Marketplace customer blacklist

[Felicia Silversmith]

Greetings!

 

I would like to suggest creation of marketplace customer banlist. Everybody who have own shop at marketplace knows that people writing reviews rarely even if they like product. Thats why products protected bad from bad reviews. Of course if review contain correct information creator can work on issue. But sometimes customers writing reviews with content like that - "I don like it"... Then is hard to understand why person bought it if do not like product. Of course if product is not same as described in listing its creator fault.  But sometimes people write reviews like that just because they have bad mood. And SL laws dont protect creators from it. Or as in case with one of my product even placing fake info about product into review. So people now writing reviews without any responsibility for review content.

I suggest 2 things:

1. Reviews wich defaming product without list of REAL disadvantages of product should not be allowed.

2. Placing reviews with fake or incorrect information about product should cause placing review author into banlist. And such customers should not be able write reviews anymore.

 

I guess i am not only creator who have issues with incorrect reviews.

 

 

[KarenMichelle Lane]

Requesting this thread be moved to General Discussion for a proper discussion...

[Qie Niangao]

I suggest just not using Marketplace any more. Solves a lot of problems.

[Storm Clarence]

I suggest the creation of a merchant banlist.  Especially merchants with a *union* label.

Do you see some of the garbage some merchants sell on marketplace? 

[Felicia Silversmith]

Storm, there are mechanisms to unlist bad products. But merchants dont have any protections from incorrect reviews. Thats is what topic about,, People spending a lot of time to create product and then some person writing defaming review wich really fake. And all merchants can do in this case is to write tickets to Linden Labs. But it will not stop this person from writing more fake reviews like that.

[Theresa Tennyson]

---

Felicia Silversmith wrote:

Storm, there are mechanisms to unlist bad products. But merchants dont have any protections from incorrect reviews. Thats is what topic about,, People spending a lot of time to create product and then some person writing defaming review wich really fake. And all merchants can do in this case is to write tickets to Linden Labs. But it will not stop this person from writing more fake reviews like that.

---

A merchant can put a comment in after an unfair review. And, as a consumer, I can usually recognize reviews that are unfair even without comments.

[LaskyaClaren]

---

Theresa Tennyson wrote:

---

Felicia Silversmith wrote:

Storm, there are mechanisms to unlist bad products. But merchants dont have any protections from incorrect reviews. Thats is what topic about,, People spending a lot of time to create product and then some person writing defaming review wich really fake. And all merchants can do in this case is to write tickets to Linden Labs. But it will not stop this person from writing more fake reviews like that.

---

A merchant can put a comment in after an unfair review. And, as a consumer, I can usually recognize reviews that are unfair even without comments.

---

What Theresa said.

I actually rely on reviews sometimes, but only if they are detailed enough to tell me something beyond "I didn't like it," or "it's crap." If I see one review out of, say, three, that says "It didn't work," I will probably ignore that comment, as the other two apparently didn't have the same experience. If, however, I see more than one review trashing the product for the same reason, then that's a pretty good indication that maybe it is a problem. Where there is no demo available (as is mostly the case for non-clothing items), reviews represent at least a potentially valuable way to ascertain whether a product is any good or not.

Who would get to decide who gets "blacklisted"? The merchant, annoyed at a bad review? A committee of self-interested merchants? LL? This is a non-starter, and simply not feasible.

Of course the reviews can be "gamed"; so can the marketplace itself, and merchants are as guilty of this as anyone else. But in a world where there is absolutely NO protection for consumers, reviews are important.

(PS. An idea I've floated before, and which I'll mention again, is the formation of a sort of SL "Better Business Bureau." A real one, that actually sets standards for its membership, isn't a sort of cliquish "gentleman's club," and takes the time to establish its credibility as a worthwhile setter of standards for quality.)

[Tari Landar]

---

Felicia Silversmith wrote:

Storm, there are mechanisms to unlist bad products. But merchants dont have any protections from incorrect reviews. Thats is what topic about,, People spending a lot of time to create product and then some person writing defaming review wich really fake. And all merchants can do in this case is to write tickets to Linden Labs. But it will not stop this person from writing more fake reviews like that.

---

Part of the problem is merchants who place far too much importance on reviews.  Customers do not even place that much importance on reviews, merchants should not either.  Someone simply saying they don't like something is NOT a bad review, at all. Go look around on e-commerice sites, take a look at reviews. A review is supposed to describe to the audience how someone feels about a product, it's merchant, etc.. If all a customer feels is they simply don't like something, by all means, tell folks. Sure it would be nice if they'd actually go into detail, but it is NOT a requirement nor should it be. I think it's utterly stupid to suggest someone who simply says they don't like a product should be put on a banlist.  Why would you want to ban someone from ever creating a review again simply becaus they don't like a product? Maybe that particular creator made a crappy product. Again, yeah it would be ideal if people would list exactly why they don't like something, but it is neither for you nor me to decide what others do and do not like about things.

You really need to let go of the idea that reviews are all that important.  It would be nice if they were, but they really aren't. Most people don't even pay them any attention. A lot of merchants have learned, over the years, to stop placing such importance on them too. Of course they can, and should, be a good thing-whether the review is positive or negative. But that is NOT the reality on the marketplace and it never has been since it's inception. The review system has been flawed since day one and the quicker you realize that, the better off you are.  Yes you can use reviews to your advantage, to figure out problems, and things like this. Yes it is nice when someone tells you something is wrong, so that you can fix it. It's even nicer when they then update their review. But the review system should still be far lower down on your priority list of things to care about. UNLESSS or UNTIL someone leaves a review that enables you to create a better product.  Otherwise, take the entire system with a grain of salt.  They're certainly not changing it anytime soon, we've been asking since day one, to no avail.

The idea of a banlist that prevents people from leaving reviews at all simply because a merchant gets their panties in a twist or does not agre with a bad review is an enormously bad idea. Do you honestly not think some merchants would take advanatge of that? As it is some merchants simply remove products when they get bad reviews and re-list them(sometimes with updates, or faked updates, sometimes with none at all). Of course that goes against the listing policy, but LL and the commerce team aren't stopping those folks. So, no, an overall ban list, utilized in the manner you described is NOT a good idea. 

I don't like bad reviews anymore than anyone else does. I also hate that despite them saying we should always get an email when a review is left, that still does not work for a LOT of merchants. But, all I can do is work to fix problems, make my customers whole again if I need to, learn from it, and move on. I have one bad review that is completely and utterly false...it doesn't make me angry or make me want to ban that person from leaving other reviews(or even from purchasing). The nice thing about reviews, is we can follow them up. If someone is going to take the time to read, and listen to, a bad review, they're likely to take the time to read your follow-up comments... so USE them.

Really the review system is a joke, and you shouldn't take it so seriously. There's not much use in holding onto the clear level of animosity and anger you're holding onto. This isn't the first discussion about bad reviews, it wobn't be the last, but I do recommend you go back and read some of them. You'll understand exactly why many merchants and customers do not think much of the review system in general. Other than, of course, to fix problems where they actually exist. Otherwise.. let it go, or you're going to drive yourself mad being upset.

[Tari Landar]

---

LaskyaClaren wrote:

---

(PS. An idea I've floated before, and which I'll mention again, is the formation of a sort of SL "Better Business Bureau." A real one, that actually sets standards for its membership, isn't a sort of cliquish "gentleman's club," and takes the time to establish its credibility as a worthwhile setter of standards for quality.)

---

This is something I would never support. Because again... who gets to decide? Who is on thie bureau? Who decides the criteria for standards? How do you know they aren't biased?

Humans, in general, are biased. In SL, things like this have never worked because frankly we don't know jack from jill. I don't know if that dude who is at the head of the bureau table is the boyfriend of that merchant justa dded to the approved list. How do I know I can trust his opinions and trust that he will remain neutral in all situations? Few humans can remain neutral in all situtations. I sure as heck know I can't.  It WOULD be clique-ish, plain and simple. There would be no real accountability.  There is no real way to determine standards of quality when the personal opinions of others is involved. Take mesh clothing for example... just look at how many opinions there ar of quality, lol. What I think is quality is NOT typical, just from reading the forums and even being out and about in world. Things I think are hideous others mconsider the epitome of fashion. The same would apply anywhere else. There's just too much room for interpretation and not enough room for accountability on the part of the bureau. I can honestly say I do not determine quality based on what others say. I figure that out on my own. Likely because, like I said, I don't often agree with others' opinions, lol.

I absolutely hate those labels, as if that particular group is the be all end all final judge of what is best and what is not. The people are often not the kind of folks I'd enjoy spending time with, much less take their opinions seriously. Not to mention they let that kind of "pwer" go to their heads, all too often.

 

 

[LaskyaClaren]

---

Tari Landar wrote:

---

LaskyaClaren wrote:

---

(PS. An idea I've floated before, and which I'll mention again, is the formation of a sort of SL "Better Business Bureau." A real one, that actually sets standards for its membership, isn't a sort of cliquish "gentleman's club," and takes the time to establish its credibility as a worthwhile setter of standards for quality.)

---

This is something I would never support. Because again... who gets to decide? Who is on thie bureau? Who decides the criteria for standards? How do you know they aren't biased?

Humans, in general, are biased. In SL, things like this have never worked because frankly we don't know jack from jill. I don't know if that dude who is at the head of the bureau table is the boyfriend of that merchant justa dded to the approved list. How do I know I can trust his opinions and trust that he will remain neutral in all situations? Few humans can remain neutral in all situtations. I sure as heck know I can't.  It WOULD be clique-ish, plain and simple. There would be no real accountability.  There is no real way to determine standards of quality when the personal opinions of others is involved. Take mesh clothing for example... just look at how many opinions there ar of quality, lol. What I think is quality is NOT typical, just from reading the forums and even being out and about in world. Things I think are hideous others mconsider the epitome of fashion. The same would apply anywhere else. There's just too much room for interpretation and not enough room for accountability on the part of the bureau. I can honestly say I do not determine quality based on what others say. I figure that out on my own. Likely because, like I said, I don't often agree with others' opinions, lol.

I absolutely hate those labels, as if that particular group is the be all end all final judge of what is best and what is not. The people are often not the kind of folks I'd enjoy spending time with, much less take their opinions seriously. Not to mention they let that kind of "pwer" go to their heads, all too often.

 

 

---

That is indeed a danger, and why I specified that it not be "cliquish." 

I'm not so cynical, perhaps, as you: while I agree that it would be difficult, and you'd have to establish some very firm and strong mechanisms to ensure that it didn't devolve into a self-serving clique, I think it's possible. But it would have to be very transparent and, obviously, very open.

[Storm Clarence]

---

Felicia Silversmith wrote:

Storm, there are mechanisms to unlist bad products.

But merchants dont have any protections from incorrect reviews

. Thats is what topic about,, People spending a lot of time to create product and then some person writing defaming review wich really fake. And all merchants can do in this case is to write tickets to Linden Labs. But it will not stop this person from writing more fake reviews like that.

---

Marketplace is chockful of *bad* product.  If there is a mechanism for unlisting [sic] then it hasn't worked.  Or maybe it has worked and then someone figured out that if we keep whacking/delisting we won't have any more product to sell on Marketplace.  

Merchants have plenty of tools at their disposal to reconcile poor reviews.  Use them.

 

 

 

 

[Nova Convair]

Nonsense.

Not a customer blacklist but a personal merchant blacklist is needed.

Then I can block all who excessively use wrong keywords and all that try to spam me. (spam is every msg I get without opt in) With the remaining 5-10% of the entries the marketplace will become even useable.

The reviews only have any value if there is a significant number of them. If there are only 2-3 I ignore them anyways.

[Marianne Little]

This, so much this. 

---

Nova Convair wrote:

Nonsense.

Not a customer blacklist but a personal merchant blacklist is needed.

Then I can block all who excessively use wrong keywords and all that try to spam me. (spam is every msg I get without opt in) With the remaining 5-10% of the entries the marketplace will become even useable.

The reviews only have any value if there is a significant number of them. If there are only 2-3 I ignore them anyways.

---

 

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

LaskyaClaren wrote:

---

Tari Landar wrote:

---

LaskyaClaren wrote:

---

(PS. An idea I've floated before, and which I'll mention again, is the formation of a sort of SL "Better Business Bureau." A real one, that actually sets standards for its membership, isn't a sort of cliquish "gentleman's club," and takes the time to establish its credibility as a worthwhile setter of standards for quality.)

---

This is something I would never support. Because again... who gets to decide? Who is on thie bureau? Who decides the criteria for standards? How do you know they aren't biased?

Humans, in general, are biased. In SL, things like this have never worked because frankly we don't know jack from jill. I don't know if that dude who is at the head of the bureau table is the boyfriend of that merchant justa dded to the approved list. How do I know I can trust his opinions and trust that he will remain neutral in all situations? Few humans can remain neutral in all situtations. I sure as heck know I can't.  It WOULD be clique-ish, plain and simple. There would be no real accountability.  There is no real way to determine standards of quality when the personal opinions of others is involved. Take mesh clothing for example... just look at how many opinions there ar of quality, lol. What I think is quality is NOT typical, just from reading the forums and even being out and about in world. Things I think are hideous others mconsider the epitome of fashion. The same would apply anywhere else. There's just too much room for interpretation and not enough room for accountability on the part of the bureau. I can honestly say I do not determine quality based on what others say. I figure that out on my own. Likely because, like I said, I don't often agree with others' opinions, lol.

I absolutely hate those labels, as if that particular group is the be all end all final judge of what is best and what is not. The people are often not the kind of folks I'd enjoy spending time with, much less take their opinions seriously. Not to mention they let that kind of "pwer" go to their heads, all too often.

 

 

---

That is indeed a danger, and why I specified that it not be "cliquish." 

I'm not so cynical, perhaps, as you: while I agree that it would be difficult, and you'd have to establish some very firm and strong mechanisms to ensure that it didn't devolve into a self-serving clique, I think it's possible. But it would have to be 

very

transparent and, obviously, 

very

open.

---

I don't think Tari is being cynical. In a system where participants are anonymous and cloneable, I don't think it's possible to have any, let alone strong, mechanisms to prevent exactly the sort of things she's concerned about.

And the Better Business Bureau is not without its problems...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Better_Business_Bureau

http://business.time.com/2013/03/19/why-the-better-business-bureau-should-give-itself-a-bad-grade/

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/27/your-money/27haggler.html?pagewanted=all

In my dealings with the local BBB over the years, I'd be hard pressed to give them better than a "D". I used to think their customer relations were terrible, until I realized I wasn't their customer. Oops!

Also notice that the BBB is not a member of the BBB.

;-)

ETA: If Tari's apprehension over a BBB type service in SL is "cynical", isn't the call to have such a service also cynical?

[Tari Landar]

---

LaskyaClaren wrote:

---

That is indeed a danger, and why I specified that it not be "cliquish." 

I'm not so cynical, perhaps, as you: while I agree that it would be difficult, and you'd have to establish some very firm and strong mechanisms to ensure that it didn't devolve into a self-serving clique, I think it's possible. But it would have to be 

very

transparent and, obviously, 

very

open.

---

It's not so much cynical, as it is reasonable.  There is no reasonable way for a BBB type organization to work in sl. There really isn't.  Ideally, it would be possible, but sl is not ideal and never will be.  It's simply impossible to make certain there is full transparency, and full amiguity among sl residents.  It wouldn't even be possible for ll employees to remain impartial in a situation such as that.  There are far too many "what ifs" and absolutely no "this is how".

I understand the desire for something like that, the desire is all over the place. I have yet to see a reasonable way in which something like that could happen.  How do you propose transparency be made possible? How do you propose to convince the residents of sl that all members of such a bureau are completely impartial? How you you believe they would determine the standards of quality for merchants?

A rating system is nice, and that is primarily what the BB actually provides to people who look to use their service. It is not so much that they, themselves, determine eligibility based on actual quality, but more that they base it on whether or not complaints are made(and how they are dealt with when they are made) as well as compliments made. They don't really determine "quality" outside of those qualifications though.

[LaskyaClaren]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

I don't think Tari is being cynical. In a system where participants are anonymous and cloneable, I don't think it's possible to have any, let alone strong, mechanisms to prevent exactly the sort of things she's concerned about.

And the Better Business Bureau is not without its problems...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Better_Business_Bureau

http://business.time.com/2013/03/19/why-the-better-business-bureau-should-give-itself-a-bad-grade/

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/27/your-money/27haggler.html?pagewanted=all

In my dealings with the local BBB over the years, I'd be hard pressed to give them better than a "D". I used to think their customer relations were terrible, until I realized I wasn't their customer. Oops!

Also notice that the BBB is not a member of the BBB.

;-)

---

This is all fair enough. 

To respond to both you and Tari, I don't know whether it could be done or not. And I am certainly aware of the problems with RL BBBs.

At the same time, I have been a member of SL organizations that were at least reasonably transparent, open, and even "democratic." They certainly weren't perfect, but they functioned reasonably well, and did not devolve into cliques or corruption.

Could that kind of model be applied to an inworld association of merchants? Well, I really *don't* know, but I'd support an attempt to make it work. if it seemed genuine and sincere.

[Kelli May]

Sounds like a huge overraction to a single bad review. You already had (and used) the opportunity to answer that review on the Marketplace. I think your reply was very reasonable considering the overwhelming negativity of the reviewer (their review reads like they don't understand a couple of basic concepts in SL, like waiting for textures to load and needing to position attachments).

The rest of your products get great reviews: 5 stars across the board, in fact. You're clearly very popular with those customers who've left reviews and should be happy with your work.

---

Felicia Silversmith wrote:

Greetings!

 

I would like to suggest creation of marketplace customer banlist. Everybody who have own shop at marketplace knows that people writing reviews rarely even if they like product. Thats why products protected bad from bad reviews. Of course if review contain correct information creator can work on issue. But sometimes customers writing reviews with content like that - "I don like it"... Then is hard to understand why person bought it if do not like product. Of course if product is not same as described in listing its creator fault.  But sometimes people write reviews like that just because they have bad mood. And SL laws dont protect creators from it. Or as in case with one of my product even placing fake info about product into review. So people now writing reviews without any responsibility for review content.

I suggest 2 things:

1. Reviews wich defaming product without list of REAL disadvantages of product should not be allowed.

2. Placing reviews with fake or incorrect information about product should cause placing review author into banlist. And such customers should not be able write reviews anymore.

 

I guess i am not only creator who have issues with incorrect reviews.

 

 

---

I'd love to know how you think your suggestions would be implemented. Should LL have someone read every review, and judge whether that review is accurate compared to the product involved? That would mean they'd have to buy and test every reviewed product, or they'd have no way to judge the accuracy. To be fair to customers as well as vendors, they'd have to read all the positive reviews and test the products against the claims made. Do your strap-on plugs *really* empower Mistresses as one of your reviewers claims? We, the consumers, have a right to know!

[Pamela Galli]

Merchants have long wished for the ability to ban people from buying their stuff on the marketplace, like we can inworld. Buyers can decide who they do and do not want to do business with, but sellers do not -- for example, even people who have bought stuff on the MP after being banned inworld, for the purpose of copybotting it, it are free to continue. No one in SL should be forced to do business with someone they dont want to.

 

The idea of a BBB for SL has been discussed many times, but it falls apart pretty quickly when you look into the who's and how's of it. 

[Sassy Romano]

I never worry about reviews, I only get one per year anyway so not really drama lol

[Pussycat Catnap]

---

Tari Landar wrote:

---

Felicia Silversmith wrote:

Storm, there are mechanisms to unlist bad products. But merchants dont have any protections from incorrect reviews. Thats is what topic about

---

Part of the problem is merchants who place far too much importance on reviews.  Customers do not even place that much importance on reviews, merchants should not either.

. . .

You really need to let go of the idea that reviews are all that important.  It would be nice if they were, but they really aren't. Most people don't even pay them any attention. A lot of merchants have learned, over the years, to stop placing such importance on them too.

---

At my last RL job they wanted to add a review system to the shopping section. Then the marketers wanted to make sure it was moderated so they could cull "unfair" reviews. I recall repeatedly trying to point out to them that one mistep in that could lead to some rather bad press given that there was already a popular web forum where many of our customers went to talk about things...

Give the merchants the ability to screen what reviews show up - and you can be sure a certain popular SL third party forum will light up with topics like "my review of X got culled, don't trust merchant Y, their stuff is [bleep]".

- And then, while your reviews might end up being glowing, becomming known as a person who censors their reviews will be some pretty seriously toxic press, even among customers who never paid the reviews any mind in the first place. And you can be sure half the people complaining about culled reviews will blame not just the merchant, but also wrongly; LLs...

 

[Storm Clarence]

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

 No one in SL should be forced to do business with someone they dont want to.

---

No business, unless it is a consultancy, should be permitted to refuse business to any SL resident, unless of course, they are known criminals i.e., copybotters.  This ain't Arizona!  And, it's pretty offensive to think this mind set prevails. 

What's next no gays; no blacks; no newbies; no NPIOF; no jews; no furries?   

[Dillon Levenque]

Aside from the fact I think that even the suggestion that a person should be banned from writing reviews anytime anywhere is utterly ludicrous, there's no way in a million years the system you suggest could be implemented.

Who is going to decide if the reviewer actually understood the product? Certainly not the merchant or the customer—they're the ones being judged; they can't take part in the judging. Who's to decide if maybe the product isn't very good? Who's to decide what's good in this instance?

It's silly. Even if the money was avaialable to pay someone or more than one someone to do all this reviewing, there's not a chance they'd be able to get things right, or even know what IS right!

Either reply to your bad reviews or ignore them. Most people (as has already been pointed out) either ignore reviews altogether or use them as a very tenuous way to judge a product. A mountain of bad reviews, particulary ones with a lot of provable detail, is probably a bad sign. A mountain of joyfully positive reviews, particularly with little provable detail, is an equallly bad sign, at least to me.

If your products are what people want and like, you're fine. Don't waste time getting into a battle with a reviewer. And forget about banning customers for bad reviews.

[Kenbro Utu]

---

Storm Clarence wrote:

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

 No one in SL should be forced to do business with someone they dont want to.

---

No business, unless it is a consultancy, should be permitted to refuse business to any SL resident, unless of course, they are known criminals i.e., copybotters.  This ain't Arizona!  And, it's pretty offensive to think this mind set prevails. 

What's next no gays; no blacks; no newbies; no NPIOF; no jews; no furries?   

---

Naw, just no tea baggers...

[Felicia Silversmith]

I would like to concentrate attention to one moment. I am not suggesting to ban customers for bad reviews. If review is bad but it telling true its another situation. I was talking about unfair defaming of product. There is now already system of flagging reviews and think it can be modified a bit to flag fake defaming reviews. We have abuse report in SL for defaming persons. As i said creators spent sometimes really long time to create some products and i guess protection from unfair defaming should exist.

About who will decide is it fair review or not. In some cases it visible at first sight. I dont know if comments to review can fix situation. Some people here saying that customers rarely paying attention to reviews. Then i guess they even more rarely paying attention to comment to reviews. But anyway, even if merchant lose at least ONE customer because of fake defaming review this situation should be solved. I mean solved in common, not in particular case. I spent monthes to create and promote some of my products and i dont want to lose customers because of fake reviews. Merchants should have way to protect their products from unfair defaming.

 

 

[Tari Landar]

While I understand, some, of your frustrations, I think you're missing the big picture. No one *wants a bad review, but many people get them from time to time.  Yes most don't pay attention to reviews, we've seen the topic discussed a lot. A "bad" review isn't going to lose you a customer if they don't actually pay attention to the reviews in the first place. The ones who do matter, or should, the most to you, are those who DO read the reviews. Which is why you need to comment to them. For the folks who read reviews and actually utilize them to buy a product, your comments and follow-up to a negative review is going to be more important than the negative review, hands down. If you can prove that despite issues, you still are the type of merchant you want to present yourself as, a negative review is not going to slow or even prevent others from purchasing.

Of course the flag system could work better. The entire review system could work better, it sucks. I don't think you'll find a whole lot of people who think the review system is really all that helpful in the first place.

On the flip side though, do you feel the same way about reviews which are positive and say absolutely nothing about the product? Reviews that, perhaps, may seem fake, even though they are positive? Or is it only negative ones? Fake good reviews, or at least positive reviews that say absolutely nothing about the product to inform the folks who actually read them, SHOULD be as detrimental to your product as a bad review, if you believe that negative reviews that aren't true are detrimental to your sales. That is, if you take the entire system that seriously.  This is why I, and others, have said that the review system does not function the way you believe it does, nor does it have an effect on whether or not most people purchase. But for the few it may have an effect on, a negative review that is properly followed up on, isn't going to sway them towards not purchasing. It will more than likely sway them TO purchase. That's the one benefit if being able to comment on a review.

I don't believe people should post fake reviews whether they are positive or negative, personally, but people do.  Even in the real world when people make reviews, they aren't always that great at really expressing themselves in the ways we would prefer. In that right, the review system we have, works an awful lot like many other review systems e-commerce sites have. Ours just sucks on a larger scale. But no system is perfect, and no system weeds out fake reviews, positive or negative.