That is in practice not true. If you leave a fake but glowing 5-star review, no business will challenge it. But if you leave a 1, 2, 3, or even 4-star review, suddenly you're asked to provide proof. Of course, they can legally challenge a 5-star review as well. But in reality they conveniently don't seem to care about those.
Anyway, Germany is probably one of the few places where this happens. The issue isn't necessarily that reviews can be challenged. The issue is that users aren't informed when they leave a review that they may later be required to provide proof of their visit.
I once left a negative review of a very popular touristy business in Germany after a genuinely terrible experience. I included photos and detailed information, yet they still challenged the review, claiming I had never been a customer. Google then required me to provide additional evidence to prove that I had actually visited the place.
What made it even more frustrating is that they challenged the review two years in a row. After the second challenge, I wrote to them that if they continued contesting the review, I would consider it harassment and pursue legal action. After that, they stopped.
What I find pretty shady is that most businesses seem to wait a year or two before contesting reviews. By that point, most people no longer have receipts, invoices, or other documentation. If they challenged reviews immediately, customers would be much more likely to still have that evidence available. In my case, I take photos frequently, so Google accepted my proof and kept the review online.
Ironically, after going through this process myself, I've come to believe that some form of verification should probably be standard worldwide. Requiring reviewers to provide evidence that they were actually customers could help reduce fake reviews. But if that's going to be the standard, it should be clearly communicated upfront, before people submit their reviews.
Another related issue I have with Google Maps is that, at least in my home country, some places have reviews disabled because Google considers them too prone to polarization or controversy. Schools are one example.
Personally, I think that's a terrible idea. I'd rather be able to read the reviews and make up my own mind. Instead, Google, in its infinite wisdom, decides that certain topics are too contentious for users to see feedback at all.
I find that to be one of the worst decisions made by the Google Maps team. Hiding reviews doesn't eliminate disagreement or bias, it just removes information that users could otherwise evaluate for themselves.
Having proof is not always enough. I had a bad experience with a shady used car salesman and my review was removed by them. I appealed, nothing happened. I deleted the review and put up a new concise one with proof. It wasn't published. The appeal was eventually successful but my new review still not published. I appealed via arbitration, which was decided in my favor but the review is still not published, as their decision is not legally binding. So Google rather pays hundreds of Euros in arbitration fees than publish my honest review. In the arbitration process they said that because I deleted my first review there is nothing they could do, which to me is nonsense. Overall the Google Maps review situation is very frustrating. At least they now show how many reviews have been removed in the past year for defamation for every Google Maps listing.
You sound like you fumble your way through life. You use "very touristy" businesses, which is a sign of low IQ or trashy tastes, and then you write a review on the internet instead of just moving on with your life (again, you should learn to live better), and ultimately get done again by the review being removed. I'd say you need to rethink your whole approach to being.
> The first is our duty to the global poor. There is a real possibility that AI will displace human labor at very large scale. If that happens, supporting those displaced will be a moral imperative of historic proportions.
We already have poors that are really suffering, and the "elite" (or oligarchs depending on your point of view) have done very little to help them.
Why should we trust them they will do anything for us if we are all displaced by AI?
VISA an MasterCard have Credit Cards. Pix is just a way to transfer money you have in your bank account. In europe we can do that with IBAN. It goes from one account to another. In Argentina we have something similar in all banks. What is unike from VISA and MasteCard, at least untill now, is the Credit part of it.
"AI-native pods: We’ll be concentrating around AI-native talent who can manage fleets of agents to drive outsized impact. We’ll also be experimenting with reduced pod sizes, including “one person teams” with engineers, designers, and product managers all in one role."
This comments reads sarcastic, but it makes a serious point. GoDaddy has an extremely poor reputation. At some point you must accept that choosing companies like that is your own mistake.
the thing is that it makes sense when you are small, and it's one of the hardest and riskiest things to change, so it's a decision that stays with you.
And to be completely honest, it isn't that bad, you get a phone you can call 24/7. Of course mistakes happen and staff can't always help, but it's more like a 99.9% vs 99.99% quality thing when comparing to other providers like AWS or CloudFlare.
Namecheap looks really bad if someone does some due diligence and the word 'cheap' comes out, it's unproffessional and signals cheapness of materials.
Porkbun I'm not familiar, but it for sure can be a better option, it's just that when people start out they look for a familiar name rather than the marginally best option.
I just said it makes sense, not that it's the best option. It's just fine if you are a small or even medium business.
This is at the very least debatable. The site they took down contained multiple videos of animals being tortured and killed. Not all decisions are simple black and white.
Animals die too in a genocide. I don't understand your point here. Namecheap decided they should proactively police Namecheap customers for this, Namecheap should lose all its business as a result. Let Namecheap decide whether the income from Israel exceeds the income from all Namecheap customers.
reply