Purging the Vendetta reviews

[Mando]

If the Beaver Ranch reviews are going to be deleted, then it's only fair that other types of these reviews with artificially low ratings are deleted as well;
Black Falls 1.5
Maple Hill .5 and 2 (same group)
Whippin Post 1
Woodshed 0
These ratings are making a mockery of the top 25 and it's no coincidence that all are pay to play.
If Tim is too busy to deal with it, maybe the moderators can step in.

 

[Monocacy]

In other realms (Amazon, etc.) it is pretty clear that crowdsourced ratings can be abused. I wonder what sort of criteria other websites use to distinguish fair reviews from punitive reviews.

If you have enough reviews the punitive ones mostly drop out, but excellent courses out in the boonies can be more strongly affected. Is there a statistical measure or score weighting that would do a decent job of fairly excluding punitive reviews without eliminating legitimate differences of opinion?

 

[Mando]

In other realms (Amazon, etc.) it is pretty clear that crowdsourced ratings can be abused. I wonder what sort of criteria other websites use to distinguish fair reviews from punitive reviews.

If you have enough reviews the punitive ones mostly drop out, but excellent courses out in the boonies can be more strongly affected. Is there a statistical measure or score weighting that would do a decent job of fairly excluding punitive reviews without eliminating legitimate differences of opinion?

Great points. If one of the DGCR review rules is, " do not give out an artificially low rating" and one or two folks toss out a rating of 2.5 or less on a course with an average of 4 or more, that's artificially low in my book.
And as you mention, when it happens to a course like Black Falls with a relatively low number of reviews, it's devastating.
In addition to P2P, difficult courses get these same artificially low ratings, just because folks get their ass kicked by the course.

 

[DavidSauls]

Beaver Ranch's reviews have been in a special class: not only were they obviously hit jobs, but obviously for personal reasons, unrelated to course quality, and in quantity that indicates a conspiracy to sabotage the course for personal reasons.

I thought one of the Maple Hill reviews---dinging the course because he couldn't retrieve his lost disc---crossed the line, too.

It's trickier if it's a low rating, but the review states or claims that it's an honest opinion of the course, just out of step with the consensus. For those who remember Redneck Machismo, who obviously had his own idea what constituted a good course, and seemed to knock a rating down a half-point for every tree present. But at least he was honest about it.

 

[Mando]

For those who remember Redneck Machismo, who obviously had his own idea what constituted a good course, and seemed to knock a rating down a half-point for every tree present. But at least he was honest about it.

Oh yea ? Read his review of Woodshed...he gave it a zero. Nothing honest about that.

 

[DavidSauls]

Oh yea ? Read his review of Woodshed...he gave it a zero. Nothing honest about that.

Thanks. That was fun. I hadn't read it, and wouldn't have ever read it without the tip.

But I don't know---the Pros, Cons, and ratings were very consistent with RM's taste in courses, and other reviews. I'd say that was honest---way off the bell curve, but honestly what he thinks.

The tale about the car chase, maybe not, but it's not like Beaver Ranch, where people have been talking about the course being good, but not liking the owners, and rating that a 0.

 

[bjreagh]

I have been reading the Top 10 threads and Beaver Ranch threads. This thread however seems like an appropriate place for my thoughts.

With outlier low reviews (or high for that matter), do the reasons cited justify the rating? Maybe a high rated course does not appeal to somebody- which is fair. Or maybe there was something bad about it on a given day or time period? Who knows.

But these BR reviews clearly stated how great the course is, but were then given a rating that did not match their own course description. In fact, if the course was not so great in their minds, this whole thing would not be as big of a deal. Instead, they were actually "reviewing" an owner and a situation. Now I do think these things can be a factor in a rating, but it was clear in this case as to what was happening- people were mad and looking for attention and support (boycott) in a dramatic fashion, and as somebody else mentioned: unfairly dragging DGCR into a dispute.

It wasn't always this way on here, but now DGCR has things like course conditions and a wall plus FORUMS, which to me are a much more appropriate place to discuss things like what are happening with BR.

Example- I once [early on in DGCR] had a review removed. Drove a long ways, course had no baskets. I gave it a 0.0 and explained there was nothing to play. I hated to do it, but I wanted others to know. Turns out they were temporarily pulled, so I had no problem with my review getting deleted. Examples like this are likely what inspired the course conditions feature, so we can share this type of info without having to give a rating/review.

I am not familiar off the top of my head with the other reviews Mando referenced without going back and reading them. And you can't make everyone happy but I believe Tim and the mods do try to be as fair as possible when having to make decisions like this. Besides, this isn't life or death, just a course rating and overall ranking we are talking about. I won't get into it here, but I know discussions have happened ad naseum about formulas and qualifications for counting reviews and coming up with a rating.

Well anyways, my 2 cents.

 

[thrembo]

Check out the review spread for this course. It has two 1 disc reviews and two 5 disc reviews on the first page. It's almost batting for the cycle.


https://www.dgcoursereview.com/course.php?id=7293

 

[Chiefstang]

There is so much lol here. They're reviews. There are any number of things that would factor in a review, personal experiences included. The whole "delete the review because it's not the same as others and I don't agree with it" gaffe is ridiculous. "This review is a homer inflation, delete it! This one is a personal vendetta, delete it!"

When you have a review site that deletes reviews, that site becomes worthless.

 

[AHagglund]

Dunno why we couldn't just drop the lowest two and highest two scores on courses with at least 5 reviews. Would force out the outliers.

 

[Mando]

Dunno why we couldn't just drop the lowest two and highest two scores on courses with at least 5 reviews. Would force out the outliers.

exactly, the perfect solution...but it would be too much work.

 

[DavidSauls]

When you have a review site that deletes reviews, that site becomes worthless.

And yet, it hasn't.

 

[Mando]

When you have a review site that deletes reviews, that site becomes worthless.

You omitted one key word, I think. deletes reviews...selectively... then that site becomes worthless

 

[DavidSauls]

Dunno why we couldn't just drop the lowest two and highest two scores on courses with at least 5 reviews. Would force out the outliers.

On a course with 5 reviews, that would leave 1. On a course with 50 reviews, the effect would be negligible.

Of course, you could do that. Or the top 10% and bottom 10% of reviews for a given course. Or the ones more than 2 years old. Or the ones more than 2 years old, subject to a 10-review minimum. Or any of a thousand variations to "perfect" the course ratings, each with bringing cries than another editing formula would be "more perfect". Most of which would bring only slight changes to a course's ratings, anyway.

Which is why I think Tim is wise to minimize the meddling in the course ratings---a minimum number for the Top 10 list, and weeding out the most egregiously agenda-driven ones.

 

[Cgkdisc]

There are statistical equations that could be set up to automatically suppress bogus review scores. But similar to PAR, who would want statistics used to improve procedures?

 

[DiscGolfCraig]

When you have a review site that deletes reviews, that site becomes worthless.

When you let 25-200 people out of hundreds of thousands of disc golfers determine a top 10 list, said list already is worthless.

 

[DavidSauls]

When you let 25-200 people out of hundreds of thousands of disc golfers determine a top 10 list, said list already is worthless.

Except when compared to all the other lists of top 10 courses.

 

[DavidSauls]

But presumably, the issue of vendetta reviews extends to more than the Top 10. Or Top 25.

 

[Mando]

Others that come to mind, Highbridge-Blueberry and Gold, Nockamixon & Iron Hill

 

[DiscGolfCraig]

But presumably, the issue of vendetta reviews extends to more than the Top 10. Or Top 25.

Whippin Post in Paw Paw, WV is currently the 59th rated course - 4.41. rating. Take away Jmk5704's bs review, it jumps up to #31 and a 4.57 rating.

Point being is anyone more likely to play here because a bs review was pulled? Is there a difference in being the 31st or 57th, or 9th, 15th, or 70th rated course? An elite course is an elite course.