The thing with Yelp is that the negative reviews usually have a grain a truth to them.
I think they should pivot into an Internet complaints department.
Yelp’s Six-Year Conflict with Google
191–198 of 198 posts
Re: Yelp’s Six-Year Conflict with Google
#192yelp and tripadvisor basically destroyed the usage of "site:.XX" on google. Now every time I want to look for information on a specific country, I have to skip the first 2-4 results because they are almost "spam"
Re: Yelp’s Six-Year Conflict with Google
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can see both being true. Assuming the sales staff are on commission, there's a strong possibility some asshattery happened. Perhaps you didn't run into any unethical sales staff.
I ran into plenty of idiots in sales. I don't assume anything about what salespeople say...but I know for a fact that salespeople at Yelp have no ability to affect reviews.
Anyone has the ability to affect reviews to some degree. And anyone can imply they have more control.
Re: Yelp’s Six-Year Conflict with Google
#194Earlier quoted context omitted.
And in chrome the address bar is hijacked to be a Google search
Simple setting to change the search engine.
Should I interpret your comment as helpful ("btw, you can fix that in the settings!") or annoying disregard for the powerful difference between opt-in and opt-out ("there's nothing wrong with bad defaults as long as the option exists to change them!")?
Re: Yelp’s Six-Year Conflict with Google
#195Earlier quoted context omitted.
I ran into plenty of idiots in sales. I don't assume anything about what salespeople say...but I know for a fact that salespeople at Yelp have no ability to affect reviews.
Anyone has the ability to affect reviews to some degree. And anyone can imply they have more control.
"Anyone has the ability to affect reviews to some degree."
No, they don't. Except in the imaginations of conspiracy theorists.
Re: Yelp’s Six-Year Conflict with Google
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
> nobody if forced (except for perhaps android users) to use Chrome Unlike iOS you can install different browsers on Android directly from the Play Store. These can actually be different browsers with their own rendering engines not just alternative UIs on top of Chrome. Firefox on Android for example uses the actual Firefox rendering engine, not Chrome.
You can, but by default you get Chrome, which is about the same thing people were fighting Microsoft over in the Netscape-IE days, but this time on Android.
That case created a misconception that refuses to die... There's nothing inherently illegal about having a default app or product. There's also nothing inherently illegal about having a popular app or product.
The reason Microsoft got in trouble is because it was not only found that they had a monopoly in a particular market, but that they obtained some of that market share illegally through shady contracts effectively forbidding OEMs from offering alternative OSes, etc... They were then found to have used that illegally obtained monopoly to take over a completely different market in part by bundling IE with Windows and punishing OEMs who sought to including alternate browsers and completely disallowing the removal of IE.
Re: Yelp’s Six-Year Conflict with Google
#197Earlier quoted context omitted.
It depends on position. They treat CSRs like absolute shit -- see Talia Jane. Given a choice, I'd prefer not to work for companies that treat any employee like that.
I've read her article. ( https://medium.com/@taliajane/an-open-letter-to-my-ceo-fb73d... ) It really has nothing substantive to say except "I'm struggling, pay me more." She even points to several facts in her article. "She ended up leaving the company and moving east, somewhere the minimum wage could double as a living wage." "But boy did I not anticipate a decade and a half ago that a car and a credit card and an a…
First comment on your first comments page I agree with.
Re: Yelp’s Six-Year Conflict with Google
#198I find all this hand wringing over Google to be so tiring. Google is doing what is best for it's customers. Be that advertisers and/or searchers. If they stop doing that, they'll lose their market dominance. Last I checked, nobody is forced to use google to search for things, nobody if forced (except for perhaps android users) to use Chrome. I'm not a laissez-faire capitalist by any means, but I don't see that Google…
> I don't see that Google has an unfair monopoly.
really? isn't the use of their search engine to squelch competition in local reviews support that they are a monopoly?