Five-star-ratings everywhere
-
Capitalism tries to get as much out of their employees as possible. Meaning employees fear of losing your job of you don't get the highest rating. And if you are in the USA that means losing benefits and quickly running out of money. Give employees the highest rating, unless it actually bad, because they are forced to live in capitalism.
Ok, 1. row for US, 2. row everywhere else, got it.
-
Everyone I've ever dealt with who thought the employee needed reprimanded was either
-
A huge asshole
-
completely wrong
-
didn't like a policy that the employee had no say in
-
was dealing with a reversible error that required training not reprimand
The times I've done it were for:
- One guy who had his phone in his steering wheel and was playing some sort of online gambling the whole drive and didn't look directly at the road once
- One guy who was driving around on a spare tire (doughnut) on the highway at speeds way above those it said on the tire.
I mean I can look the other way on just about anything (I've given 5* to a lot of questionable driving decisions and shitty cars) but when you are putting my life at risk, that's where I draw the line.
-
-
I rate your scheme 3 stars...
But no better idea?
-
Good luck convincing HR, or any of the assholes in corporate.
Who asked them?
-
So for the instead rating, what would a dildo server under when only 2 stars? Like what would people try to even put down at that point?
wrote last edited by [email protected]Dildo shared your usage data. 1 stars would be it electrocuted or poisoned you.
-
I don’t think this is actually having the effect you think it does. The people running these things still need the same number of workers in total, so all you’re really doing is contributing to the effect that OP is describing, where the gig workers getting marked down becomes arbitrary and random rather than related to whether they do their job.
The way to protest gig work is not to do business with companies that use it.
In theory, sure. However in the real world there is no escaping neither the ratings or the gig economy. Every single delivery company here does it. When it is possible to choose the delivery I pick the postal service. They too asking for ratings, but at least they have regular employees though some delivery points that are stores and kiosks have a suspiciously high rotation of staff. Not every vendor uses the postal service and sometimes the only option is to order from them or be without.
I don't have any grandiose ideas of it having any effect, but I will not participate in rating the performance of my fellow humans that are service workers. They do the job to do the job and the job is not to suck up to me. And everybody has the right to have a bad day or whatever without some manager making it even worse.
Realistically it is better to support political parties that legislate wages and working conditions and such so that people working any jobs have a decent wage and are protected from abuse.
-
But no better idea?
YMMV. Every person has their own internal mental scheme and will keep using it, no matter what. That's why I usually (a) trust large numbers (b) read very carefully detailed reviews if they are available.
-
This is actually dumber. Rating is about how well the person felt about spending the money whereas everyone really wants to know how good of a whatever it is
So you really want to know it's an 85 out of a hundred on an absolute scale but all you know is how people felt about spending a certain amount of money which may not even be the amount of money the merchant is changing.
So 4 might mean people felt pretty good about spending $10 but you are being asked by Joe Bob merchant to pay 20
I mean if I'm being asked to rate something then it's likely they're asking for a rating of the actual service and by asking they've degraded the quality of the service.
-
For hr or Uber or similar the scale is this:
5 stars = meh, expected experience
4 stars or lower = your employee literally tried to kill me
I usually save 4 stars for attempted kidnappings, its important to distinguish these things.
-
The race may already be lost, but still.
Small secret.
When companies compare performances they see only three categories.
0-1 star reviews are bad.
2-3 are okay.
4-5 are great.This is because in the end the well written review you gave to the product after testing it for 100 hours and gave the product 4 stars because of the minor flaws is pretty much the same as some randomass teens hype review 5 stars.
In the end you both liked it and there is no urgent need to fix anything.
As a consumer you should just trust to the wisdom of the crowd to tell truth.
-
The race may already be lost, but still.
Give 5 stars to this comment or I report You for any other score as harassment!
Also I add extra gifts for any 5 star ratings!
Corrupted, it is all corrupted.
-
The race may already be lost, but still.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Remember boys and girls, a 4 out of 5 star review on any platform that doesn't allow a zero star, is only a 75% grade. Not an 80% like these hucksters imply. Thats a solid C, not a B. Let's not give in to this corporate delusion anymore
3-5 = 50% =/= 60%
2-5 =25% =/= 40%
It's a false show of satisfaction in the very least. A rotting manifestation of the soulless corporation not allowing any amount of transparency stop them from pulling the curtain closed tighter, on the, "oh fuck," side.
I think they are actually aware the curtains are silk and quite see through. I think we can all agree we've crossed the event horizon. Everything is going to get pulled in soon.
-
The race may already be lost, but still.
It always seems like, for most people, the middle three stars might as well not exist. Was it acceptable? Five stars. Do I want to complain? One star. There is no in-between.
-
Except it isn't even an objective scale other folks are rating something a 5 for not being complete POS and being 5 dollars treating it as an objective scale and using a different one from planet Earth is less than useful.
Yeah which is why I pretty much ignore stars unless someone has a rubric in their profile, or an actual review attached.
Solely numeric reviews are basically no better than up and down votes. Good for automation or algorithms, but largely useless to humans.
-
Who asked them?
they're the ones who decided that anything less than a perfect score is an "opportunity for improvement" in other words "do better or you're fired".
-
The times I've done it were for:
- One guy who had his phone in his steering wheel and was playing some sort of online gambling the whole drive and didn't look directly at the road once
- One guy who was driving around on a spare tire (doughnut) on the highway at speeds way above those it said on the tire.
I mean I can look the other way on just about anything (I've given 5* to a lot of questionable driving decisions and shitty cars) but when you are putting my life at risk, that's where I draw the line.
Yep perfectly justified but you can't actually couch gambling guy you really just need to fire him because he'll continue to be a moron.
-
The race may already be lost, but still.
It’s the kind of thing that honestly should be regulated.
-
The race may already be lost, but still.
Perfection is a goal,
Not a default
-
The race may already be lost, but still.
What if the company pays a bot farm to give 5 star ratings to everything?
-
The race may already be lost, but still.
I just don't provide ratings. You shouldn't either. Reviewing is a job. Some people are professional reviewers. Don't do free labor for corporations. Do not rate products or services.
