Reviews - salt needed

[Ruthmay]

I wrote a one star review of the Murano glass bead necklace, called it tourist tat, which it is.

only 5 star reviews have been published.

I will not trust any reviews again, unless on here.

 

[borednow]

I have had bad reviews published but I fear that they have the tendency to disqualify bad reviews for the slightest reason (no proof just a feeling driven by the reviews that I have had declined)

 

[Scout]

I wrote a one star review of the Murano glass bead necklace, called it tourist tat, which it is. only 5 star reviews have been published.
I will not trust any reviews again, unless on here.

I think people are far too paranoid about reviews that are declined. I understand it, because I used to be myself, but I've discovered that there's an art to writing bad reviews and if you write them in the right way to comply with the rules, they are published. I've now had quite a lot of bad reviews published, even one saying that if I could give no stars I would. If your review was refused you should have received an email telling you so and asking you to read the rules and take them into account. The reason for refusal can be tiny, but if you've broken a rule that's what happens. I always call them and ask them the reason for refusal, and I've always found them very friendly and reasonable, often suggesting how I could say the same thing without them having to refuse it. The people monitoring the reviews have rules they have to follow, but if you play the game by those rules your one star review will be published alongside the five star reviews. Should also say that I also always post a review if I'm really pleased with a product. Some people only post bad reviews, but that doesn't seem fair to me.

Edited this to add that I also had very good reviews declined in the past because they broke the rules. They were what made me really look at what the rules actually say and made me realise that there's a technique to writing them and that there's no big conspiracy to only publish the good ones.

 

[Weathergirl]

I don't have time to write any reviews at the moment but in the past I have written a few. I once had a POSITIVE review rejected because I inadvertently broke the rules!

 

[Autumn]

I must have been very lucky as every review ive written has been published ( only been 9 or 10 mind) most of them have been bad 1 star reviews aswell.

 

[Mazza]

I had a one star review published, no problem, and a glowing five star review declined because I happened to mention it was on free p&p. I only found out why it was rejected after I asked them though. I do not bother now except for really shocking products (like my Tova selection).

 

[donna255]

Only ever had one review turned down, it was a positive one too. I see quite a few bad reviews for stuff on their site.

You cannot mention promotions when buying (though I have seen easy pay mentioned), other retailers, so can buy from Amazon cheaper won't get published or the delivery charges.

 

[Ruthmay]

Really can't be bothered to read the rules. I do not use bad language nor libel or defame anybody, that is all that should be required. not a problem. will not bother in future, if I ever buy from them again!

 

[KimP]

So the problem is not with the integrity of the review system is it.

The veracity of the reviews posted by those of us who can be "bothered" to follow a few simple guidelines should not be called into question unless their are credible grounds to do so.

 

[jaydeen]

I have written reviews which have been within the guidelines and had them rejected before. It doesn't always happen but sometimes it does. I have also copied and pasted a rejected review a second time or a third time and it has been posted. Maybe it depends which person is putting it through.

 

[thatu]

Exactly the same here. I started a thread about this a couple of weeks ago - too lazy to look it up. The review system is inconsistent and I can't be bothered with it any more. Sometimes the presenter will say on a second airing that this has x number of 5-star reviews and I think, well, mine would have proved the lie to that IF you'd posted it.

 

[RedT]

Sorry but i think the notion of having 'rules' you have to follow when submitting a review is absolute nonsense and just a very convenient way of QVC to thin out many negative reviews. If I want to review a product I want to be able to say pretty much whatever I like without having to stop and think how I'm going to frame my thoughts so that they fit in with QVC's rules! When you think about it, they have the ball in their court entirely - they flog stuff based on all the fabulous five star reviews and yet have the power to reject negative reviews, it's ridiculous. And the notion that you get feedback on why your review failed? Well I've had that e-mail and it made no sense whatsoever. I don't have the time or inclination to call them to plead for information on why my precious review failed! Any other website that allows reviews allows users to say what they really think without having to conform to arbitrary rules.

 

[Ruthmay]

My point exactly, RedT, you put it so well*****

 

[Bid Up Side Down]

Flamin arrogance from Q. A review is a review; good, bad or indifferent. By censoring all reviews Q are just cooking the books and making themselves look a tad paranoid.

 

[Weathergirl]

The main rule they have is that the review must forcus solely on the product itself so attempts to comment on pricing, postage, comparisons with another brand are excluded. This is such a grey area and what one person would allow another would reject. For example I have had a review rejected for saying "too expensive" whereas another person has got away with saying "excellent value for money". I hadca review for Emma Hardie moringa balm rejected for saying that it was better thsn Liz Earle on my skin whereas other reviewers have got away with saying "I will stick to my Liz Earle in future". The system only succeeds in annoying customers who have used their own valuable time to write a review. I gave up bothering a couple of years ago because of these rules - which seem to be unfairly and inconsistently applied. Plus I have better things to do with my time than write reviews- shame because I tend to read the reviews before buying a product.

Off topic slightly I posted ages ago on another thread that if you want a laugh look at Amazon's reviews for the "Bic for her"box of pens. Appealed to my little mind anyway. Hilarious.

 

[Buttercorn]

Weathergirl - I am not sure whether to thanks you for this or not. I have read the reviews you suggested and I have just wet myself.:Hysterical:
So, so funny. If you need a cheer up this wet, windy Monday morning, have a read!:witchbroom:

 

[iloveshopping]

LOL just started reading the Bic for her reviews on amazon.

 

[Weathergirl]

Glad to cheer you up! They are genius aren't they. My husband has been using a bic for her pink pen at work. People have commented on it (because a burly kiwi is writing with a pink pen!) and he tells them to read the Amazon reviews as well. He had tears rolling down his face when he read them.

 

[Autumn]

The thing about the review system that annoys me on Q is when people write a review without evening receiving the item yet , theres been many cases of a TSV coming on air and it already having reviews, the people often write they haven't got the item yet but cant wait to receive it, surely that's a stupid thing to allow.

 

[Akimbo]

This is a real bugbear of mine too. The evil side of me secretly hopes they never receive theirs or it's mangled in the mail just to teach them a lesson; but maybe for TSVs the website shouldn't have a review button for at least 48 hours (I'm being generous about delivery time because TSVs often arrive quickly).
I'd also like to see a facility that verifies that the reviewer purchased that very item. I swear there's a woman who leaves a 5* review on every Liz Earle item! I appreciate it's a finite range of products and she's probably tried every one but surely they haven't bought every single permutation ever offered?