Hacker News Reader

Comment by mothsonasloth | Hacker News Reader

The problem with reviews is even though they have a name, like "Bob Seymour, from Manchester" or "Tracy Hughes, from London".

They're still impersonal.

Unlike the reviews when you go around to a friends BBQ or are at an event, and you say "Oh hey Sarah, I see you are driving the new X".

Then they proceed to tell you how great/bad or mediocre it is.

Surprised no-one has been able to engineer a more personable review mechanic, then again with all the privacy concerns. Do you really want to know what your friends are buying, and equally for them to know what you are buying too.

View on HN

Amazon used to have a reviewing system that was a lot more social: you could follow people, chat with them on message boards, read detailed bios and an explanation of why they review a certain niche of products, etc. Then, it was easy to notice trustworthy reviewers who were reviewing things for the simple pleasure of it. (Back in the day, it was mainly books, CDs, and DVDs being reviewed, not Chinese-made products like now.)

Amazon eventually shut down the message boards, probably because it felt moderation cost more than the feature brought profit. Successive changes to the site's design obscured most of the other social aspects.

And the current fix for this is something like Facebook which I'd also hate.

Maybe what we need is a Kevin-Bacon-degrees-of-separation style system. I can review something and my 'friends' can see it's me. Friends of friends can see someone just outside their circle bought it (maybe they can ask their friend for further info). And strangers get the usual 'Trent from London' with no further info.

That's exactly right - this is the problem that we have with every online "social" network (I would include Amazon reviews in this label for the purposes of this comment).

It's clear from the article that she retains two separate and unequal ratings of each product: one that she provides to her "online" persona, and one that she would provide to her "authentic" persona. It's clear that she would not purchase these products herself or recommend them to friends, yet rates them 5 stars on Amazon. As many will point out, the ability to do this is not new; the ability to do it at scale and with zero consequences (where consequences would be to your own personal reputation, for example) is the innovation.

What's truly sad is that we're missing out on such a crucial piece of information that is available to her: namely, her boyfriend's expertise in chemistry. They could blow the lid off shoddy and downright dangerous products on Amazon and provide a valuable public service to boot, but hey, it's easier to run the grift, right?

I'm not sure if I think personalization would fix it. When I was on Facebook, I received one or two MLM offers. If Reddit is to be believed, this is actually a prevalent practice.

You'd go from anonymous reviews to seeing which of your "friends" are more interested in a shitty side hustle (e.g. there would still be.the kind of gaming noted in the article)

If comfortable writing a review about a product, I’m comfortable with friends knowing that I bought it.

The bigger problem seems to be critical mass of friends reviews to make it a worthwhile endeavor.

How many similar products have my friends bought? If that small group, how many have written reviews?

That subset of a subset is probably too small to be meaningful.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com