problem that you bought a new old stock light that is no longer listed on the manufacturers website.

The link is not listed as required.... so you could omit that. I guess you could just Put "unknown rotator" or "unknown" model I guess..... but I'm not sure how helpful a review about an item no one can find to buy would be. I'd post it in the ID this light thread before reviewing it.

Originally Posted by Zapp Brannigan

While I am sure you already thought of this, just doing my civic duty, since you have a lot on your plate, to request to make sure to update the current posting in the Equipment Reviews Section with these new guidelines!!

Thanks again, glad to see it is getting a bit more concise!!!

How to post a review READ FIRST

There is a format template posted now too.