Tell your girlfriend that Uber drivers might lose their job if they drop to a 4.6 star average. 3 seems savage for a good ride.
"If your rating over the most recent 100 trips is below a 4.6, your profile may be at risk of deactivation."
"If your rating over the most recent 100 trips is below a 4.6, your profile may be at risk of deactivation."
It makes you a jerk, nothing more really.
Since I had no idea that 3 stars was a bad rating that hurt drivers until I read the comments here, I think that your condescension is very misplaced.
>It is "right" to provide an honest rating. What you seem to be saying is that it is the rider's duty to provide dishonest ratings.
That seems to me a staunch defense of doing what you want to do regardless of how it affects the driver.
From reading the comments here, though, I think I know what I'll do: opt out of the whole thing and avoid ride-sharing services in the future.
EDIT: I mean the royal "you", not you specifically. Also, I have been the a'hole before :|
I agree, in a sense. If you're working with a rating system that is inherently dishonest (as I just learned this one is) by redefining what ratings mean, then it's dishonest to supply a rating that you know means something other than what it should.
I was not advocating doing that.
If the company is using them dishonestly then inflated ratings are just serving the dishonest purpose.
Moreover, in the honest case (which I do not think applies) if the company is trying to use (known to be highly culturally variable) star ratings as a substitute for a simple binary “you would want to ride again with this driver” flag, they are idiots and overcomplicating what should be simple.
However, Uber doesn't value star-ratings the way she does, so she is wrong.
It's a car ride, not a movie. A perfect ride... is still just a ride in a car. If they get you there without incident and don't annoy you too much that seems like a 5/5.
Here's how the scale I instinctively would use would work: Getting me there without incident and without being too annoying would be a 3. If they don't annoy me at all, that would be a 4. If they do anything that makes my trip better (a better route, a good, relevant suggestion for where to go for something of interest to me, or just making my day a bit brighter), that would be a 5.
That guy probably deserved a "true" 5-star rating.
Direct action needs to actually affect the people who have the power to make changes. Stubbornly rating drivers 3/5 for a good ride just makes their lives harder, and let's be clear, nobody who is working at Uber gives a shit about that.
If people provided informative ratings, the cutoff would be adjusted. Uber's policies can't make the rating system worthless; the raters are doing it.
I stand by exactly what I said before: Uber is only able to set the cutoff it does because of rider behavior, and if the rider behavior were different, Uber would adjust to it, not the other way around. The riders have all of the power to determine what ratings mean, and Uber has none of that power, because the riders are the ones who set the ratings. No one at Uber is enough of an idiot to deactivate every driver on the platform because none of them reached a number that Uber made up. Or even to deactivate 70% of drivers because only 30% got perfect ratings.
Uber had lots of other choices, too.