- Jul 11, 2001
- 37,505
- 8,102
- 136
Meaning what? Those 4 emoticons? You're being sarcastic, right? Not be able to quote members?
brianmanahan
Lifer
- Sep 2, 2006
- 24,237
- 5,634
- 136
Meaning what? Those 4 emoticons? You're being sarcastic, right? Not be able to quote members?
well you would be able to quote members, but it would have to be in a new post
it'd be like usenet newsgroups
alt.anandtech.offtopic
ultimatebob
Lifer
- Jul 1, 2001
- 25,135
- 2,445
- 126
Captante
Lifer
- Oct 20, 2003
- 30,276
- 10,783
- 136
shortylickens
No Lifer
- Jul 15, 2003
- 82,854
- 17,365
- 136
- Jul 11, 2001
- 37,505
- 8,102
- 136
Of what? A product?Could always try posting a negative review!
I figure I can fill my reviews (some, anyway) with diatribes about how brickheaded they were to scuttle the comments feature including manufacturer's explanations, etc. etc. It's something. Enough of that makes an impact.
I could also edit my reviews and place my comments in them! Such as:
Captante
Lifer
- Oct 20, 2003
- 30,276
- 10,783
- 136
- Jul 11, 2001
- 37,505
- 8,102
- 136
You are entitled to your opinion. I personally think this will only cost them money. The previously superior customer review support was a major reason I went there. Now I won't so much. It's not just me.
Captante
Lifer
- Oct 20, 2003
- 30,276
- 10,783
- 136
Technically it's still censorship and kinda sucks too BUT you are correct that it's completely legal. (if not exactly ethical)
Given the crazy legal environment around "liability" for negative online reviews these days I understand why they want tighter control.
- Jul 11, 2001
- 37,505
- 8,102
- 136
I think there's something else going on. It could indeed be that they don't want to suffer the expense of monitoring the content of the comments. However, it's the reviews themselves that are by far the most voluminous. They can afford to keep the comments... look, Bezos is the world's richest man. The comments are what set Amazon apart from the competition. It's just a shame and they may come to regret their decision. I don't suppose they will reinstate Comments, but figure it's definitely possible. They aren't going to delete that data.
Lost_in_the_HTTP
Lifer
- Nov 17, 2019
- 10,804
- 6,464
- 136
Zon shut their forums down a few years back. If people were having discussions on reviews, I can see why they shut that down too.
Reviews are not for discussions..
Reviews are not for discussions..
rh71
No Lifer
- Aug 28, 2001
- 52,853
- 1,048
- 126
You can't beat their return policy though. I would much rather take a risk on Amazon even if a 3rd party seller. I've had some good finds through Amazon Warehouse because of this. Last one was a headset at 50% off new price. It was "used - like new" and I couldn't find a thing wrong with it, not even the box. It was wrapped like new too.
Red Squirrel
No Lifer
I try to avoid buying from Amazon these days. They treat their employees like crap, and they do very sketchy stuff like screw over their own sellers by selling the same thing and undercut them, or even sue them etc. Like for example if someone sells a certain type of product, Amazon will start selling it too at a lower price and make sure it shows up first in the results, then push out the seller.
Unfortunately there's lot of stuff that you can't really buy anywhere else, so I end up buying from there.
I sometimes toy with the idea of making a site like amazon but focused on small business and on Canada only as it's so hard to buy stuff here compared to the states. It would be a way for small business to sell their products either locally or online. As a buyer you would specify your city so when shopping you would get local options too where you can see their inventory and order for pickup. I find half the battle of buying local is even knowing that a certain product exists locally, as small businesses don't tend to have much of an advertising budget, or even a proper website with a shopping cart etc. There's lot of red tape involved in starting a site like this though, such as dealing with sales tax.
Unfortunately there's lot of stuff that you can't really buy anywhere else, so I end up buying from there.
I sometimes toy with the idea of making a site like amazon but focused on small business and on Canada only as it's so hard to buy stuff here compared to the states. It would be a way for small business to sell their products either locally or online. As a buyer you would specify your city so when shopping you would get local options too where you can see their inventory and order for pickup. I find half the battle of buying local is even knowing that a certain product exists locally, as small businesses don't tend to have much of an advertising budget, or even a proper website with a shopping cart etc. There's lot of red tape involved in starting a site like this though, such as dealing with sales tax.
PowerEngineer
Diamond Member
- Oct 22, 2001
- 3,551
- 717
- 136
It seems to me that censorship is only an issue as a restriction to free speech, which means I have a hard time seeing the distinction you are trying to make.
You may well be right that there will be some blow-back against Amazon because of this policy change on comments, and perhaps they will see fit to reverse it due to business considerations. That would be fine and good.
What causes me to scratch my head is why people think that any provider of online customer feedback or member forums is obligated to let posters say anything they want because of free speech. Yes, you have a Constitutional right to free speech -- but that doesn't mean I am required to let you express it on my premises in any way you see fit. You don't get to express yourself through graffiti on my white fence.
I hope this doesn't get censored... 🤣
balloonshark
Diamond Member
- Jun 5, 2008
- 6,320
- 2,722
- 136
The comments did help keep some of the reviewers honest. If someone was bashing a product or gave it a bad review because they weren't using it correctly people could go on the record and correct them. They even helped some folks that were having issues with the product.
People always say you have to take some reviews with a grain of salt. The comments helped distinguish such reviews.
But the dumbing down of the internet surges on.
People always say you have to take some reviews with a grain of salt. The comments helped distinguish such reviews.
But the dumbing down of the internet surges on.
- Jul 11, 2001
- 37,505
- 8,102
- 136
You have trouble understanding why a retailer would let people speak their minds about the products they buy there?
You have no sense of the value of forthrightness and honesty? That is a free speech and/or censorship issue. If I can't trust a retailer to let their customers be frank with their comments, I will not read the reviews. I sometimes wonder. I'm glad when I see negative reviews because it means the retailer is not censoring content, a definite plus in my book.
- Jul 11, 2001
- 37,505
- 8,102
- 136
Yeah, I will buy on Amazon sometimes rather than, say, Ebay because I'm more confident I won't run into hassles if there's a problem. Amazon customer service is relatively excellent. I can get an associate on the phone in a matter of a minute or two. Try that with Ebay, I dare you.
mindless1
Diamond Member
- Aug 11, 2001
- 8,055
- 1,443
- 126
Can you link to a specific example of what you're seeing with the comment function gone?
I just went to product reviews for things recently purchased, was able to click "comment", and up pops the comment box same as always.
However, if I were to make a comment and click "Post"... it won't, because I was previously perma-banned from making Amazon comments, and they wouldn't even tell me why but it was probably something to do with mentioning that a seller's specs were fraudulent and the seller flagged it.
They still don't effectively police that. Examples include 9900mAh 18650 cells, or 2000 lumen AAA keychain lights, and these just the first two out of thousands, where they spend more time censoring than trying to address the problem because $$$$$$$$$$$.
I just went to product reviews for things recently purchased, was able to click "comment", and up pops the comment box same as always.
However, if I were to make a comment and click "Post"... it won't, because I was previously perma-banned from making Amazon comments, and they wouldn't even tell me why but it was probably something to do with mentioning that a seller's specs were fraudulent and the seller flagged it.
They still don't effectively police that. Examples include 9900mAh 18650 cells, or 2000 lumen AAA keychain lights, and these just the first two out of thousands, where they spend more time censoring than trying to address the problem because $$$$$$$$$$$.
18650 Battery 9900mAh, 4 pcs Safe Rechargeable Li-ion Battery Battery and Charger Battery Button Top，for LED Torch Flashlight Torch Accumulator Cells (3.7V Original New) - - Amazon.com
18650 Battery 9900mAh, 4 pcs Safe Rechargeable Li-ion Battery Battery and Charger Battery Button Top，for LED Torch Flashlight Torch Accumulator Cells (3.7V Original New) - - Amazon.com
www.amazon.com
Amazon.com: Kangnice Portable Waterproof Pocket LED Flashlight 3 Modes Torch Mini Penlight 2000LM : Home & Kitchen
Amazon.com: Kangnice Portable Waterproof Pocket LED Flashlight 3 Modes Torch Mini Penlight 2000LM : Home & Kitchen
www.amazon.com
PowerEngineer
Diamond Member
- Oct 22, 2001
- 3,551
- 717
- 136
You have trouble understanding why a retailer would let people speak their minds about the products they buy there?
No, I certainly do understand why a retailer might chose to let customers review their products. It may well be in their best interest as a business to do so.
Let's not get apoplectic. I think I can hold an opinion that this different than yours without forfeiting any claim to placing value on forthrightness and honesty.
I also put more trust in retailers and products with reviews that include both positive and negative comments. In fact, I normally pay most attention to 3 and 4 star reviews because they are better balanced with pros and cons.
However, if a retailer decides that allowing customers to post unedited reviews is not in their best business interest, I do not agree that this is some sort of violation of Constitutional free speech or illegal censorship that needs to be taken to court (other than the court of customer choice and free enterprise).
mindless1
Diamond Member
- Aug 11, 2001
- 8,055
- 1,443
- 126
Heh, we're back to censorship again. Yes they have the right to do it, and it is censorship but that word censorship does not by itself, restrict to some right granted by the constitution, rather has a broader definition. They were never obligated in the first place to entertain our posting to their website, but if it is done at all, it should have a balance that remains useful to the consumer rather than leaving the impression that it's just a tool of manipulation.
Even so, if you grant people some freedom then take it away, you will meet more resistance than if they never had it, and there is some validity to that when you base your habits, in this case shopping decisions, based on something you consider a very high value feature of their site which is apparently becoming diminished in value if they want to game it for making products look better than they really are, and it is disingenuous to offer one part of the feature but not to allow a civil discourse.
Legally required no, but ethically required yes. There has to be checks and balances for all the nonsense posted on the internet, and in the case of Amazon, they can't play both sides of the fence pretending to be a great, friendly company then sneakily only care about your money being converted into their money.
Obviously most of us were not under the delusion that they were out to do anything other than conquer the world at the expense of everyone else, but we should still concede that they serve a valuable purpose and consider what is in the best interest of society. Once there are few competitors left, we are stuck with what we tolerated.
Even so, if you grant people some freedom then take it away, you will meet more resistance than if they never had it, and there is some validity to that when you base your habits, in this case shopping decisions, based on something you consider a very high value feature of their site which is apparently becoming diminished in value if they want to game it for making products look better than they really are, and it is disingenuous to offer one part of the feature but not to allow a civil discourse.
Legally required no, but ethically required yes. There has to be checks and balances for all the nonsense posted on the internet, and in the case of Amazon, they can't play both sides of the fence pretending to be a great, friendly company then sneakily only care about your money being converted into their money.
Obviously most of us were not under the delusion that they were out to do anything other than conquer the world at the expense of everyone else, but we should still concede that they serve a valuable purpose and consider what is in the best interest of society. Once there are few competitors left, we are stuck with what we tolerated.
VirtualLarry
No Lifer
- Aug 25, 2001
- 56,340
- 10,044
- 126
I agree. No violation of Constitutional rights here.
That said, there's something to be said for crowd-sourcing as to the veracity of review content, basically for free, by allowing comments to be left about reviews.
Therefore, I have to conclude, that if allowing comments saves Amazon money from having to police review content themselves, that there must be some other reason for axing the comment support, and like I said, they wanted to per-emptively avoid running afoul of the law, should "Section 230" be repealed.
VirtualLarry
No Lifer
- Aug 25, 2001
- 56,340
- 10,044
- 126
Sounds more like what the Firefox devs did. Right-click, "Print"? We don't need no stinking easy way to print web pages!
Steltek
Diamond Member
- Mar 29, 2001
- 3,042
- 753
- 136
Could always try posting a negative review!
ftfy.
*(MAYBE video too!)
Nah, waste of time. It'll just be drowned out by the 100 extra fake positive reviews posted by the sellers.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter