Is this news? They do this all the time with review bombing.
this post was submitted on 10 Dec 2024
191 points (98.0% liked)
News
23627 readers
2728 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
One hand washes the other.
Cowards.
Who reads reviews for a McDonald's? What could you possibly learn?
Edit: I just found out that the local Arby's in this Indiana town of under 100,000 people has 940 reviews. And not because it's especially terrific or horrible (comparatively, it's still an Arby's).
I think I know why Trump won.
They are independent franchises - I would absolutely check reviews on any chain I go to.
Which I do, but not McDonalds, because I can't eat anything there. But my point is the same - I have a food allergy, and some chains do a better job of keeping clean and keeping things separated.
So yes, there are entirely reasonable people who do write and read reviews, even for something like a McDonalds.
Why? Knowing how the staff conducts itself is an important aspect of deciding if it’s a good place to eat.
I don't think the review bombs were a great thing to do. It's one step from doxxing the person, who might have been just getting by and the money was enough to convince them. A negative review of a place just because it's where something happened unrelated to the place is just ranting and not legit. I wouldn't have done it, but I'm not in that much need of such a safety net to make the next rent payment.
We can look at it as corporate protecting corporate, but in the end isn't this just good moderation of posts that are not appropriate for the purpose? What if this hadn't been McD's but a family-owned restaurant?
"1/5. mcsnitches. don't eat here if you're on the lam."
would be a legit review of that particular restaurant.
I think these are very reasonable points and the hypothetical is poignant, but it's important to remember that corporations aren't reasonable people, they don't behave like reasonable beings and they get a system of justice totally different than you or I.
So one doesn't need to be reasonable in any aggression against them, just disruptive.
I’d really like to know how they feel about turning him in now that they’re aware there’s little to no chance of them getting the reward money.
Cant we just keep doing it or have they put safeguards in place or something?