Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Amazon Puts New Limit On Customer Reviews: No More Than 5 a Week Except For Verified Purchases (geekwire.com)

Posted by msmash on from the fixing-things dept.

Amazon says it will start capping the number of product reviews any customer can submit in a given week, limiting each person to five/week except for products that have been verified by the company as purchased by the reviewer. From a GeekWire report: Books, music and video are exempt from the limit, but the new cap applies to the rest of Amazon's vast online selection of products. It's the latest move by the e-commerce giant to police its online reviews, a critical resource used by many online shoppers to assess products before buying. The news comes during the peak holiday shopping season, the most important time of year for Amazon, as the company tries to get more people comfortable with doing more of their shopping online. An Amazon spokeswoman confirmed the changes in a message to GeekWire, and they're spelled out in Amazon's updated Community Guidelines.

95 comments

  1. A pity, but not a surprise by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 3, Informative

    It only makes sense that you should only be allowed to review something you've actually bought through the site, but man will I miss the comedy reviews. The reviews for the Trump Christmas tree ornament hat are GOLD, as were the reviews for uranium in a can and all the others.

    1. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by dmomo · · Score: 4, Informative

      You can still make up to five comedy reviews a week. Not all is lost.

    2. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by TWX · · Score: 1

      I've reviewed a couple of products on Amazon that I didn't buy on Amazon, but only when some quirk or another really stood out that a buyer would have no way of knowing about prior to purchase. One of them was for a label maker that cuts off the labels electrically, but still requires the user to manually trigger the process through one of the buttons on the labelmaker's keypad instead of being capable of auto-cutting. This makes no sense to me, especially when it still does this when generating labels through software on the computer and printing them via USB to the labelmaker. As this is supposed to be an industrial-grade labelmaker, this quirk is obnoxious when generating hundreds of labels for structured cabling or data switches.

      If any issues with a product are self-evident then I don't see a need to review the product that I didn't buy there though.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    3. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by burtosis · · Score: 1

      You can still make up to five comedy reviews a week. Not all is lost.

      You should get additional review points for brilliant reviews. It adds to the sites bottom line after all.

    4. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by dj245 · · Score: 2

      It only makes sense that you should only be allowed to review something you've actually bought through the site, but man will I miss the comedy reviews. The reviews for the Trump Christmas tree ornament hat are GOLD, as were the reviews for uranium in a can and all the others.

      You can still write 5 reviews per week for items that you haven't bought. That should be plenty for legitimate purposes.

      The real issue with Amazon is that the actual seller's feedback score is not clearly shown on the product page. If you want feedback for the actual seller, it is buried at least 1 click away. Other websites with 'marketplaces' make this a lot more transparent on the product page. Putting their feedback score front and center would fix several issues. Not every problem, but Amazon's reluctance to do even that shows to me that they don't take the problems of chinese sellers seriously.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    5. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by Tx · · Score: 1

      They're capping each person to five reviews a week where they're not verified purchasers, not banning them. Why do you think the comedy reviews will disappear? I doubt it will affect those at all, since serious serial reviewers are probably not the people leaving those comedy reviews.

      --
      Oh no... it's the future.
    6. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by Penguinisto · · Score: 4, Insightful

      TBH, I would much prefer that *only* verified buyers review an item.

      Yeah, I admit that the joke reviews are often seriously great comedy, but honestly - verified buyers only means that potential buyers will know one way or the other if the thing is worthwhile. This is especially true when it comes to anything political, or anything sold by Twitter's Target Of The Week - hordes of frothing people with a keyboard and a bad case of butthurt (or worse, SJW fever) flood the item with bad reviews, even though they've never paid money for the thing.

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    7. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not about being legitimate, people get free crap from sellers, review it, then sell it; it's an income stream that also does not get declared to the relevant tax authorities. That's the bloody problem! If you fail to do 5* the expected review, you don't get more shit to "review" which can then be sold.

    8. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I agree, the comedy reviews are funny and IMO deserve their own webpage.... It does make it hard for a discerning consumer like myself to believe or trust anything anyone put on any website comment section... ever.

    9. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or they could put the control into the shopper's hands by accepting all reviews and providing filters:
      - hide reviews from non-verified buyers
      - hide reviews from prolific reviewers (today's concern)

    10. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by MooseTick · · Score: 2

      I'd like to see results separated from verified buyers and everything else. If the results are too far apart, then that would seem to indicate someone may be pulling a scam.

      --
      Ninjas don't carry tic tacs
    11. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by unixisc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't get why Amazon or any shopping site would allow non-buyers to review stuff, or even conversely (aside from sociopathic trolls) why people would review products they didn't get from there. If I bought something from Bed, Bath & Beyond and didn't like it, I'd sort it out w/ them, and maybe post something on the product's website, but I wouldn't post that on Amazon. Unless I bought the product in question from there.

      If it's a real scam, take them to court or the BBB, but other than that, it's not my job to put companies out of business and even more people out of work

    12. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by DogDude · · Score: 0

      So, why do you feel that it's your responsibility to tell other random people about random stuff you buy? Are you getting paid to do so?

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    13. Re: A pity, but not a surprise by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      Item I am selling gets negative reviews.
      Remove listing.
      Relist item with slightly different description.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    14. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by pr0fessor · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Haven't you ever heard the saying "A happy customer will tell no one but an unhappy customer will tell everyone." ?

    15. Re: A pity, but not a surprise by unixisc · · Score: 1

      There are 2 ways of dealing w/ negative reviews, depending on who you are

      - If you are the manufacturer, the negative feedback helps you revisit the product and see how to make it more palatable to the public. I dunno about others, but when I post a review, I do my best to describe what exactly is wrong, and avoid things like 'this product sucks'. Hopefully, that helps them fix their problems in future iterations

      - If you are a reseller, I do the same thing, and then you have the option of either letting the manufacturer know and getting an improved product down the line, or stop carrying the product in your store

    16. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by TWX · · Score: 1

      Probably to attempt to reduce, ever so slightly, the amount of angst in this world.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    17. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Citizenship?

    18. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by tepples · · Score: 1

      Then how would you recommend that people who purchase a product through a channel other than Amazon verify the purchase to Amazon? Photo of a receipt from Target, Toys R Us, etc.?

    19. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by CRCulver · · Score: 1

      So, why do you feel that it's your responsibility to tell other random people about random stuff you buy? Are you getting paid to do so?

      I'm an Amazon Top Reviewer, and I started reviewing in the late 1990s. I can't remember what drove me to start reviewing, but I've certainly found it worthwhile over time. I tend to review some niche categories of music and books, and while they audiences for these products aren't all known to me personally, it's not quite "random" and one feels that by reviewing one is helping out a community of peers. Also, with a written record of my tastes and impressions from a given time, it's also interesting to see how my views about literature or recordings have changed over the years.

      Many top reviewers had the opportunity to make some money from their status by eBaying the freebies they get, but not me. At some point I started getting offers for free products, but all but a handful of those offers disappeared when I mentioned that I now live outside the US -- no one would want to pay such high postage to get promotional materials to me.

    20. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One of them was for a label maker that cuts off the labels electrically, but still requires the user to manually trigger the process through one of the buttons on the labelmaker's keypad instead of being capable of auto-cutting. This makes no sense to me, especially when it still does this when generating labels through software on the computer and printing them via USB to the labelmaker.

      Without knowing anything about the label maker, this seems to make sense to me. If you are creating labels from a PC over USB, presumably you are batch-creating them, telling the device "this is label 1, this is label 2, label 3, etc", so it knows to make them individual labels instead of one giant label. But if you are making them manually using the label maker, how is the device supposed to know when one label stops and the next one ends, unless you press a button that does just that?

    21. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by DogDude · · Score: 1

      I see it as you're helping out Amazon for free. It used to be that retailers had product knowledge, and helped their customers choose products. Now, people such as yourself do it for Amazon for free, and Amazon reaps all of the rewards. You don't feel cheated, in that you give away your time for free, and Amazon makes money off of it?

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    22. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 2

      Then how would you recommend that people who purchase a product through a channel other than Amazon verify the purchase to Amazon? Photo of a receipt from Target, Toys R Us, etc.?

      Why does Amazon need their input? Seriously. Is Amazon hosting a "review blogging community" or is it a merchant who wants reviews from customers who have bought stuff directly from it?

      Just posing the question.

    23. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by Wycliffe · · Score: 1

      The real issue with Amazon is that the actual seller's feedback score is not clearly shown on the product page. If you want feedback for the actual seller, it is buried at least 1 click away. Other websites with 'marketplaces' make this a lot more transparent on the product page. Putting their feedback score front and center would fix several issues.

      The problem that I've found on amazon is that it's hard to separate the reviews of the product from the reviews of the shipper. Many times a product will be rated poorly but then looking at the reviews the problem is really that people are getting knockoffs or dealing with a crap company. It might make a little bit of sense for a company to be docked for selling crappy products but docking the product because the shipper just happens to suck doesn't usually make sense. You would think it would be to amazon's advantage to try to discourage this kind of thing because having a bad shipper in the mix that might be a few pennies cheaper drag your average score down from 4 star to 5 star probably loses them business.

    24. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by Wycliffe · · Score: 2

      I would much prefer that *only* verified buyers review an item.

      I think a threshold should probably be used. If there are less than 100 verified buyers then include them all and flag it so you can tell. If there are more than 100 verified buyers then either completely remove the non-verified buyers or bury them away some where. A non-verified review may be somewhat useful for a product with only a couple reviews but once you have a large quantity of verified reviews there is no reason to let them continue to taint the reviews as they could be freebies, spam, etc...

    25. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by Joviex · · Score: 2

      You can still make up to five comedy reviews a week. Not all is lost.

      Not only that, you can just make endless emails and post 5 per.

      All this does is swap one type of spam for another, and now, Amazon gets to enjoy that extra helping as well when 1 million new accounts suddlenly show up and they have to figure out what is and is not legit.

      Totally smart way to resolve this instead of just making it 100% you can only review shit you buy.

    26. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 1

      TBH, I would much prefer that *only* verified buyers review an item.

      A few years back, I would have probably had a different opinion, but now I think I agree with you. Amazon used to benefit from the idea that anybody could write a review -- I think it helped to establish them as THE bookseller back in the day when they mostly dealt with books. Back in the 1990s, it was a central location to write and find reviews of a huge variety of books, which didn't really exist elsewhere at that time (at least on that scale).

      But now Amazon has a huge customer base, reviews can be found for just about anything EVERYWHERE on the web, and I think the former benefits of random reviewers are now outweighed by the bad stuff that comes from them.

      After all, what sort of person goes on Amazon to write a review for an item they haven't even purchased there? In the past 15 years, I can say that the few times I've done so, it was to rant about something. While I personally think my rants were justified for products I was really disappointed in, I've also read plenty of other reviews by people whose rants clearly didn't seem justified (or at all logical), but nevertheless dragged down the ratings of products or whatever.

      Does Amazon really need to provide a forum for people who just want to vent about something they've bought? I suppose once I also really wanted to talk about something great I bought too, so I wrote a glowing review. But my point is that I doubt many people who haven't actually bought something on Amazon are going there to provide a "nuanced" perspective on a product.

      Then you add in the potential for fake and paid reviews (both positive and negative ones aimed at competitors), and it seems like the majority of "non-verified" reviews are more likely to cause problems than to be helpful.

      Not to mention the problems that happen when customers make mistakes about matching up products (as I've seen in a number of reviews). With books, it was usually pretty easy -- if it had the same title and author, you were usually good to go. (Yes, obviously comments about physical elements like layout or quality of binding or whatever might occasionally occur, and which might vary in different printings, but that was usually a minor issue in reviews.)

      Even on Amazon itself, there are problems with 3rd party sellers and mixed up (or deliberately fake) products reviewed together, which is why I've said Amazon should make it easier to sort verified reviews by the seller you're actually contemplating buying something from. That problem is multiplied when you allow people to review a product bought from who knows where and which might not even match up with the product page they're on.

    27. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by TWX · · Score: 1

      When one instructs the labelmaker to generate a series of labels, the labelmaker knows where one label ends and the next begins. If the labelmaker is capable of electrically cutting the labels then there's no reason not to do so, as it prints them. In fact, Brother's P-touch series can use this capability to reduce waste; without knowing when to cut, it would have to generate a nearly inch-long bit of waste to manually cut as the position of the print head relative to the end of the cartridge would require it.

      Rhino's printers print right at the cutter. It doesn't generate the waste bit that the Brother does, but it's still annoying when printing a hundred labels in a row to have to manually press the cut function ninety-nine times. The labels print slowly enough to have downtime between cuts, but quickly enough to not allow one to really do anything else while printing the series. It's annoying.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    28. Re: A pity, but not a surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sometimes people do things they enjoy without being paid. In the old days, we called those things "hobbies." Back then, people were also interested in helping others rather than simply finding an "angle" they could use to get rich.

      You might find references to this behavior in a history book somewhere.

    29. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by c · · Score: 2

      After all, what sort of person goes on Amazon to write a review for an item they haven't even purchased there? In the past 15 years, I can say that the few times I've done so, it was to rant about something.

      Every once in a while I run across something I bought years ago from elsewhere and bang out a quick review. Usually I'm looking for something related like a part or extension and the original pops up.

      My motivation for doing so is that I actually like the thing, found that it's lasted for a while, and feel the urge to spread the love.

      I've noticed other people doing this too, and quite frankly I consider these sorts of reviews from experienced owners to be a shitload more convincing than someone who's pulled the thing out of the box and played around with it for a few minutes.

      --
      Log in or piss off.
    30. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      The product is equally shite or equally good no matter where you bought it from.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    31. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

      I see it as you're helping out Amazon for free. It used to be that retailers had product knowledge, and helped their customers choose products. Now, people such as yourself do it for Amazon for free, and Amazon reaps all of the rewards. You don't feel cheated, in that you give away your time for free, and Amazon makes money off of it?

      You are assuming that he only leaves good reviews. His review might cause someone not to buy it.

      Sometimes, someone puts a lot of research before purchasing it. They may feel like posting their research may save someone else some time if they have similar needs.

      It seems like in your world, we would only have reviews from paid review sites and the companies, themselves. Customer reviews tend to be more honest.

    32. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      I see you understand very little of society and the principles of caring and sharing. You give nothing away for free, you are simply repaying those who have repayed others, when a task is freely shared. Your write reviews for 'free' to pay for reviews you read for 'free' and that likely saved you quite a sum of money in buying some shitty product that got the bad review it deserved. See, that's how it works, you are simply sharing, get it, sharing in the task of eliminating bad products from the market, a very worth while investment, see that, right there. You are not reviewing for free but simply investing time and capital into the reviewing marketing and the return is not buying a crap product you end up having to replace with another crap product, which you replace with another crap product, and maybe just maybe finally then getting a reasonable product (that my buffoonish friend is the return on your investment, avoiding that).

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    33. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by mea2214 · · Score: 1

      My favorite were the reviews for Monster cables.

    34. Re:A pity, but not a surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously I've never seen any group of people so fearful and butthurt about "SJWs" than Slashdot nerds. What is it about them that makes you feel so cornered?

    35. Re: A pity, but not a surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2/5 stars, mailman woke me up during me 2PM nap.

  2. A++++ Decision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Would make decision again, speedy and swift review, exactly as expected...

    1. Re:A++++ Decision by TWX · · Score: 1

      They said Amazon, not Ebay...

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    2. Re:A++++ Decision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ebay is where this policy already exists and we all know the reviews there are quality...

      Too subtle?

  3. 1 star... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I rate the above comment 1 star... Only because there is no 0 star rating. The aforementioned comment was not worth reading at any price.

    1. Re:1 star... by FatdogHaiku · · Score: 1

      I rate the above comment 1 star... Only because there is no 0 star rating. The aforementioned comment was not worth reading at any price.

      You forgot the "I received the above comment in exchange for my fair and unbiased review of the comment" part...

      --
      You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
  4. Not good enough... by ddtmm · · Score: 1

    It should be that the user HAS to have purchased the item. Why would you do it any other way?

    1. Re:Not good enough... by alvinrod · · Score: 1

      Does that really fix anything though? If I'm a company who wants fake reviews I can reimburse the person writing the fake review for their purchase of my product which they just return to me or have shipped back to me. It's slightly more expensive, but now supposedly comes with the legitimacy that the "Verified Purchase" stamp of approval supposedly comes with.

      Maybe that kills off the lowest, of low-hanging fruit, but some companies will still find a way to exploit it. Here's an example from just this year of a company doing something very similar (buying their own product to try to drum up marketing and drive demand) but they even did it in meat-space. Imagine how much easier it would be to do online.

    2. Re:Not good enough... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "P.S. The fact that I was given this item for free in no way influenced my review."

      Bullshit. If it were true, reviewers wouldn't make that little tidbit of information the final text of the review.

    3. Re:Not good enough... by FatdogHaiku · · Score: 2

      It should be that the user HAS to have purchased the item. Why would you do it any other way?

      I would be happy if I could just filter reviews based on a "verified purchaser" tag. They already mark the verified purchaser reviews with that exact text, so make it a sub-option on the review display options...

      --
      You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
    4. Re:Not good enough... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i'm ok with making assholes jump through extra hoops. What's the problem, exactly ?

    5. Re:Not good enough... by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      they already do this. you get free thing in return for writing an amazon review of it.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    6. Re:Not good enough... by bigwheel · · Score: 3, Informative

      It should be that the user HAS to have purchased the item. Why would you do it any other way?

      I would be happy if I could just filter reviews based on a "verified purchaser" tag. They already mark the verified purchaser reviews with that exact text, so make it a sub-option on the review display options...

      You can already do that. From "see all customer reviews", select the sort/filter for "Verified Purchase Only" (rather than all reviewers).

      What is missing is the ability to sort my searches by "average customer review", but only consider the reviews from verified purchases.

    7. Re:Not good enough... by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      It should be that the user HAS to have purchased the item. Why would you do it any other way?

      Because sometimes there are very useful reviews by people who chose a different product (or chose to not buy a product at all) after discovering serious flaws in the product while looking at it in a brick-and-mortar store.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    8. Re:Not good enough... by bjdevil66 · · Score: 1

      Why? Because the Amazon reviews being honest and helpful is far more important than whether you actually buy the product from Amazon or not.

      In my case, sometimes I buy an item at Best Buy, Wal-Mart, etc., that's total garbage - and I want to get the word out there to warn others away if it's available on Amazon. I've done this to a couple of products that really pissed me off when they cut quality corners or were openly deceptive in their ads, and those reviews were the most highly appreciated/helpful/valued by other Amazon shoppers.

      IMO, this policy seems like a good compromise to combat a deluge of fake reviews while still allowing me to express my opinions.

    9. Re:Not good enough... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is missing is the ability to sort my searches by "average customer review", but only consider the reviews from verified purchases.

      What I find missing is the ability to search by the average review of items which have a non-trivial number of reviews. For example, when I'm looking for a chair I want to see the highest reviews, but if somebody only got five reviewers I don't care they are a 5/5.

      Does anybody have advice about how to achieve this (both for Amazon and Newegg, and other major retailers)?

  5. Sort out their own behaviour first by andrewbaldwin · · Score: 1

    "..... as the company tries to get more people comfortable with doing more of their shopping online ...."

    Amazon is on my personal "back of the queue list" and I'll not willingly use them in future having been badly let down.

    Word of warning to others to stop being burnt.
    DO NOT buy through Amazon Marketplace.

    If your item develops a fault and the trader refuses to answer you're completely out of luck.

    Amazon (despite taking payment and giving an order number) claim that it's nothing to do with them and won't help; the bank won't reverse charges as they say the issue is with the trader but Amazon took payment [and thus there's no clear payment path] and the item supplier won't honour warranty because the item was not bought through a UK approved channel.

    If Amazon put as much effort into customer services (and paid what is for them a small amount but a not insignificant amount for me) as they do into tax dodging, I'd be singing their praises. As it is they've lost a long term customer who is dissuading other friends and family members from using them.

    1. Re:Sort out their own behaviour first by OhPlz · · Score: 1

      Amazon has nothing to do with what you're describing. It's your responsibility to know the terms of the warranty. You could have contacted the manufacturer prior to purchasing the item. Instead, you went with the lowest cost. If Amazon were to police that, those lowest costs would go up and you wouldn't be buying from Amazon at that point anyway.

    2. Re:Sort out their own behaviour first by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 3, Informative

      Strange. Maybe Amazon's UK service quality differs from the US? Amazon service just recently gave me a credit for a purchase through a third-party seller. I was only reporting a seller that seemed to be charging an excessive amount of shipping (about $20), nearly as much as the product, which I hadn't notice at the time I purchased it (yeah, it was more or less my fault, but still). They said they'd look into the matter and then offered me a credit without me even asking for it.

      Anytime I've contacted Amazon support, my issue has *always* been quickly resolved and completely, with outstanding service. Maybe it helps that I've been a customer for a very long time, probably over fifteen years or so. That's one of the reason I continue to buy from them almost exclusively - the other is they've got a good security track record.

      I've also had support from 3rd party sellers... hrm, maybe two times? One time a replacement unit was sent, and another time, I shipped the product back because it was defective, and I got a refund because they couldn't get a replacement.

      Maybe I've just been lucky?

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    3. Re:Sort out their own behaviour first by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      I've had excellent service from Amazon in the US too. I've never had a problem with Amazon, infact, they've exceeded what I would have hoped for on a couple of occasions.

      I've been slightly disappointed with other sellers on Amazon, but never treated completely unfairly.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    4. Re:Sort out their own behaviour first by andrewbaldwin · · Score: 1

      The item was advertised and sold as a UK spec phone. The manufacturer then claimed that this was not the case. This is a clear case of misrepresentation by Amazon (who presented the item, showed the description on their site, took payment and acted as middleman).

      I am just as annoyed by Huawei as Amazon. Neither has covered themselves in glory and they both stand in stark contrast to other suppliers.

    5. Re:Sort out their own behaviour first by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 1

      I've also had support from 3rd party sellers... hrm, maybe two times? One time a replacement unit was sent, and another time, I shipped the product back because it was defective, and I got a refund because they couldn't get a replacement.

      3rd party sellers are really hit or miss with Amazon, even if they have generally positive "reviews." Two out of three times I've had problems, I have had to involve Amazon as an intermediary to resolve the dispute -- one was a case where someone sent me the wrong book but refused to believe they did so, and another was a seller who said a product would be delivered around Christmas but it took until early February to get it shipped (after a number of misleading status emails from them). The latter ultimately did give me a discount, but it took a lot of work to deal with it.

      Amazon itself, on the other hand, has generally been very easy to deal with over the years. I still remember when i sent them a suggestion about improving their website way back in 1997 or so and got a $25 gift certificate just for the idea. In general, every other time I've contacted them, I've received prompt and effective service.

    6. Re:Sort out their own behaviour first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I purchased an item through amazon for $100. I needed it in a hurry and got overnight delivery.

      The unit showed up DOA, called them up and they sent me a replacement, but instead of what I'd ordered, they overnighted me a $1000 upgrade. I called to ask them if they wanted it back, but they told me to keep it. I wonder how long this can go on, but I love it.

    7. Re:Sort out their own behaviour first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, I've had the exact opposite experience with both.
      Have an issue with something purchased from Amazon? They typically fix it immediately.
      the 2 times I've had to call Huawei, I had a very short list of prompts and < 10 minute hold time to get a real person on the phone that actually knew the answers.

    8. Re:Sort out their own behaviour first by OhPlz · · Score: 1

      Amazon didn't misrepresent anything. They offer an ecommerce platform to other companies. If the seller misrepresented something, your issue is with them. You could also blame your browser or your ISP, they were also involved with delivering the page to your device. It wouldn't be possible for Amazon to check every item from every seller to the extent necessary to accomplish what you're looking for. As for taking payment, again, that's just a service they provide.

      I got caught in the warranty trap once but it was with Amazon directly. They stated that the product was covered by warranty for something they sold and shipped, but the manufacturer denied it because Amazon wasn't an approved seller. Amazon refunded the purchase after I pointed out the problem. That's a little different than your example though because it wasn't a 3rd party seller.

    9. Re:Sort out their own behaviour first by andrewbaldwin · · Score: 1

      " It wouldn't be possible for Amazon to check every item from every seller. "

      Why not? I don't suppose Amazon offer trading spots rent free - some form of vendor checks would be reasonable and covered by the fees charged.

      What value is Amazon adding?
      Might just as well allow sale of perpetual motion machines and then say "not us - we're just passing trades through - don't expect us to check whether they're real or not".

      If I wanted a low price but with the risk of dealing with a shifty and unreliable supplier I could go to the local flea market or car boot sale.

    10. Re:Sort out their own behaviour first by OhPlz · · Score: 2

      Amazon isn't the equivalent of "consumer reports". They offer retailers a sales platform and they offer consumers a varied market. That's it. You can check the seller reviews or Google, or if it's an expensive item and you want to make sure the warranty claims are valid, you can contact the manufacturer. Amazon couldn't possibly check every item for sale at every retailer. That's like saying a shopping mall should ensure that every item in every store is marked correctly every day. You'd need an absurdly large workforce and the cost of doing so would negate any savings for the consumer. You could bring the seller to court for making false claims, but that's up to you.

  6. Overall Result by alvinrod · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The overall result is that instead of 20 fake reviews from a single account, there are now 20 fake reviews spread over four different accounts. This just makes it more inconvenient for the people posting fake reviews, but doesn't really do anything to stop them. Maybe that makes it economically infeasible for a few of them and they go on to something more economically viable for them like pimping their grandmother, but this isn't going to be that big of a shakeup.

    1. Re:Overall Result by freeze128 · · Score: 1

      You can still click on the reviewer's name and get details about how many OTHER reviews they have written, and the dates of those reviews. This allows shoppers to DISREGARD reviews written by newly created accounts. This will still empower shoppers.

    2. Re:Overall Result by alvinrod · · Score: 1

      Sure, for the first 3 months or so, but eventually new accounts become old accounts and how much trust differential do you assign to an account that is 4 years old as opposed to one that is only 3 years old?

      Furthermore, how much time and effort will people put into reviewing the reviewers? At a certain point it eats up more time than its worth for most people. If I'm buying a $10 cable or something similarly priced, it's not worth spending a few hours to research it in the same way I'd be more careful as when buying a $1,000 appliance.

      Even if you make some analytics that are easily available to help share that information with users, the fake reviewers will just figure out how to game that system. It's a never-ending cat and mouse problem that doesn't have a good solution because the underlying problem isn't one of technology, but one of human nature. The only way I could see this problem being fixed is to make laws requiring real IDs and strict penalties for financially motivated reviews, but that cure is probably worse than the current disease.

    3. Re:Overall Result by geekmux · · Score: 1

      You can still click on the reviewer's name and get details about how many OTHER reviews they have written, and the dates of those reviews. This allows shoppers to DISREGARD reviews written by newly created accounts. This will still empower shoppers.

      Did you just suggest that a consumer would actually go through what they would define as a mindnumbing tedious process consisting of a few more clicks in order to empower themselves?

      Your assumption is almost as strong as the ain't-nobody-got-time-for-that stench coming from millions of mindless lemmings who perpetuated this mess.

    4. Re:Overall Result by c · · Score: 1

      The overall result is that instead of 20 fake reviews from a single account, there are now 20 fake reviews spread over four different accounts.

      At some point, the review system notices that these accounts review 5 items/month, but never actually buy anything... Then the next generation of fake account owners has to ensure that each fake account occasionally buys something, but then they have to get it shipped to the fake address since having fake accounts tied to their home/business address might raise flags.

      More likely they'll going to have to hack the verified buyer mechanism somehow...

      --
      Log in or piss off.
    5. Re:Overall Result by barc0001 · · Score: 1

      That only realistically works for a few reviews. If a dedicated shitposter has 20 sockpuppet accounts they can still do a ton of damage to a product's rating and most customers aren't going to go to the trouble of checking more than a couple of those accounts and blocking them - if they even bother. Most people will see 35 reviews, and 20 of them are 1 star. NEXT PRODUCT, this one sucks!

    6. Re:Overall Result by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They should link your # of unverified reviews to how much money you've spent on products on Amazon.

      This would make it uneconomical to post fakes.

  7. I had never realized that by lwmv · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I can review something not bought throught amazon, until I read this on slashdot...

    1. Re:I had never realized that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are also those that can't or won't click anything unless it is bright colored and says click me.

  8. Still doesn't make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I've always been confused why people rate things they didn't buy off the site. At that point, it's just middle school gossip.

    1. Re:Still doesn't make sense by OhPlz · · Score: 1

      Writing a bad review on Amazon gets more exposure and may influence others to not purchase a crappy product.

    2. Re:Still doesn't make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most likely: because they're being payed to do so by a marketing department. (accounts for positive reviews)

      Less likely: because they bought it though a channel that doesn't have a built in review system and they're juts that irate about whatever issue they encountered and need the world to know it. (accounts for negative reviews)

    3. Re:Still doesn't make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      marketing departments would also account for some non-zero quantity of negative reviews. Gotta torpedo those competitors selling equivalent goods.

  9. Re:Thanks, Trump! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unlike the "Thanks Obama!' meme because he never made anything great.

  10. Who decides? by PvtVoid · · Score: 0

    Who decides whether or not a review is fake? It is well known that the Main Stream Reviewers are all a bunch of biased SJWs, and important information such as T-shirts being manufactured in Hillary Clinton's secret forced-labor camps in Benghazi for abducted conservative youth are being suppressed!

    Also, they are coming for your guns.

    1. Re:Who decides? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You said something truthfull and then couched it in a bunch of false strawmen statements to make it appear ludicrous.

      I like it! You'll go well in the fields of political journalism, video game media, or talk show host!

    2. Re:Who decides? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You said something truthfull and then couched it in a bunch of false strawmen statements to make it appear ludicrous.

      I like it! You'll go well in the fields of political journalism, video game media, or talk show host!

      I'm going to give you a participation sticker!

  11. Security Through Annoyance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This just makes it more inconvenient for the people posting fake reviews, but doesn't really do anything to stop them.

    This is how (most) security works. Whitelisting is better. (A review should require an account that has made at least one Amazon purchase in the country where the reviewed object is sold from).

    But making things harder, rather than impossible, is how the vast majority of real security works. The lock on your front door doesn't keep someone out who really wants into your house, or who has skill. It just makes it harder.

    Even cryptography isn't impossible to break. The Allies broke enigma, and your wife may guess your randomly generated password. (Why did you name your dog after your password?)

  12. Well there goes the night job... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NO more can I sit on Mom's couch in the basement and whore out my witty prose in hopes of attracting vendors to send me gifts... I have to actually BUY something...

    Oh Well, at least the return policy is "liberal" still.. !

    MOM! Can you please bring the packages on the front porch down so I can open them? Oh, and I'm hungry for pizza rolls too..

    1. Re:Well there goes the night job... by aicrules · · Score: 1

      Have you tried applying as a iWriter for HuffPo?

  13. Trump, Bezos and Amazon by unixisc · · Score: 1

    Won't happen, since he has a major beef w/ WaPo owner Jeff Bozos, and wants Amazon to be taxed. Actually, if Amazon did get taxed at par w/ brick & mortar stores, one might see the latter get more competitive

    1. Re:Trump, Bezos and Amazon by ausekilis · · Score: 1

      The only tax that Amazon gets to skirt is any difference between "Warehouse" and "Retail" for the number and square footage those warehouses take. Sure, they are a big retailer, but they have nowhere near the total square footage of the other big names like Target, Best Buy, etc...

      It's because they are an online-only (well, mostly now) retailer that they are able to decrease their overall footprint and compete with the big boys. A better comparison (ignoring bankrupcies) would be Radio Shack is to Target as NewEgg is to Amazon.

    2. Re:Trump, Bezos and Amazon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sales taxes have been collected on my Amazon purchases for at least a year now.

    3. Re:Trump, Bezos and Amazon by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      [*----]
      Bought a new keyboard. When I type "/" (as in S/ Lord, p/ helmet) it replaces it w/ /. I tried reinstalling the drivers and all that. Am returning it, I have no fa/ in the supplier any more.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  14. Spamming by pigsycyberbully · · Score: 0

    Amazon should stop the spamming companies from spamming you with requests that you should leave them positive feedback preferably five stars.
    And why are spam messages always the same even though they are different companies. "We are a small company and your positive feedback would help us. You can click this link and leave positive feedback."

  15. Even that seems excessive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even 5 non verified reviews a week is a bit excessive, 5 per MONTH should be more than enough for most people. I wonder what finally pushed them to finally fix this obvious issue, I hope it wasn't the Trump ornament "protest".

  16. Should have gone verified purchase only by barc0001 · · Score: 2

    I don't see a point at this stage of the game to people being allowed to post reviews without having a papertrail in Amazon that they bought it to AMZN.

    1. Re:Should have gone verified purchase only by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Obviously unverified reviews are unnecessary for items like iPhones that sell in the millions. But so many products with smaller sales numbers have few reviews already. If you drop all reviews except verified purchases, far more items will become reviewless.

      So there's a point, even if you don't like it.

  17. Purchased != verifiably purchased by tepples · · Score: 1

    As far as I'm aware, Amazon can't verify off-Amazon purchases. The five weekly reviews for non-verified purchases appear to be a concession to allow reviews of products sold through Amazon that were obtained through a channel other than Amazon.

  18. Good if.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It'll be great IF they stop bugging me to review the shit I bought. As an adult I am quite capable of determining if I want to rate something I've bought on my own and I don't need spam reminding me to rate a $.69 MP3.