View Single Post
Old 06-21-2015, 10:25 AM   #6
dickloraine
Guru
dickloraine ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dickloraine ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dickloraine ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dickloraine ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dickloraine ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dickloraine ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dickloraine ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dickloraine ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dickloraine ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dickloraine ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dickloraine ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 631
Karma: 7544528
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Berlin
Device: PRS 350, Kobo Aura
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phogg View Post
I read this as basically a scheme to bury critical reviews.

Already the system of users tagging reviews as either helpful or unhelpful flagged the better reviews. I suspect someone wants to sell the ability to circumvent the consensus of readers to those who will pay to have that done.

Of course, I also believe that Amazon bought Goodreads for that purpose.
Why should they do this? Longterm it would only damage their business. For amazon it doesn't matter that much which book you buy for example. What matters is that you buy the books on amazon. Taking a little bit of money from producers to make reviews screwed would harm the overall business, since people won't trust amazon anymore. I can't believe they are that stupid.
dickloraine is offline   Reply With Quote