Glassdoor not so anonymous
51–60 of 507 posts
Re: Glassdoor not so anonymous
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
Glassdoors business model is selling the ability to take down bad reviews. Why would they out their customers?
How do I pay Glassdoor to take down a review? Is that on their website somewhere?
they will present is as a review optimization strategy.
this is how yelp did it back in the day.
i dont know if glassdor does or did it, just pointing out other review sites did do it and never posted it on their "pricing" or "services" page for employers...
Re: Glassdoor not so anonymous
#53Re: Glassdoor not so anonymous
#54Re: Glassdoor not so anonymous
#55Re: Glassdoor not so anonymous
#56There's an uncloseable pop-up telling you to log in.
Normally I wouldn't bother, but curiousity got the best of me - I logged in with my Google OAuth.
Not so fast - you haven't contributed to Glassdoor in the last 12 months, here's another annoying pop up and you cannot dismiss it until you do.
Does anyone actually bother to use this dark pattern infused service?
Re: Glassdoor not so anonymous
#57Re: Glassdoor not so anonymous
#58>Glassdoor’s FAQ goes into a little more detail about how they will defend user anonymity. They know this is vital their success: If glassdoor cares so much about anonymity, why didn't they engineer their site in such a way that prevents them from being able to deanonymize reviewers? For instance, not keeping identifying user details after they have been verified?
Probably because doing so is hard. You not only have to verify that a review is coming from an actual current or former employee, but then you have to ensure that the same employee cannot write multiple reviews. If you discard all links between a reviewer account and a review, how do you do that? I imagine there's some sort of zero-knowledge magic cryptographic thing you can do (or maybe something simpler, like a...…
Re: Glassdoor not so anonymous
#59A decent outcome here would be if Glassdoor revealed all employers that attempt to go after former employees with alerts like the current one on the Zuru page.
Glassdoors business model is selling the ability to take down bad reviews. Why would they out their customers?
Foo Technology unambiguously did not exist as a separate company in any form.
Thing is, Foo was the unlikely company where the line workers were more satisfied than the Technology employees - the company overall was very decent but the technology org was toxic.
Accordingly, Foo Technology had lousy ratings and negative reviews, while Foo has largely positive reviews and a strong rating. The difference was on the order of Foo~=4.0 while Foo Technology~=2.0, both derived from a significant number of employees.
You can imagine the pitfall this could create as a prospective technology employee contemplating a stint at Foo.
As a disgruntled Foo “Technology” employee I contacted Glassdoor to notify them that a nonexistent company was distracting many genuine reviews away from a legitimate company.
Glassdoor notified me that they would not provide any corrective action unless the formal owner of the Glassdoor account for Foo agreed to it.
This told me that accuracy of reviews on Glassdoor comes in a few positions shy of their top priority.
Although in full disclosure, a year or two later the 2 separate “companies” did get merged on Glassdoor. I don’t know what the impetus finally was, but they certainly didn’t give a shit when I notified them of the snafu with their system.
Re: Glassdoor not so anonymous
#60A decent outcome here would be if Glassdoor revealed all employers that attempt to go after former employees with alerts like the current one on the Zuru page.
Glassdoors business model is selling the ability to take down bad reviews. Why would they out their customers?