Slashdot Mirror


Amazon Lawsuit Aims To Kill Fake Reviews (theguardian.com)

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.

125 comments

  1. why review? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re: why review? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Only if tou make stupid reviews that look like thin attempts at fullfilling a review quota.

    2. Re:why review? by KGIII · · 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.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    3. Re: why review? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just like it's stupid to write comments on /. or post shit on FB. I should be paid for adding value to their products.

    4. Re:why review? by Anonymous Coward · · 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...

    5. Re:why review? by Dzimas · · Score: 4, 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.

    6. Re:why review? by serviscope_minor · · 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)

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    7. Re:why review? by chipschap · · 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.

    8. Re:why review? by BlueUnderwear · · 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?

      --
      Say no to software patents.
    9. Re:why review? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

      Moron... They are only going to sue you if someone pays you to post an artificial review.

    10. Re:why review? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did the same thing with video games between 2006 until 2012ish when I finally burned out. Sure I accepted a comp here and there considering they hand game codes out like candy, but what built a solid following was being brutally honest. Unfortunately death threats are par for the course when it comes to things people are passionate like video games and from one amateur critic to another thanks for sticking to your guns and not caving in. It's a scummy world out there where everyone is trying to influence you one way or the other.

    11. Re:why review? by chipschap · · Score: 3, 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.

    12. Re:why review? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would kill reviews like this warning away people from counterfeit products.

    13. Re: why review? by Anonymous Coward · · 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.

    14. Re:why review? by NerdyLove · · Score: 1

      Also BIC Cristal For Her!

    15. Re:why review? by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I've only read the banana ones. I'll be reading the others this evening. Thanks. :D

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    16. Re:why review? by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      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.

    17. Re:why review? by Aighearach · · Score: 2

      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.

    18. Re:why review? by RuffMasterD · · Score: 1

      Some products are just begging for fake reviews... hat tip Badonkadonk land cruiser :-)

      --
      Human Rights, Article 12: Freedom from Interference with Privacy, Family, Home and Correspondence
    19. Re:why review? by DrXym · · Score: 1

      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 I be expected to buy this shit in order to criticize it? The only beneficiaries from this would the people peddling bullshit.

      And more mundanely maybe I just own the product in question simply want to review it online.

      It's a terrible idea to block legitimate reviews regardless of someone owning a product or not. I'm sure it might stop shill reviews (much like lopping one's head off is a cure for headlice), but it doesn't make it a reasonable or good idea. If Amazon want to stop shills then they need to proactively monitor for suspicious activity and start weighting reviews and products based on the trustworthiness of the reviews, and yes if they've bought it.

    20. Re:why review? by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      Presumably they're only concerned with the genuinely misleading ones. Nobody is going to see those reviews and not realise it's a joke. It has the side effect of attracting more people but it's doing so in an honest way and doesn't damage Amazon's brand.

      The fraudulent views do damage the brand. People can't tell whether to take these seriously or not.

    21. Re:why review? by FingerDemon · · Score: 1

      And the one about the $10,000 flat screen TV.

      --

      "Contrarily the lookaside buffer might not be the panacea... "
    22. Re:why review? by Shirley+Marquez · · Score: 1

      Real reviews from people who didn't buy a product from Amazon are possible. I have done some myself, of products that I bought when another supplier had a better price or Amazon was out of stock.

    23. Re:why review? by CriminalNerd · · Score: 1

      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.

  2. Should we sue all advertisers too? by popo · · Score: 3, 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

    --
    ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
    1. Re:Should we sue all advertisers too? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, we should, in addition to passing consumer-protection laws that punish lying for profit. GM and VW should have been given the corporate death penalty already.

    2. Re:Should we sue all advertisers too? by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You can actually complain about false advertising here. Major advertisers know the rules though, and get close to the line of illegality without actually crossing it. Although not always.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:Should we sue all advertisers too? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The issue isn't "false" advertising per se. It's advertising that's mimicking factual content or user opinion.

      And that's exactly what the advertising industry is pushing as its next big thing: Native ads.

    4. Re:Should we sue all advertisers too? by Intron · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
    5. Re:Should we sue all advertisers too? by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1

      Strangely I can't find much recently about his politics. According to this he is a libertarian who supports gay marriage, gives primarily to Democrats but not exclusively, and his PAC supports both parties.

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
  3. Amazon is not suing Fiverr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Amazon is not suing Fiverr

    OK, then... Wait, what?

    1. Re: Amazon is not suing Fiverr by Dan+East · · Score: 2

      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.

      --
      Better known as 318230.
    2. Re: Amazon is not suing Fiverr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They should go after Microworkers too. And every other website that pays people to do shit.

    3. Re: Amazon is not suing Fiverr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And every other website that pays people to do shit.

      Mechanical Turk?

  4. Tongue in cheek reviews? by Dan+East · · Score: 3, Informative

    What about reviews written tongue in cheek for humor? Amazon seems to actually embrace them:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/featu...

    How is the USB cable review different than the ones in the link above?

    --
    Better known as 318230.
    1. Re:Tongue in cheek reviews? by ayesnymous · · Score: 1

      Yeah George Takei posts a lot of those. I was hoping Amazon would ban him, but I guess not.

    2. Re:Tongue in cheek reviews? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    3. Re:Tongue in cheek reviews? by Cederic · · Score: 1

      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.

  5. Awesome article, would buy again! by JoeyRox · · Score: 5, Funny

    A+++++

    1. Re:Awesome article, would buy again! by antdude · · Score: 2

      ATH0
      OK

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    2. Re: Awesome article, would buy again! by mnemotronic · · Score: 1

      ahhh. A man ^H^H^H person after my own HUP.

      --
      The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
  6. On what ground?? What is legal reason for civil ca by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If normal person writes review about the product whats amazon legal reason to civil court case????

  7. Interesting how will they categorize "false"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Humor, for instance can almost always be false. http://www.amazon.com/review/R2XKMDXZHQ26YX/ref=cm_cr_dp_title?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B002HJ377A&channel=detail-glance&nodeID=1036592&store=apparel

  8. One more reason to avoid Amazon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why leave a review if you could get incorrectly caught up in something like this down the line?

  9. amazon reviews are THE BEST! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    They are THE MOST accurate reviews I have ever seen or heard of! AAA++++++++++++++ accuracy! Would read them again!!!!!!! Top value!

  10. Three things about Amazon reviews by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, 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!

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:Three things about Amazon reviews by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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!

      You hear that Consumer Reports? Your entire magazine is a dumb concept.

    2. Re:Three things about Amazon reviews by evilviper · · Score: 1

      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!

      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 product ratings up.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    3. Re:Three things about Amazon reviews by Ecuador · · Score: 1

      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 many reviews that people find helpful. Yes, I'd rather read the review of someone who did not think about buying the item themselves, but is a good reviewer in general.

      --
      Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
    4. Re:Three things about Amazon reviews by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    5. Re:Three things about Amazon reviews by 93+Escort+Wagon · · 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.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    6. Re:Three things about Amazon reviews by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      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 playing field a bit between the good and the bad.

    7. Re:Three things about Amazon reviews by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 4, 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.

    8. Re:Three things about Amazon reviews by lgw · · Score: 1

      . 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).

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    9. Re:Three things about Amazon reviews by Gavagai80 · · Score: 2

      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.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    10. Re:Three things about Amazon reviews by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because we usually buy what we need. Right.

    11. Re:Three things about Amazon reviews by Ecuador · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
    12. Re:Three things about Amazon reviews by mysidia · · Score: 3, 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.

    13. Re:Three things about Amazon reviews by mysidia · · Score: 1

      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"

    14. Re:Three things about Amazon reviews by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

      Has Consumer Reports every reviewed Linux or anything open source?
      I've never seen one...

    15. Re:Three things about Amazon reviews by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think they've tried but every time they do they've had to needed a package that wouldnt install or couldnt get the automake to build.

    16. Re:Three things about Amazon reviews by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      Maybe the person already has an X1 (which he bought, because he needed it), and now he's being sent an X2 for free. If he actually finds that the X2 fits his needs better than the X1, he might actually discard/resell the X1 and keep the X2.

      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.

    17. Re:Three things about Amazon reviews by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 4, Informative

      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?

      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.

  11. Re:On what ground?? What is legal reason for civil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    we should have the legal right to kill bezos in self defense then. fuck amazon. time for a corporate death penalty.

  12. I've been reporting sellers lately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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/reports

    1. Re:I've been reporting sellers lately by BradleyUffner · · 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/...

      I had no idea they were breaking the rules by doing this.

    2. Re:I've been reporting sellers lately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Me neither, and I don't see how when I read the participation agreement.

      However, I was told to do this by Customer Service when I complained that I don't want to be contacted by the resellers.

      So, for now I report even if it's just to be an asshole. But I might eventually escalate and write negative feedback ratings for the resellers, even though I never wrote any feedback for anything yet.

      Well, to be honest, Amazon doesn't have the same value for me as it once did. Even a small annoyance like this helps to unfavorably tip the scale.

    3. Re:I've been reporting sellers lately by glitch! · · Score: 1

      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!

      --
      A dingo ate my sig...
    4. Re:I've been reporting sellers lately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bought a $10 can opener and got spammed twice a week by the seller to write a review, so this is the 1-star review I wrote... "Works good for opening spam, because the seller spams me twice a week to write a review. And the can opener is already broken"

  13. Great! Next up: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Finding a way to prevent the majority of online reviews from being written by the grade school kids currently polluting virtually every site. It's nice that they participate, but the opinion of an eleven-year-old really isn' that useful in pragmatic terms to me. I don't bother leaving or reading reviews anymore.

  14. Sometimes useful. by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    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.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  15. Next up: by r-diddly · · Score: 0

    Amazon sues itself to get rid of false & misleading EMPLOYEE reviews.

  16. A good start, but not the big problem by evilviper · · Score: 3, 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 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...

    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.

    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    1. Re:A good start, but not the big problem by blindbat · · Score: 1

      I agree. The overwhelming positive reviews for stuff you know can't be 5 star (cheap bluetooth speakers, etc.) has made me completely ignore any of the "paid for with free product" reviews. Those reviewers often go into great length writing about product descriptions or packaging and ultimately aren't worth a damn. The real reviews that have ratings and reviews that aren't gushing are the ones I trust. The whole free product for reviews system needs to die.

    2. Re:A good start, but not the big problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then there are the reviewers who go for bulk so they can stay up in the 'top reviewers' list. It's noticeable in book reviews when someone's stable of reviews are all somewhat lengthy but completely vacuous 5-star reviews of books of nearly every genre available.

  17. as long as they don't stop bad reviews by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    as long as they don't stop bad reviews / sue people for posting bad reviews

  18. 1 Star Reviews by Anonymous Coward · · 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.

  19. I must have missed the memo.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..which said I was legally obligated to pay any attention to the ToS of any random website. I hope their review system gets shitflooded and ddosed to the point that it's completely useless and they make a futile attempt to sue every Tor exit node and VPN in existence. Good riddance, fuckheads.

  20. There's another reason to not write reviews... by lhowaf · · 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.

  21. Bummer by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    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.

  22. How Amazon stole me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Still waiting for my gift :
    How Amazon steal people

  23. I worry about the funny ones by fyngyrz · · Score: 5, Funny

    I worry about losing the funny ones. Like these.

    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.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    1. Re: I worry about the funny ones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, reading reviews of inflatable furniture and toilet paper makes me laugh. Sometimes totally out loud

    2. Re:I worry about the funny ones by Megane · · Score: 1

      Not mentioning The Story About Ping? Heathen.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    3. Re:I worry about the funny ones by Anonymous Coward · · 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.

    4. Re:I worry about the funny ones by locopuyo · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't worry about those. Amazon has embraced them and even shared a list of funny reviews before.

    5. Re:I worry about the funny ones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you, I just laughed my ass off.

      Incidentally, I wonder if Amazon is suing unpaid fake reviews...like the fake critical reviews I put up in an attempt to drive consumer interest away from a product I want, so the price comes down a bit before I buy it.

    6. Re:I worry about the funny ones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or these, which became unexpectedly popular after the second Presidential debate in 2012.

    7. Re:I worry about the funny ones by wienerschnizzel · · Score: 1

      This one got really popular earlier this year!

    8. Re:I worry about the funny ones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not funny

    9. Re:I worry about the funny ones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      reviews are paid for. so are web trolls doing propaganda. click load all comments and slide bar over. see how the system works to hide posts.

  24. Easy to find by evilviper · · Score: 1

    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...

    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    1. Re:Easy to find by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I think Amazon realizes it would be like suing the road after a bank robbery. The road may have been used in the bank robbery, but suing it will lose, and make you look like an ass.

  25. The FCC doesn't regulate humor by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    they do, however, regulate paid endorsements. See the difference?

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  26. get a load of that profile? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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.

    1. Re:get a load of that profile? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2, 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.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  27. The classic Haribo Gummy Bear Reviews by HockeyPuck · · Score: 2

    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/

  28. Wow Amazon that's swell Chum! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  29. go away greenwow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And stop replying to your own idiotic posts

    1. Re:go away greenwow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought it was rubycodez.

  30. UK problems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Say what you will shit consumer laws in the U.S. At least we can lampoon a product on its own page. Whatever dope Guardian writers are smoking; they forgot in the U.S. This kind of lawsuit can almost get you laughed out of court.

  31. Idiotic philosophy. by Anonymous Coward · · 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 never even laid eyes on the product and doesn't disclose it at all, or Bill the company's marketing guy who just posts positive reviews of his own products to generate buzz but acts as though he's a normal customer, or Steve the e-commerce moron who writes a 1-star review discussing how bad UPS messed up the box in shipment and doesn't even mention the product itself, or Nancy the mostly-illiterate, who writes incomprehensible gobbledygook that might be in some way related to the product, but rates it 1-star because it's "#1, the best."

    Quite frankly, I'd MUCH MUCH rather have reviews from people who can actually write, are skilled at writing comprehensive and thorough reviews (as determined by the community of shoppers), and are honest about both their motivations and their product experiences. Essentially every single tech site and publication and YouTube channel and professional reviewer gets some products for free and/or is sponsored by manufacturers, and they don't always review things positively or benchmark things generously either. When I know who is writing the review and why, I can take that information into account along with the review's actual content and come to my own conclusion. This is especially helpful when it's a newly introduced product and there aren't any other reviews of it yet. I don't want to be the only guinea pig, especially if it's moderately to high priced.

    So please stop trying to down-rank those reviews on "principle" and make me wade through the cesspool of idiocy and nearly unreadable reviews mentioned above just to get to the ones that, you know, tell me why I might or might not be interested in the product.. I'm smart enough to decide for myself if I trust the reviewer to be impartial or if the information in it is valuable without someone making a blanket judgement based only on one factor that they're fully honest and up-front about!

    I only downvote reviews that actually suck (there are a lot of them), or that are obviously fake (for example one user reviewing all the products from just one company, often on the same day, and with no other reviews, or several reviewers with very suspiciously similar reviews all posted around the same time and often being the only review they've written).

    1. Re:Idiotic philosophy. by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      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.

    2. Re:Idiotic philosophy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That has not been my experience, at all. I read, and write a lot of reviews and _usually_ (admittedly not always) the reviews of free products are among the more informative and useful to me in deciding which product to purchase, whether negative or positive. It's pretty easy to tell when someone is just trying to pump up a product versus a fair evaluation, especially when I already know they received the product for free. For example, if they only gush over how great it is, but don't really explain in detail why, or mention anything even remotely negative, nor mention the specific annoyances that another product they've tried has and that this product improves on. Frankly, the gushing, but not very detailed non-free-product (and sometimes even verified purchase) reviews are the worst. Sometimes they seem to have hundreds of them on one single product and they use them to deliberately bury the honest reviews under a giant pile of astroturf. More often than not, none of those says they received the product for free (most of them have probably never even seen the product), but when I notice a product with hundreds of such seemingly fake reviews, I know to avoid that product altogether.

      On the other hand I've even seen a few 5-star reviews of USB cables that were actually justified (especially fast-charging Micro-USB cables). There are so many absolute crap cables out there these days that finding one that's actually reliable, fits snugly, is capable of properly fast charging, and doesn't look/feel flimsy or fail in a week or two is pretty rare, and at this point pretty much deserves 5 stars. You can't even trust the "name brand" cables on Amazon, et, al. anymore because they're usually counterfeit or old and intended for much earlier and lower-powered devices.

  32. Not all fake reviews are equal! by Somebody+Is+Using+My · · Score: 1

    I'm all for them deleting fake reviews, especially those that are written in exchange for money. But they had better leave these comments alone!

  33. Save The Mountain Three Wolf T-Shirt! by Irate+Engineer · · Score: 1

    I hope Amazon doesn't shut down the reviews for the The Mountain Three Wolf Moon Short Sleeve Tee

    It is pure Internet Gold!

    --

    Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!

    Vote for Bernie in 2016!

  34. Hasselhoff reviews by bjs555 · · Score: 1

    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...

  35. List the companies with paidfor reviews by mnemotronic · · Score: 1

    Just put a little popup next to the company name stating "In the past this company has paid reviewers for positive reviews. The veracity of the reviews below cannot be confirmed or denied."

    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.

    --
    The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
  36. I admit I did this for about a year for extra cash by Cito · · 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...
    http://kickstartyourforums.com...
    http://thecashchat.com/forum/
    http://www.mylot.com/
    http://www.postloop.com/
    http://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.

  37. Re:I admit I did this for about a year for extra c by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For example you may hate Jews, or Scientology, or Coke, or Apple, Microsoft, lists go on and on and on...

    This post itself looks like a ruse. Guiding the public to determine facts/fiction by love/hate is wrong on principle. Appeal to emotion is #1 in subterfuge. You list some websites (will not click them) as if to give yourself credibility because you are an actual shill. This is a nested loop of red flags.

    pro tip: calmly analyze facts even if, and especially if, it's a "hot issue" like your government selling you down the river for Israel, or a company turning on the entire globe and updating their product (Windows) to full adware/malware/spyware like Windows 10 is.

    Intelligent people don't need to be advised, but maybe reminded.

    The post I am responding to reaks of total bullshit. Two false religions, a common soft drink, and two proprietary operating systems.. and then "it goes on and on".. naw homie.

    This "confessed shill" is trying to shill you while saying "i'm not shilling you". Doesn't seem profound whatsoever either. I am picturing the stereotypical used car salesman or a gypsy at a Metro station with a baby in her arms asking for change. smh

  38. Re:I admit I did this for about a year for extra c by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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...
    http://kickstartyourforums.com...
    http://thecashchat.com/forum/
    http://www.mylot.com/
    http://www.postloop.com/
    http://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.

    Looks like damage control from a self-proclaimed shill. Used to sell bridges in Brooklyn area... but not any more. Now just telling it like it is. Uh huh. Posts list of shill links. Yeah ok. *cough* bullshit *cough*

    shill /SHil/
    North Americaninformal
    noun
    noun: shill; plural noun: shills

    1.
    an accomplice of a hawker, gambler, or swindler who acts as an enthusiastic customer to entice or encourage others.
    a person who pretends to give an impartial endorsement of something in which they themselves have an interest.
    "a megamillionaire who makes more money as a shill for corporate products than he does for playing basketball"

    verb
    verb: shill; 3rd person present: shills; past tense: shilled; past participle: shilled; gerund or present participle: shilling

    1.
    act or work as a shill.

    O

  39. Re:- distraction theater - by Cederic · · 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.

  40. Easy Fix by wkwilley2 · · Score: 1

    I was a reviewer for Newegg for a while where they would give you an item and you had 2 weeks to post a review on the item you received. That lasted for about 6 months before I stopped receiving assignments. I was always honest with my reviews, most of the items I received were useful and good in quality, though there were a few that did not work properly or had some inherent issues with their design. It's an easy problem to fix though. If that person didn't purchase the item from Amazon, they shouldn't be allowed to post a review. I think it should go the same way for other sites as well. If they don't do this, then the weight of the review from a non "Verified Purchaser" should be zero. It should have no effect on the review score and should show up lower in the results.

    --
    Have you ever fallen asleep at the keybhanusdiog?
  41. Re:I admit I did this for about a year for extra c by Cederic · · Score: 1

    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 :)

  42. Product was great, got me to Valhalla by ender9441 · · Score: 0

    Immortan Joe will look at you.

    http://www.amazon.com/Wilton-7...

    SHINY AND CHROME! WITNESS ME!

  43. No products sold actually work by Sabalon · · Score: 1

    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"

  44. Re:I admit I did this for about a year for extra c by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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 :)

    consider facts, that is how simple it is.

    facts are not a disinformation campaign by definition of facts. appeals to emotion are where bamboozling and subterfuge dwell.

    there is literally nothing comical about any of those posts, but you say there is.

  45. - Jew trolls - by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't give a sht whether scum jew troll 'skip' my posts or not. The Facts are stated clearly in my post. The JEW tribe now has trillions in weapons, the robbing, scheming, child raping mass murdering jew tribe has been spraying NANO CHIP CHEMTRAILS for a period of years, and recently added a bio weapon lab virus to the spraying to start the cull of nordic whites. For those who are not scum jews distracting on the web so no one does anything to stop them before their cull, see other information in 'distraction theater' post above. Keep copy to re read, postal mail info to others, put links on notes, hand out to everyone. You won't see a post like this much longer. Don't waste time. Get off the web get off your ass. No one is coming to save you. Make tribes, stop the jews, they mass murdered using your ignorance for world takeover, now the weapons are pointed at you. No one will stop them but you. Hand out notes to meet real people, make tribes.

    Add this to the links in the other post - they do this now to masses of children they are also behind the massive child porno and pedophilia snuff worldwide - - skrewdriver.net/ritual.html

  46. racist Jew supremacist - by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only jews do the 'racist' bs. It was jews - 'who brought the slaves to america' by walter white, archive.org . The jews brought and owned most of them, then when the southerners were seceding to be free of bogus jew 'government', the jews ran around screeching 'free the slaves' so scum idiot northerners went and slaughtered their southern racial kin who were trying to be free of the jew. A century later after jews were making up bogus version of the kkk to stoke division, the same time bashing general 'whites' for slavery which most didn't own slaves and there were over 300k white irish slaves, the jews screeched again to con the bogus 'minorities' bs so jews gave themselves 'special' status to further crush whites with false guilt so idiot whites would pay for lying jews and blacks we owed nothing to and for every 'welfare' and scum immigrant parasite. In 1965, 95% of the usa population was white. Mostly nordic white, some millions of 'white' ashkenazi jew race faking as 'white'. They are not nordic white. It's jews behind the mass immigration destruction of us.
    http://balder.org/judea/Hate-Speech-Laws-Immigration-Jewish-Influence-USA.php

    It's millions in 'white' ashkenazi in jews 'govt', jew 'media' masses of jew trolls on the web that screech 'racist' bs so jews keeps other races hating general 'whites' for wha JEWS do, while what's left of real whites sit on their asses allowing the fraud. Those that do the 'racist' or 'hate speech' bs are JEWS or dupes and co-parasites with the jew. The JEW is the ultimate racist while they screech 'don't be racist' at nordic whites. . There is no such thing as 'white supremacist' on the 'white' skin Ashkenazi JEW supremacist.

    Add that link and these to the others in 'distraction theater' and jew troll posts -

    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/Auschwitz.htm
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/Hopie_ike.htm
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/810dresden_primary.htm

    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/81murder_incorporated.htm
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/Coure_d_Arlene.htm
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/False_Flags_summary.htm

    And tell anyone screeching 'racist' to FCK Off. To be 'racist' is to think. To discriminate is to use your brain.

    It's everyone's right to be racist. The scum JEWS just beat it out of true whites while pumping up bullshit 'pride' in every other race and their own. Scheming lying scum. Chemtrail virus.

    “We Jews put issue upon issue to the American people. Then we promote both sides of the issue as confusion reigns. With their eye’s fixed on the issues, they fail to see who is behind every scene. We Jews toy with the American public as a cat toys with a mouse”
    – Harold Rosenthal

    We Jews, we, the destroyers, will remain the destroyers forever. Nothing that you will do will meet our needs and demands. We will forever destroy because we need a world of our own. ~ Maurice Samuels, 1942.

    I don't care if Americans think we're running the news media, hollywood, wall street or the government. I just care that we get to keep running them. - Joel Stein LA Times 2009

    "Our race is the Master Race. We are divine gods on this planet. We are as different from the inferior races as they are from insects. In fact, compared to our race, other races are beasts and animals, cattle at best. Other races are considered as human excrement. Our destiny is to rule over the inferior races. Our earthly kingdom will be ruled by our leader with a rod of iron. The masses will lick our feet and serve us as our slaves" - Menachem Begin

    "We have exterminated the property owners in Russia. We are going to do the same thing in Europe and America.” - The Jew 1925 Zinobit

  47. - hidden posts- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    have click show all comments button - and also slide bar over at top to see all posts. have to do Both to see all posts. notice what they hide.