Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hotel fines $500 for every bad review posted online

pagesix.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 249 posts

Re: Hotel fines $500 for every bad review posted online

#161

Post by positivejam »

imaginenore wrote: post #32
[deleted] wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[deleted]

Your sarcasm detector is broken. Call the repairman.

personZ understood the sarcasm:

-literal meaning of Spooky23's statement: it's unreasonable to expect ice in the middle of summer.

-sarcastic meaning of Spooky23's statement: it's completely REASONABLE to expect ice in the middle of summer.

personZ acknowledges the sarcastic meaning (that it is reasonable to expect ice in the middle of summer), and is pointing out that based on the article, the guests actually DID in fact receive ice, making Spooky23's sarcastic statement not very relevant; the issue was that they had complaints about the attitude with which it was provided.

Edit: unless perhaps personZ edited his original post.

Re: Hotel fines $500 for every bad review posted online

#163

Post by mikeash »

TallGuyShort wrote: post #121

So I agree with what appears to be the overwhelming majority that this policy is probably legally unenforceable and was destined to backfire as soon as it was posted on the interwebs, but... I think they have a legitimate problem and I'm wandering what alternate solutions we can come up with. The person planning the wedding (may or may not be the people actually getting married) thinks this is a good place for the we…

If the problem is people booking rooms for their guests and the guests often dislike the rooms, then the solution seems easy: don't let people book rooms for large numbers of guests. Make guests book their own rooms.

These people want to have it both ways. They know they have a problem wherein people are frequently booked as guests and then don't enjoy their stay. But rather than try to avoid this situation (either by fixing what these people dislike, or by turning them away) they want to keep raking in the cash, and just want people to shut up about their experience.

Re: Hotel fines $500 for every bad review posted online

#164

Post by pilsetnieks »

chippy wrote: post #160
dm2 wrote: post #16

What a horrible policy, it won't end well for them. http://www.yelp.com/biz/union-street-guest-house-hudson?sort... 10 negative Yelp reviews have been posted today (so far), ouch... http://www.tripadvisor.com/Hotel_Review-g47931-d490934-Revie... Their website navigation is a very discrete image map in the middle of the page, http://www.unionstreetguesthouse.com/ obviously this was someone's first website. It's probab…

off topic, but why don't people use image maps anymore?

Accessibility (probably not so great on a screen-reader,) and SEO (not a proper link with content), I think. Of course, there may be other reasons, too.

Re: Hotel fines $500 for every bad review posted online

#165

Post by pavel_lishin »

kmfrk wrote: post #102
smackfu wrote: post #80

This seems like it would violate Yelp's rules. If you fine people for bad reviews, is that any different than paying people for good reviews?

It's illegal to sue people for bad reviews (SLAPP); I think it's just against Yelp TOU to pay people for good ones.

Not all states have SLAPP statutes.

Re: Hotel fines $500 for every bad review posted online

#166

Post by inigoesdr »

chippy wrote: post #160
dm2 wrote: post #16

What a horrible policy, it won't end well for them. http://www.yelp.com/biz/union-street-guest-house-hudson?sort... 10 negative Yelp reviews have been posted today (so far), ouch... http://www.tripadvisor.com/Hotel_Review-g47931-d490934-Revie... Their website navigation is a very discrete image map in the middle of the page, http://www.unionstreetguesthouse.com/ obviously this was someone's first website. It's probab…

off topic, but why don't people use image maps anymore?

The largest issue is that you have to re-create them every time you make a change. You have to create an entire new image, and update the coordinates for the map, which is arduous. They are also not very mobile-friendly, tend to waste a lot of bandwidth on the filler space, and you are somewhat limited in what you can do with the link shapes. It's much more efficient and cleaner to create the elements separately so you can easily update them, and they can scale better. Also, SEO as the other responder mentioned.

Re: Hotel fines $500 for every bad review posted online

#167

Post by mikeash »

Vik1ng wrote: post #154
potatolicious wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does seem a bit unfair, but at the same time the reviews aren't just a measure of how much the bride and groom will enjoy the place, it's also a measure of how much everyone else does as well. Perhaps "many of your guests will hate this place" is a valuable signal to couples picking venues. Honestly, if you've been a legitimate guest of a particular venue IMO it's perfectly fine to leave a review about it. The peo…

But then it's just as valid to write a bad review about a McDonalds restaurant your group of friends decided to go to, because the wine selection sucked.

I don't think McDonald's is a good example, because everyone already knows what it is, and reviews don't serve a useful purpose.

Let's instead imagine some similar non-chain place called O'Brien's. Would it not be useful, when deciding whether or not to go to O'Brien's for dinner, to see a bad review saying, "I didn't like this place, all they had was burgers, and no booze"?

Re: Hotel fines $500 for every bad review posted online

#168

Post by ghaff »

nitrogen wrote: post #140
peroo wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As bad as the star system is, I'm not sure there's anything better. I think Amazon has the right idea with the "Was this review helpful to you?" buttons, though that may not work quite as well for Yelp if you consider the possibility of review-burying by owners.

We could have stars for multiple axes, plus a "choose n-of-m" keyword selection, but I wonder if that would be too complicated for users. Example: Service: 1-5 Cleanliness: 1-5 Concierge: 1-5 Modernity: 1-5 .... Choose three words to describe the hotel stay: _ modern _ rustic _ rude _ quaint _ clean ...

There's a lot of evidence that minimizing dimensions--even to the point of getting rid of obviously relevant ones--generally works best. Though Zagat does have food, decor, service, and cost so it can work especially when you're focused on a single thing. It gets harder when you're rating different things that span different dimensions. Amazon, for example, obviously just has a star system and DVD reviews are this sorta annoying mix of reviews of the movie and reviews of the specific DVD product.

Re: Hotel fines $500 for every bad review posted online

#169

Post by kevinpet »

Vik1ng wrote: post #156
67726e wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I went through and read them all and they don't exactly seem "fake" in that the reviewer doesn't claim to have visited to the location. They are all complaining about the policies and attitude of the place, which can pretty well be gleaned from reading the policies on the site.

So you think it is valid to leave a 1 star review for a restaurant, because you don't like the menu posted in their website?

What's the proper response to those handful of restaurants that scam tourists who fail to read the menu charging outrageous prices? If only there were some online site I could find out of a business is a rip off before I patronize it.

Re: Hotel fines $500 for every bad review posted online

#170

Post by blisterpeanuts »

Vik1ng wrote: post #156
67726e wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I went through and read them all and they don't exactly seem "fake" in that the reviewer doesn't claim to have visited to the location. They are all complaining about the policies and attitude of the place, which can pretty well be gleaned from reading the policies on the site.

So you think it is valid to leave a 1 star review for a restaurant, because you don't like the menu posted in their website?

A more accurate analogy: you read the menu and notice in the fine print at the bottom that they will charge your credit card an extra $25 if you post a bad review of your meal.

So you get on Yelp and post a review warning others of the practice. Doesn't that seem like a legitimate use of a review site?

Technically, yes, you didn't utilize the service, but that doesn't mean you have no qualifications to comment on the business's bad policies.

"I drove to the repair shop, they insulted me with ethnic slur, and I got mad and drove away." Would this not be a legitimate and useful review?

Post reply on HN