Slashdot Mirror
Google Maps No Longer Lets You Post Negative Reviews About Your Crappy Job (gizmodo.com.au)
From a report: Google has updated its Maps policies to ban certain business reviews left by former employees. In a new section of the Google Maps "User Contributed Content Policy," Google now labels reviews "about a current or former employment experience" as a "conflict of interest." Originally, only current employees were barred under the policy. The new rules, quoted below, went into effect on December 14.
So, just to check here...
Are you saying you think the unwashed masses are graceful and/or professional?
That they have any consideration for future repercussions to their actions?
That they are capable of even remembering that they did this a week later?
You think that acting sensibly would be more important than the 5 minutes of 'fame' they felt they would get from posting some stupid troll-rant the moment they left a job?
Interesting...
Want to buy a bridge?
So which would be a better solution, come up with a fake on-line ID and use that to comment on an abusive former employer, or just have a friend do it for you?
Decisions, decisions...
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
It's also rude to mistreat your employees. Or require them to look the other way where the law is concerned. That's why it's good to have websites like Glassdoor.
And isn't it funny how when an employee has a complaint upon leaving a company its called 'burning their bridges.'
Yet when upper level employees have a complaint upon leaving a company it's called 'managerial differences.'
Care killed the cat, but satisfaction brought it back.
Another way that google exerts control over the sheep every day and every way.
Perhaps. But a map app really isn't an appropriate forum for bitching from disgruntled ex-employees. Nobody using a map is looking for crap like that.
Why would you publicly defame current or former employers? Not only is it rude, it's not graceful nor professional in any way to burn bridges on exit.
It's also rude to mistreat your employees. Or require them to look the other way where the law is concerned. That's why it's good to have websites like Glassdoor.
And isn't it funny how when an employee has a complaint upon leaving a company its called 'burning their bridges.'
Yet when upper level employees have a complaint upon leaving a company it's called 'managerial differences.'
I think you will find that mistreatment is part and parcel of being profitable and as such employee mistreatment by companies is highly commendable. It’s only organizing workers to defend against abuse that is neither graceful nor profssional in any way which is why many employers would like nothing more than ban labour organization and collective bargaining by law.
Well its not always defamatory, sometimes the former employer are just terrible, and thats why you left.
But sometimes.... We had a recent issue where a very senior employee left to start at another company, all good and fine, and then started spamming reviews of our apps with absolute nonsense, and he knows it would be nonsense because he was on the design team. It was baffling, we thought he left on good terms, but apparently he had something bottled up.
Shame he never told us what was irking him while he was here. We could have sorted it. It wasnt like the guy was shy when he had something he didnt like.
So I get googles position here. It IS a conflict of interest.
Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
Capitalism is adversarial by nature. The company would benefit the most by destroying all competition, paying their workers next to nothing and selling their stuff at exorbiant prices. The workers would benefit the most by being paid a lot and not having to work. Society benefits by a power balance in these relationships, but nobody maintaining this balance actually want it to be where it is. And competition wastes collossal amounts of resources by making people who could've worked together work to one-up one another instead.
The basis for capitalism is not that it is the theoretically most optimal system. What it does is to try and leverage and/or work around quirks of human psychology in order to do useful work. It does so reasonably well, but it fails to put value on some of the most valuable things in humanity, such as bringing up a child well, helping the helpless, or use natural resources carefully. The tragedy of the commons is one of the many failure modes of capitalism.
Abusive employers are the unprofessional ones. It is a public service to expose them.
No it really isn't. Here's how this plays out. Even if an employer is genuinely terrible your rant about them is NOT going to "expose" them or make any difference at all. What will happen is people who read it are mostly going to think you are an irrational jerk who got fired for cause and is salty about it. (which is probably true) Future prospective employers who read it will conclude "this is a person who may be willing to bash us publicly - we should hire someone else". The company will not be impacted in any meaningful way and you might be hurting yourself in the process. Even if you have a genuine gripe and they are actually the worst company ever it's still an objectively stupid thing to do and will almost certainly accomplish nothing useful. Quite possibly it will even be counterproductive.
If you want to bring attention to a shitty employer there are FAR more effective tactics to use then an emotional and probably irrational rant on google maps.
Power and money grubbing scum are not deserving of your imagined "professionalism", you have Stockholm syndrome.
Pretending that you are saving the world by posting a negative review on google maps about a company that fired you is delusional.