Amazon Lawsuit Aims To Kill Fake Reviews (theguardian.com) 125
Mark Wilson writes with a story at Beta News (relying on this report at The Guardian) that Amazon is suing more than 1,000 fake reviewers for their misleading, paid-for reviews:
The ability to read reviews of products before making a purchase is one of the great advantages of online shopping. But how do you know that what you're reading is a genuine review and not just glowing praise planted by the seller or manufacturer? Fake reviews are a serious problem, and Amazon is trying to do something about it. The retail giant has filed a lawsuit against 1,114 individuals for writing 'false, misleading, and inauthentic' reviews. Amazon says that the fakers are tarnishing its reputation, and the attempt to clean up the site is something that will be welcomed by consumers.
From the Guardian's version of the story: Amazon said there had been misleading five-star reviews and comments about products, such as: “This has lit up my life” about a USB cable. A bogus comment said “definitely buying more I was impressed with how bright the lights on the cable are”, while another reviewer gave a product top marks and added the comment “cool charger”.
Amazon is not suing Fiverr, a startup that raised $30m from investors last year, as the company says in its terms and conditions that advertising for services such as writing bogus reviews is banned.
Re: why review? (Score:1)
Only if tou make stupid reviews that look like thin attempts at fullfilling a review quota.
I worry about the funny ones (Score:5, Funny)
I worry about losing the funny ones. Like these. [amazon.com]
Some of this stuff is pure gold, and I think it actually helps Amazon overall, as it gets people to go to the site, and hang around on it, and think about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
That was funny, but I don't think reviews like that are the issue. The problem is "paid-for reviews." I doubt that person got paid.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
See, normally I ignore your posts because they reek of racist stupidity.
This one skipped that initially so I made it as far as
nano chip chemtrails
Congratulations. You've killed your credibility even more thoroughly than when I was discounting it as a racist rant.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:why review? (Score:5, Funny)
I want to know what they're going to do with the funny reviews like the steering wheel table, three moon t-shirt, etc... Some of those are too funny to let die. Maybe we need to scrape them and host them elsewhere just to make sure they don't go away. Some of them are damned funny. I've wasted hours reading some of them.
Re: (Score:1)
More entertaining ones:
50 shades of Grey (love or hate the book, the reviews are hilarious)
That funny plastic banana slicing thing (these crack me up every time).
Silver food spray (after Mad Max of course)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I've only read the banana ones. I'll be reading the others this evening. Thanks. :D
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The fraudulent views do damage the brand. People can't tell whether to take these seriously or not.
Re: why review? (Score:1)
You are paid, in the form of lower prices as they slowly weed out the bad products which waste resources systemically. You're also paid in the form of better satisfaction because the reviews help you find good products. You get a good product more often and you waste less resources on returns. It's entirely in your interest as a consumer to have a review system, and more importantly an honest review system.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Wait a minute, you mean the $25,000 ethernet cable I bought based
on the reviewer's statements about better sex might be bogus?!
CAP == 'incest' == I kid you not!
You know, sometimes I think it's better to write a comment around
the CAP than around the actual article...
Re:why review? (Score:5, Informative)
This isn't a situation where they're randomly suing reviewers. Amazon is suing people who (a) posted an offer to submit a fake Amazon review in exchange for payment, (b) received payment, and (c) posted a fake review.
Published reviews should be restricted to people who have actually purchased the product from Amazon, especially with items that cost a significant amount. That would dramatically cut down fraud. As it is, Amazon reviews tend to be most effective when there are a few hundred or thousands for a product and the product is in the $50+ range. In those cases, it can be highly educational to read through the reviews because people often highlight product flaws and provide advice and workarounds for common problems.
Re:why review? (Score:5, Informative)
I was for quite a while a high rated Amazon review (I'm still on the "top reviewer" list) and I get a LOT of offers from companies to send me products in return for a review. It's interesting how that works ... and note up front that I do very little of this any longer, primarily because accepting such offers harms my reputation as a reviewer no matter how honest my reviews were.
I got some really laughable emails saying things like, "We'll send you a product in exchange for a five-star review." Nope. No thanks. Or, "please post review with 3 pcs. pictures." Thanks but I do reviews my own way.
In responding to some of the offers, when I state that I say what I think and write reviews on behalf of the prospective buyer, not the seller, a lot of the free offers disappeared. But some remained, and when I received a bad product and wrote an unfavorable review, some manufacturers demanded that I remove it (not going to happen, if you sell a bad product, live with it).
But it got really distasteful so now I generally review things that I bought on my own.
However, I can easily see how the system has become very corrupt, and so I just don't take free products from manufacturers any longer.
Re:why review? (Score:4, Interesting)
The problem wasn't with writing a bad review of a bad product. The problem came when I received a really good product, that deserved a good review. I would look like a shill even though I was telling the truth.
For instance, I reviewed practically the whole Brainwavz audio product line. They make very good products. I'm an electrical engineer who did professional audio work for quite a few years, and I think I know what I'm talking about. So I gave Brainwavz a lot of good reviews because that was the honest truth. But I was accused of shilling and selling out, even though I was careful to point out product shortcomings as well as merits.
Did I really need over a dozen free headsets? Hardly. (And no, I won't sell them off because that's very unethical.) I just wanted to give genuine feedback in the hopes that it would be useful.
But I'm done. As the commenter above noted, it's a scummy world out there, and for every company that truly wants an honest review (Brainwavz was really good about it, they are very ethical), there's a dozen that don't.
Re: (Score:2)
Why is it unethical to sell off the headsets? I'd say it's unethical to keep them. If you sell them, fewer resources will have to be put to use making new ones.
Re: (Score:2)
That is a very flimsy argument in support of selling them. He said he didn't want to be a shill or look like one, so selling off the freely received reviewed products for a chunk of their retail value would effectively be no different from the company giving him money up front.
Re:why review? (Score:5, Interesting)
In those cases, it can be highly educational to read through the reviews because people often highlight product flaws and provide advice and workarounds for common problems.
Workarounds for common problems? That will get your review edited or cancelled real quick. With a lot of nasty mails reminding you what a review is for (i.e. for helping the buyer decide whether to buy the product or not, rather than helping him use it once he has it). Has happened to me a couple of times after reviewing some more tricky to use items (electronic gear for Raspberry Pi). I figured that re-assuring the user that the product can be used despite some flaws would put it back in place. At least *I* as a buyer would be grateful to have that kind of info when deciding whether to buy or not. But apparently Amazon moderators see this differently...
Since then I basically stopped reviewing. Indeed, why take the time to write a thoughtful and helpful review, and then see it butchered a week after, and removed entirely two weeks later?
Re: (Score:2)
Published reviews should be restricted to people who have actually purchased the product from Amazon, especially with items that cost a significant amount.
Restricting reviews to those who've bought the item is a terrible idea. I don't need to buy colloidal silver "wellness" drops to know the product is expensive snake oil. I don't need to buy Monster HDMI cables to know they're massively overpriced compared to functionally identical generic cables. Amazon sells thousands of products which are not fit for purpose, expensive, do nothing and / or in certain cases are dangerous. Why shouldn't I be able to say as much in a review as a warning to others? Why should
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
So, let's see, now if post a review on Amazon, they might sue me? I knew it was pointless to post those reviews, but now it's clearly stupid, as well.
I always knew you were a paid shill, Mr. Coward! Now you've outed yourself.
Should we sue all advertisers too? (Score:4, Insightful)
> "false, misleading, and inauthentic"
Like, advertising?
And before you say, "yes but we know advertising is advertising, and this is masquerading as something else"...
Consider the reality of "Native Advertising", the advertising industry's response to ad blocking: http://bit.ly/native_adverts [bit.ly]
Re:Should we sue all advertisers too? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
No, advertising is done by corporations which Bezos, as does the rest of his Republican kind, believe are people that have more rights than us. They are so stupid they think they're people.
Fail. Bezos supports Democrats.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
They're not suing them... yet. More than likely they're trying to win smaller cases against defendants with less legal strength, to set a precedence for when they go after bigger players.
Tongue in cheek reviews? (Score:4, Informative)
What about reviews written tongue in cheek for humor? Amazon seems to actually embrace them:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/featu... [amazon.com]
How is the USB cable review different than the ones in the link above?
The FCC doesn't regulate humor (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
What about tongue up arse IMDb reviews tens of thousands maybe even hundreds of thousands, of 10 out 10 reviews, making IMDb probably the most jacked up and totally utterly pointless review site on the internet. In fact IMDb seems to have been purposefully set up as a fake review site in order to maximise media sales. Perhaps readers are a lot fussier and angrier when it comes to get sucked in by fake reviews.
Re: (Score:2)
Are those fake? I always took the view that there really are that many dimwitted people out there that actually enjoyed Transformers 3 and think that it's appropriate to vote 10/10 to boost the average score nearer to the level they think it should be.
For evidence, read the comments sections on any popular film - lots of people 'tactically' voting because they're selfish shits that want to damage the usefulness of the site for everyone else.
Awesome article, would buy again! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
ATH0
OK
Re: Awesome article, would buy again! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
we should have the legal right to kill bezos in self defense then. fuck amazon. time for a corporate death penalty.
amazon reviews are THE BEST! (Score:1)
They are THE MOST accurate reviews I have ever seen or heard of! AAA++++++++++++++ accuracy! Would read them again!!!!!!! Top value!
Three things about Amazon reviews (Score:5, Interesting)
1. Generally, I only put stock into the ones from verified purchasers - mainly because of all the people trying to game the reviews.
2. There is a growing, serious problem with reviews submitted people who've been given a product discount and "asked" to write a review. Interestingly, they apparently are required to state that fact in the review itself, which makes it easier for me to flag all such reviews as "unhelpful".
3. Amazon has its own ludicrous program for sending free products to people expressly so they'll review the items ("Vine", I think). These are also well worthy of being flagged as unhelpful, which I try to do whenever I'm exposed to them. Come on, Amazon... I only want to hear the experiences of people who purchased the product because they needed / wanted it. I couldn't care less about the opinion of someone who received the product just because they're considered a good reviewer in general - what a dumb concept!
Re:Three things about Amazon reviews (Score:5, Insightful)
First, Consumer Reports doesn't get free copies sent to them - it chooses the products it wants to review, and it purchases them.
Second, Consumer Reports doesn't single out individual product reviewers and highlight them - there are no individual egos being built up as part of the review process.
Re: (Score:2)
It's generally a good idea. When a product first shows up on Amazon, it starts with no reviews and won't get much notice. Seeding the reviews section, by people known to write good product reviews, is helpful to everyone. Of course, AFTER there's plenty of reviews, that process should stop, but sellers keep handing out free products to keep their prod
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, under the circumstance you mention - a brand new product with no reviews - I will concede it's a decent approach. I would argue that those reviews should be removed once a statistically significant number of other reviews from verified purchasers has been received, though - leaving those early, sponsored reviews in place opens up another avenue for gaming the system.
Re:Three things about Amazon reviews (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm indifferent about it. The reviewer should be required to disclose that they received product or a promise for compensation for writing reviews.
Once they do so, their product reviews should be tagged with a Review by Paid Reviewer tag.
A star rating should not appear for the product, until there are enough reviews by non-compensated reviewers. Once they are, the compensated reviews should be kept separate, and an additional star rating should be shown that takes into account only verified purchasers.
Re: (Score:2)
1. Generally, I only put stock into the ones from verified purchasers - mainly because of all the people trying to game the reviews.
If you read about the case, Amazon did an investigation and they found that the sellers would send the "reviewers" an empty box so that the review would show up as a verified purchase. So they are trying to combat that.
2. There is a growing, serious problem with reviews submitted people who've been given a product discount and "asked" to write a review. Interestingly, they apparently are required to state that fact in the review itself, which makes it easier for me to flag all such reviews as "unhelpful".
3. Amazon has its own ludicrous program for sending free products to people expressly so they'll review the items ("Vine", I think). These are also well worthy of being flagged as unhelpful, which I try to do whenever I'm exposed to them. Come on, Amazon... I only want to hear the experiences of people who purchased the product because they needed / wanted it. I couldn't care less about the opinion of someone who received the product just because they're considered a good reviewer in general - what a dumb concept!
What is wrong with giving people who YOU and other Amazon customers have voted as writing "useful" reviews a product and ask them to review it fairly. As far as I know there are no strings attached, you don't get into the Vine program if you write "nice" reviews, you get into it if you write
Re: (Score:3)
If the person didn't think about buying the item theirself, they may not be the proper intended audience for the item. What someone who doesn't need an X will say about X is different from what someone who needs X will say about it.
Re: (Score:2)
I beg to differ. Usually a person "needing" something usually means that he/she has not something similar. A prolific reviewer who has several similar items is in a much much better position to review something by drawing from experience, whether they "need" it or not. I have read many useless reviews from people who are honest and everything, but don't realize something is not good just because it is their first of the kind.
Re: (Score:2)
Or maybe he didn't get any X so far, because he was hesitating between X1 and X2. Now that X2 landed on his desk on its own, he might just as well use (and review...) that one.
Re: (Score:2)
Sellers would send the "reviewers" an empty box so that the review would show up as a verified purchase.
That's what I would call fraud..... the review system had specific rules, and they used a technical workaround to intentionally add a false verification of purchase, then.
If the product was received for free, then they should be "Verified product owner", and "Reviewed in exchange for award or free product from Manufacturer", not "Verified purchaser"
Re: (Score:2)
Come on, Amazon... I only want to hear the experiences of people who purchased the product because they needed / wanted it.
The problem with this is that it leads to a reverse halo effect. Hell hath no fury like a buyer scorned as they say. Marketing 101 says that for every positive review a person gives about a product 10 people will give a negative review as people typically don't have much to say about a product that just works, but will do their best to let as many people know if it doesn't.
I love the concept of forced reviews for this reason. Everyone should get a discount for filling out reviews, and that may even the play
Re:Three things about Amazon reviews (Score:5, Insightful)
2. There is a growing, serious problem with reviews submitted people who've been given a product discount and "asked" to write a review. Interestingly, they apparently are required to state that fact in the review itself, which makes it easier for me to flag all such reviews as "unhelpful".
3. Amazon has its own ludicrous program for sending free products to people expressly so they'll review the items ("Vine", I think). These are also well worthy of being flagged as unhelpful, which I try to do whenever I'm exposed to them. Come on, Amazon... I only want to hear the experiences of people who purchased the product because they needed / wanted it. I couldn't care less about the opinion of someone who received the product just because they're considered a good reviewer in general - what a dumb concept!
Huh?
So, according to your logic, ALL traditional reviews of products that existed before the internet are a "dumb concept"? Things like Consumer Reports are a "dumb concept"? (Or do you think that the employees at Consumer Reports spend their own private money for the products they review?? They need to buy all of them?)
There may be many things to criticize about the Vine program and similar programs. For example, I have heard (though I haven't seen this verified) that Vine reviewers are often selected not just because they tend to write "helpful" reviews, but because they tend to write disproportionately POSITIVE reviews.
It would be like a magazine hiring a movie critic because he tended to give 4 and 5 stars to EVERY film he saw. Obviously that's dumb, and we should criticize things like that.
But the general concept of sending an educated person a product for free and asking them what they think? That's how ALL traditional reviews basically work. I've never received a free product from Amazon or anything, but I HAVE written book reviews for professional journals based on books I received for free. I'm generally asked to review them because (1) I'm an expert in the field and (2) I have written quality reviews and articles in the past.
Do you think it's unethical for me to do this?
In general, the idea of sending people free stuff to review is that they are MORE likely to look at the product from an unbiased perspective. When you look at reviews from people who only "purchased the product because they needed / wanted it," you tend to get disproportionately positive reviews as long as the product satisfies a minimal standard for most people. They needed a thing, and if that thing does the basics, they're happy -- it the thing didn't do the basics, they wouldn't have ordered it. Also, they probably were already biased in favor of the brand or specific type of product in choosing it. A reviewer who receives a product he/she didn't ask for instead has to ask, "Is this actually something I would find useful at all? Does it have interesting features? Should anyone else buy it?"
Again, I'm NOT saying the Amazon Vine program necessarily achieves these goals well or in an unbiased manner. But I think your idea that we should discount reviews from everyone who didn't NEED that specific product is ludicrous.
Re:Three things about Amazon reviews (Score:5, Informative)
No, they spend Consumer Reports' money on all of them. Consumer Reports has a policy that they never accept vendor-funded review copies specifically to avoid this conflict of interest, and also to ensure that they in fact get the same product that's being shipped to customers.
Re: (Score:2)
. Come on, Amazon... I only want to hear the experiences of people who purchased the product because they needed / wanted it. I couldn't care less about the opinion of someone who received the product just because they're considered a good reviewer in general - what a dumb concept!
Almost every video game review I've watched has been this case. The game company sends a free copy to the reviewer, because people watch that reviewer. I don't see any problem with tis as long as it's disclosed (and disclosed boldly, in a way no viewer could miss, which seems to be the legal requirement).
Idiotic philosophy. (Score:1)
Automatically marking a review "unhelpful" when it is well written, thorough, and EXPLICITLY STATES that it's a review of a product that was received for free (and down-voting it for that reason alone) is just plain stupid, period.
What a dumb concept! You'd rather hear from idiot Joe, the axe-to-grind former employee of the company that makes the product and is now on a mission disparage the company with negative reviews, or Sally the underhanded paid reviewer who writes the review for a payment having nev
Re: (Score:2)
There is a good reason to down vote these reviews. Even without malice, there is a tendency towards positive reviews from this sort of reviewer. This need not be the reviewers intention, but the manufacturer's will tend to select people who they think will write positive reviews regardless of the reason. As a reader of these reviews, being wary of them makes sense. They are, inherently, less useful.
Re: (Score:1)
I got tired of receiving follow-up communications requesting reviews after I buy something. It seems to happen almost half the time now.
This is where to report these sellers: http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/... [amazon.com]
I had no idea they were breaking the rules by doing this.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for the info. I have often received emails from vendors that demand that I give them a five star rating. The demands are couched in happy rainbow unicorn wording, but they are demands nonetheless. I refuse to comply, and have been sorely tempted to retaliate with ratings that echo how I despise their demands. But now I will probably use your useful link and report these directly. Thank you, sir!
Sometimes useful. (Score:2)
When there's a product that ships from China and has only a single, 5-star, over-the-top, broken-English verified-buyer purchase, I know to avoid the product. And all the vendor's products have similar ones... I guess we'll lose that filter.
A good start, but not the big problem (Score:4, Informative)
Far more serious are real reviewers, who are happy to give a 4 or 5 star review to anything they get for free:
http://www.amazon.com/forum/am... [amazon.com]
Amazon explicitly allows this, which I guess is better than driving it underground, but does nothing to account for this heavy reviewer bias:
"if you offer a free or discounted product in exchange for a review, you must clearly state that you welcome both positive and negative feedback. If you receive a free or discounted product in exchange for your review, you must clearly and conspicuously disclose that fact."
https://www.amazon.com/gp/help... [amazon.com]
I've seen MANY products whose 4.5 star averages are purely because the seller sends out tons of free samples in exchange for positive reviews. Meanwhile, products that are considerably less expensive but don't bribe their customers unfortunately get less prominently featured in search results because their average rating, sales counts, and review numbers are so much lower.
Re: (Score:2)
as long as they don't stop bad reviews (Score:2)
as long as they don't stop bad reviews / sue people for posting bad reviews
1 Star Reviews (Score:5, Insightful)
They should also do something about the fake 1-star reviews, the ones that tarnish a products or person's reputation. It is rampant in the e-book community, as are the 5-star reviews.
There's another reason to not write reviews... (Score:1)
If you review a product on Amazon, that will follow you until the day you die (ok, not based on experience). Not just at Amazon but all over the web.
Also, Amazon, how about fixing your search results. More than once, I've been caught by results that don't meet the search criteria. For example, a 3.5 inch drive mixed in with the results for a search that specifically states 2.5 inch. I know I should read the description completely but, for some reason, I'm biased to expect the returns to match the criteria
Bummer (Score:2)
They must mean me. I always give overly enthusiastic comments and answers when Amazon bugs me to do so, in the hope that they won't ask me again.
Easy to find (Score:2)
Fiverr must not be trying too hard to take down these services, because a search for "amazon" turns up a phony reviewer as the first hit:
https://www.fiverr.com/abigail... [fiverr.com]
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Based in: United States
Speaks: English
profile picture: blonde haired blue eyed white girl
Profile text:
"Hi
This is Abigail tess. I am very much kin to work with you about and related with any amazon work. I'm very professional and permanent worker.I can do amazon product ranking anywhere you want, I can give you 50+ reviews on a same product.
I am waiting for serving best service."
Fiverr is a cesspool of corrupt third world trash.
Not sure what your beef is. Sounds like a typical American high school graduate.
Re: (Score:2)
The classic Haribo Gummy Bear Reviews (Score:3)
Not sure how many of these are legit, but they are funny as hell, since they replace sugar with some ingredient that leads to intestinal issues.
http://www.amazon.com/Haribo-Sugar-Free-Gummy-Bears/product-reviews/B008JELLCA/ [amazon.com]
Not all fake reviews are equal! (Score:2)
I'm all for them deleting fake reviews, especially those that are written in exchange for money. But they had better leave [amazon.com] these [amazon.com] comments [amazon.com] alone [amazon.com]!
Save The Mountain Three Wolf T-Shirt! (Score:2)
I hope Amazon doesn't shut down the reviews for the The Mountain Three Wolf Moon Short Sleeve Tee [amazon.com]
It is pure Internet Gold!
Hasselhoff reviews (Score:2)
He's not just an actor, he's a golden-tongued living deity with powers far beyond the mere superhuman. Proof abounds in these Amazon reviews of his finest work: http://www.amazon.com/Very-Bes... [amazon.com]
List the companies with paidfor reviews (Score:2)
Besides the scarlet letter on the offending company, I'm guessing this will have the side-effect of scaring away any potential legitimate reviewer who would not want to be mistaken for a shill. The company learns a valuable lesson in honesty which will be forgotten in 8 seconds.
I admit I did this for about a year for extra cash (Score:5, Interesting)
I did reviews, blog comments, forum posts, and such for extra cash for almost a year.
There are companies that even pay forum commenters to try and argue a specific point. They even give tips how to get a poster with an opposing view that argues with you banned, with tricks to use to make the debate go from heated argument to using certain arguing tricks to incite the opponent into raging and cursing/name calling/etc, then get them suspended or banned thus making you look the victor in spreading a company or organization's propaganda even if you don't believe it yourself.
For example you may hate Jews, or Scientology, or Coke, or Apple, Microsoft, lists go on and on and on...
But even though you hate them, you can get paid to post pro-propaganda in a real non bot post and they give you talking points on stirring up controversy and making the thread popular and arguing with those against your side.
Toward end, when I moved from fake reviews and 5 stars, and did paid forum posts I was arguing with posters that I personally agreed with but to get paid had to "act" like I truly believed the shit I wrote. And I personally got 3 people suspended and banned by inciting them into raging. I decided it wasn't fun anymore spreading bullshit and getting paid to practically troll.
Forums they target are from news comment sections to kooky conspiracy forums like abovetopsecret.com, Slashdot, Reddit, Somethingaweful (once you've proven to be a good poster the company will buy your membership into some forums), list goes on and on.
And using Tor to create multiple accounts for creating a virtual opponent so you actually debate yourself, but just enough to bait others into it, or you wind up winning your "fake debate" with yourself.
Here's just a few examples of companies that act as the "middle man" to the corporations, organizations, and charities that pay forum posters to push specific agendas. And yes Jewish lobby is a gigantic user of these services to attack and try to get any antisemitism banned or thread locked, and political parties,SJW groups, to brand loyalty and etc. It would blow your mind how many posters on your favorite sites are actually paid shills while they may argue with you, they honestly agree with you, they get paid to incite, debate, and spread viewpoints.
http://www.paidforumposting.co... [paidforumposting.com]
http://kickstartyourforums.com... [kickstartyourforums.com]
http://thecashchat.com/forum/ [thecashchat.com]
http://www.mylot.com/ [mylot.com]
http://www.postloop.com/ [postloop.com]
http://talk4dollar.com/ [talk4dollar.com]
That's just a tiny tiny sample. But they are middle-men that way the true companies, organizations, charities have deniability of using paid shills.
Re: (Score:2)
The comical thing with this post is that you may be using the techniques you describe to kickstart a conversation in which you're replying to yourself and/or setting up a disinformation campaign.
Or you may be legit.
The two anonymous replies already received however.. they're fitting straight into the 'paid for' bracket.
I shall watch this thread with interest :)
Easy Fix (Score:1)
No products sold actually work (Score:2)
What I've determined whenever I look at the reviews of a product on Amazon (or any site) is that no product produced actually works. Every product has the people that received DOA items, or they broke on first use.
Though my favorite is the five-star review I saw for "Box was damaged so I returned it unopened, but what I saw of it, it looked okay"