# What's the point in giving someone a negative wifi rating?



## Lin (Aug 21, 2013)

I see a lot of perfect wifi-ratings on this forum, so when I see one that's not 100% it sticks out like a sore thumb and I notice it pretty quickly. When I look at the wifi feedback of users like this, it seems that the person who gives them negative feedback often feels a backlash or a "revenge negative rating" in return. Most recent case I saw was forum-goer #1 had: "this person is a scammer." (paraphrased) And then I click on the username of forum-goer #2 who left the feedback and they have a feedback from the other person saying: "this user scammed me out of so and so do not trust." So... just makes it seem like anyone can say anything and rate anyway and someone like me has no clue which side to believe. And if I ever get scammed and give a negative rating, I'm just doing it at the risk of my own reputation, especially if I happen to get scammed multiple times and get more than 1 revenge feedback. 

I'm just wondering if there's anyway to fix this because right now it seems really flawed and not that useful. .__. Just my opinion. It probably can't be fixed but I guess I just wanted to let it out, been bugging me for a while. xD Just from my side, especially with how OCD I am it makes me hesitant to give any negative feedback. :/ You could say "well if it's 99 or 98% then it seems more likely the negative feedback was for revenge or trolling" but... some people don't wifi often and 1 or 2 negative ratings from trolls will really bring their rating down by a lot. xD I'm just saying it sucks I guess.


----------



## Bones (Aug 21, 2013)

I think it's useful if used properly, but the problem is.. it usually isn't.

And it's hard to tell what is the truth and what isn't, given it's a hearsay kind of situation.


----------



## DJStarstryker (Aug 21, 2013)

It's a problem on eBay and other places too that have feedback systems. If you have a legit reason to give someone a bad feedback, then a lot of times they will give you a retaliatory bad feedback too, even if they have no reason to. 

Part of the problem with the feedback system here, IMO, is the space isn't very big for the part that other users can see. You only get 80 characters. With more details, you can sometimes guess if it's a legit bad feedback or a retaliatory feedback (for example, eBay sometimes I can guess). 

I think a few things can be done to improve the feedback system:

1) More space for details that are viewable to other users.
2) A way to designate a person that you have repeated good experiences with. For example, I have some friends that I've made here on TBT that are incredibly trustworthy and kind and respectful. It seems to defeat the point of the system to give that person repeated positive feedbacks. But I wish there was a way to say that, yes, while I had a good experience with x person that I only traded with one time, this person I trade with on a constant basis feels even more trustworthy and that people here should be able to trust them if they ever trade with them. I don't know how to do this though.


----------



## Lin (Aug 21, 2013)

DJStarstryker said:


> It's a problem on eBay and other places too that have feedback systems. If you have a legit reason to give someone a bad feedback, then a lot of times they will give you a retaliatory bad feedback too, even if they have no reason to.
> 
> Part of the problem with the feedback system here, IMO, is the space isn't very big for the part that other users can see. You only get 80 characters. With more details, you can sometimes guess if it's a legit bad feedback or a retaliatory feedback (for example, eBay sometimes I can guess).
> 
> ...



I think those are good points.  For 2) our rating system almost does the opposite. I have a friend who gave me two positive ratings but I think last time I checked it only counted it as one positive rating. xD; Another user gave me two positive ratings for two different occasions too and it also only counted the first one. That's you see sometimes it says they have a rating of let's say 15 even though they got 17 positive feedback. I'm not really telling you in particular since you may already know, it's just I saw this question pop up on another thread (but now it's locked so I can't answer it...).


----------



## BellGreen (Aug 21, 2013)

I think it is very useful!

It isn't used right however. Instead of really giving a bad review, I think it's best to just PM an admin


----------



## Ceralune (Aug 21, 2013)

The problem with this system is that it only works if people are honest. :c While I feel that most of the community is pretty good about that honesty part, even a few dishonest can ruin it.


----------



## DJStarstryker (Aug 21, 2013)

Lin said:


> I think those are good points.  For 2) our rating system almost does the opposite. I have a friend who gave me two positive ratings but I think last time I checked it only counted it as one positive rating. xD; Another user gave me two positive ratings for two different occasions too and it also only counted the first one. That's you see sometimes it says they have a rating of let's say 15 even though they got 17 positive feedback. I'm not really telling you in particular since you may already know, it's just I saw this question pop up on another thread (but now it's locked so I can't answer it...).



I think that's a good thing though, for your friend's 2 feedbacks to only give you 1 positive rating. I see friends team up on the internet all the time to artificially inflate scores or votes or whatever the case may be. And that's why I think it's pointless to also bother giving a friend more than 1 positive feedback.

BUT! Again, if you trade with somebody a lot, there has to be a way to say you think a person's a little more trustworthy *without* it impacting the total number of positive feedbacks, if that makes sense.

As an example (This is hypothetical): 
Lin and I trade once. Good experience. 1 feedback.
BellBringerGreen and I trade once a week. Good experience. 1 feedback.

HOWEVER! BellBringerGreen, even with only 1 feedback, is automatically more trustworthy *in my eyes* in this example because of once a week trades. I would like a way to have in the WiFi Rating to say that BellBringerGreen is someone I trade with all the time and *I personally* think they can be trusted a lot by others. Lin, I wouldn't know enough with you with only 1 trade to vouch for you all the time. 

I'm not a system designer or anything so I have zero clue how to pull this off.



BellBringerGreen said:


> I think it is very useful!
> 
> It isn't used right however. Instead of really giving a bad review, I think it's best to just PM an admin



Eh... The problem is admins can't really do very much. If someone got scammed, what's done is done. Also, it's also a lot of hearsay involved, with a "he said, she said" type situation. Who is actually telling the truth and who is lying? It's hard to know.

Personally, I do glance at feedback. But you have to keep in mind that you can't take it 100% seriously. It's like Amazon reviews - sometimes people are paid to make a good review about something so there can be inflated good feedbacks (TBT equivalent is maybe someone had a friend give them good feedbacks) and sometimes people have some issue that is minor or they didn't read all of the terms and gives the item a bad feedback for that (TBT equivalent is maybe person didn't read the other person's town rules and decided to run around - I've seen bad feedbacks on TBT for that). 

You are always taking a risk when you trade with someone you don't know in person. TBT can't save you from scammers. TBT can only set up a community and enforce rules as best as they can here. 

That's just my opinion though. I have no clue what the admins think on that subject.


----------



## ben_nyc (Aug 22, 2013)

Ceralune said:


> The problem with this system is that it only works if people are honest. :c While I feel that most of the community is pretty good about that honesty part, even a few dishonest can ruin it.



Agreed.  It's a stat that should be considered for any serious traders.  Will there be unfair reviews?  Yep, & the best precaution to take is:

1. Inspect review comments & post comments on the trader in question. 
2. Should there be a negative rating, try to communicate w/ both parties as a means to gather info- & NOT as an attempt of reconciliation. 
3. If this trader has multiple negative ratings; ask yourself, 'How important does this trade mean to me?' 
4. Perform all trades as follows:

A- Go to their Town (thereby limiting vandalism & theft). 
B- Meet & trade near the Train Station. 
C- Ignore Villagers or other Mayors during your trade.  If visiting Mayors are too near for comfort, ask the Trader for them to leave.  This is an exchange; you can be friends later. 
D- If this is a trade involving multiple items, insist that the trader WAIT till every item is dropped & inspected before securing.  I've read cases where a few items were picked up & the game was Saved before the connection was lost. 
E- Any suspected weirdness, USE the Wifi-switch.

IMO, the Wifi-Rating is better than nothing!   ^_^


----------



## Snow (Aug 22, 2013)

I agree, it's better than nothing. All rating systems have flaws and are subject to he said/she said problems. On eBay, for example, sellers can not leave anything BUT positive feedback. A terrible buyer can be reported to ebay, but other sellers cannot be warned. It's not going to be 100% perfect. 

As far as I'm concerned, I know that less than 100% doesn't mean a bad trader; so I'm more interested in seeing how often the person trades. I'd rather trade with someone with a high number, than a perfect %, because it means they're experienced traders and are less likely to require handholding or cause trouble.

However, I think that the ability to leave ratings at all needs to be restricted a bit -- no-one should be able to make a puppet account, never post, but leave fake negs for someone. Maybe you shouldn't be able to leave ratings until you've made say, 50 posts here.


----------



## Chris (Aug 22, 2013)

Snow said:


> However, I think that the ability to leave ratings at all needs to be restricted a bit -- no-one should be able to make a puppet account, never post, but leave fake negs for someone. *Maybe you shouldn't be able to leave ratings until you've made say, 50 posts here*.



I think 50 is a bit high - especially as some people come here exclusively for the Re-tail board. I ran an auction yesterday and the winner had less than 50 posts (even after posting multiple times in the auction's thread) and 0 feedback. He left me positive feedback on here within an hour of leaving my town.


----------



## Snow (Aug 22, 2013)

Tina said:


> I think 50 is a bit high - especially as some people come here exclusively for the Re-tail board. I ran an auction yesterday and the winner had less than 50 posts (even after posting multiple times in the auction's thread) and 0 feedback. He left me positive feedback on here within an hour of leaving my town.



true - 50 is high. Maybe just 10 posts, then they could be checked and you can hopefully see if the person is just a troll/spammer/puppet or a sincere player/trader. I'm thinking of other forums I've been on, 50 seems to be the usual bar you have to pass to access restricted functions but yeah, lower here would work.


----------



## ForgottenT (Aug 22, 2013)

I just don?t like the WIFI rating system at all, if you rate someone negatively they?re almost sure to leave negative ratings on your profile, and nobody would like that.
Also I have seen someone who have been negatively voted from an account that just got created, so some people make new accounts just to vote someone negatively, it?s such a bad system.


----------



## Snow (Aug 22, 2013)

ForgottenT said:


> I just don?t like the WIFI rating system at all, if you rate someone negatively they?re almost sure to leave negative ratings on your profile, and nobody would like that.


Well on ebay, the inability to leave negative comments for sellers resulted in just refraining from leaving any feedback. If you don't leave feedback, the person's overall count will not go up. 



ForgottenT said:


> Also I have seen someone who have been negatively voted from an account that just got created, so some people make new accounts just to vote someone negatively, it?s such a bad system.


That I agree with, I think new accounts should not be allowed to leave feedback. Not sure what the threshold should be but there seems to be a need for one.


----------



## FunkyCrunky81 (Aug 22, 2013)

That's the problem eBay had so they stopped sellers leaving negs, which is technically unfair when you get the peeps that don't pay.

But such is life! You'll always get someone that abuses an otherwise great system.


----------



## Beanie (Aug 22, 2013)

The exact scenario you described happened to me on here. But I don't really care much about my negative anymore. A lot of eBay sellers that have 98% and stuff don't affect the way I interact with them! I've received items from people like that, had a pleasant experience, while someone who also had somewhere like 98% didn't send my items or something happened.

I think it's just similar here. Much like how a person with a negative can also turn around and make their percentage high in the positives! It's all about quantity. But all in all, it's not hard to be pretentious online. I think the wifi feedback is irrelevant, or at least I am not a religious user so sometimes a positive trade will go through and neither party leave feedback (just get distracted or something) so it doesn't reflect 100% of good trades all the time. I mean, I am also human. I'd always wanna rant about the bad crap before I rant about the good crap, but I don't. It's just self-control. Some people can be immature and hate you for not giving them a darn yummy cookie, but *shrug*. Some people just age better


----------



## FunkyCrunky81 (Aug 22, 2013)

Beanie said:


> The exact scenario you described happened to me on here. But I kind of just shrugged it off because I know and the other person knows that it's her fault not mine. Just gotta be at peace with yourself when there's not much you can do I guess :/



Sorry for the extra post but I wanted to explain further.

I suppose even if someone does revenge rate you that just by looking at your ratings and others' ratings overall, if it's just the 1 rating with the rest being all positive is an inclination that you're a good visitor/host/trader. That's how I'd see it anyway.

However, if there's quite a few negs then I guess you should able to tell the bad apples. The again, saying that there's always the people that don't leave any deserved negative ratings because they know they'll get a revenge rating.

I think the rating system overall is a good thing when used properly, but there's always a few that will abuse the system.


----------



## Marceline (Aug 22, 2013)

ForgottenT said:


> Also I have seen someone who have been negatively voted from an account that just got created, so some people make new accounts just to vote someone negatively, it?s such a bad system.





Snow said:


> That I agree with, I think new accounts should not be allowed to leave feedback. Not sure what the threshold should be but there seems to be a need for one.



I've suggested this a while ago, that accounts need to be for example, three days old before the wifi system is activated for them. It prevents new accounts being created purely to give a negative rating... and plus who can seriously hold a grudge for that long over a game? x.x


----------



## Chris (Aug 22, 2013)

Marceline said:


> *I've suggested this a while ago, that accounts need to be for example, three days old before the wifi system is activated for them*. It prevents new accounts being created purely to give a negative rating... and plus who can seriously hold a grudge for that long over a game? x.x



I could see this being a turn-off for new members who come here exclusively for the online play.


----------



## Hayate (Aug 22, 2013)

Tina said:


> I could see this being a turn-off for new members who come here exclusively for the online play.



ACC needs you to wait a day before making a thread. I think you should have to wait 3 days OR 50 posts OR actually add profile information, like your 3DS code, wi-fi rating from someone with no 3DS code seems odd.


----------



## Snow (Aug 22, 2013)

Tina said:


> I could see this being a turn-off for new members who come here exclusively for the online play.



but it doesn't stop them from participating and doing trades; it just makes them wait to leave their feedback. Other people can even leave feedback for them. after their minimum of posts/days are met they can catch up. Can't see how it would discourage anyone, it's an added bonus, not part of the trading system. I mean we were all here doing trades with no wifi rating system, did it stop anyone?


----------



## Lin (Aug 22, 2013)

Glaceon said:


> ACC needs you to wait a day before making a thread. I think you should have to wait 3 days OR 50 posts OR actually add profile information, like your 3DS code, wi-fi rating from someone with no 3DS code seems odd.



Yeah I agree that having to add your 3ds code to your profile would be a good idea before allowing wifi-ratings. :O Then you might be able to track it back to the original account... Although I'm sure the admins can see the IP, some mods on other forums can even see IPs on some forums I went to before. But then the average non-mod person like me can have a better idea of who it is leaving the rating if there's a 3ds friendcode... although I suppose they could just make a code up. =3= Sigh. 


@Beanie: Aw sorry that happened to you. :C It's scary. ; - ;


----------



## Patchwork (Aug 22, 2013)

I am curious, is there any way that someone could actually provide evidence that someone didn't hold their side of the deal? Such as for example a video recording showing what the offender did and the negative ratings would need to be backed up with such evidence? But then I could imagine it would lead to other problems as well and another loophole to be exploited?


----------



## Lurrdoc (Aug 23, 2013)

I like that it's even in place as opposed to nothing, however, I usually use my own judgement to determine if someone is trustworthy or not.


----------



## radical6 (Aug 23, 2013)

ive never had a scammer in animal crossing. not in city folk either.

but if a person has 20 good reviews to 1 negative, i would still trust them. maybe they messed up a trade, or the other person was confused. or they're a troll.

though a 3 day rule thing would be great, but i think some trolls wouldnt mind waiting. 50 posts maybe?? if i was a newbie i wouldn't mind.


----------

