Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Menupages.ie - negative reviews are removed

2456

Comments

  • #52
    Shelflife
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,075 ✭✭✭Shelflife


    Simple thing would be to give the unhappy poster the option of recieving vouchers, if the poster agrees the the bad review is suspended pending a second chance from the restaurant.

    The poster has his meal and then produces the vouchers thus ensuring that they have had a genuine dining experience.

    the poster can then decide whether or not to unsuspend the initial review or not.

    Btw kudos to sandra for coming on to sort out the problems.


  • #53
    aidan_walsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,208 ✭✭✭✭aidan_walsh


    DaMelodrama wrote: »
    I don't agree that this is a good policy. The original review should remain, with a note explaining the ongoing process. If the reviewer adds a new review, the original should point to it. Anyone with a brain should realise that this is the most transparent and fair procedure.

    adam
    I disagree. If you leave the original as it is, whats to stop people trying to game the site with bad reviews so they can get a free meal afterwards?


  • #54
    dahamsta
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,659 ✭✭✭✭dahamsta


    If you leave it as-is, what's to stop restaurateurs trying to game the site by sending fake offers over and over again?

    People will always try to game the system, it's up to the operator of the system to monitor for abuse and deal with it. If they can't, they're in the wrong business.

    adam


  • #55
    Darragh29
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,097 ✭✭✭Darragh29


    Basically you have the option of "trading in", your poor experience for a free meal, if this option is made available to you. This option is unworkable not to mention unfair because it will incentivise some people to post poor feedback where it is not warranted, for the purposes of chancing their arm for a free meal. This isn't fair on restaurants, it exposes them to a form of blackmail.

    Notice than in 100% of cases, it is the restaurant that will have to pick up the cost associated with this and not menupages, whether the poor feedback is justified or not.

    Also notice that there was absolutely no mention of this scheme until the subject of deleted feedback was raised on this thread.


  • #56
    Darragh29
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,097 ✭✭✭Darragh29


    faceman wrote: »
    Of course the alternative to this big episode is that a "restaurant review" sub forum is created on boards...

    Excellent idea, and the beauty of it would be that it wouldn't be literally plastered with shabbily designed 3rd party advertising. You can't even navigate the menupages website because a big fu*k off Vodafone ad keeps jumping up all over the place, and when you try to close it down, it jumps straight back up again. This would have to be the worst designed website I've seen in some time, it's depressing to look at...


  • #57
    AARRRGH
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,382 ✭✭✭✭AARRRGH


    Welease wrote: »
    I thought Arrrgh had said that it had been confirmed plenty of people had been offered free meals, and he was now happy?

    No, I do not know of any other person who was offered a free meal, and I was only offered a free meal after I complained my negative review was removed.


  • #58
    Welease
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,834 ✭✭✭Welease


    AARRRGH wrote: »
    No, I do not know of any other person who was offered a free meal, and I was only offered a free meal after I complained.


    My bad.. i misread what you wrote
    "Btw, I hope it turns out a few people have been contacted, so this fairytale can have a happy ending. smile.gif
    user_online.gifreport.gif "

    I missed the "I hope".. apologies..


  • #59
    faceman
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,647 CMod ✭✭✭✭faceman


    Darragh29 wrote: »
    Excellent idea, and the beauty of it would be that it wouldn't be literally plastered with shabbily designed 3rd party advertising. You can't even navigate the menupages website because a big fu*k off Vodafone ad keeps jumping up all over the place, and when you try to close it down, it jumps straight back up again. This would have to be the worst designed website I've seen in some time, it's depressing to look at...

    The best place is to ask is the Food and Drink forum, see my post below:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=57610729#post57610729


  • #60
    dahamsta
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,659 ✭✭✭✭dahamsta


    Sandra's been accusing me of being "hidden behind a computer" on my blog btw, despite the fact that my name, what I do and where I work are on the About page, linked from every page on the site. I'd make a comment about her competence but she'd probably send me a solicitor's letter for "Being Naughty" or something. :rolleyes:

    I'm pretty sure I'm one of the least anonymous people on Boards.ie.

    I agree that their site is awful btw. Said so earlier.

    adam


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    faceman
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,647 CMod ✭✭✭✭faceman


    DaMelodrama wrote: »
    Sandra's been accusing me of being "hidden behind a computer" on my blog btw, despite the fact that my name, what I do and where I work are on the About page, linked from every page on the site. I'd make a comment about her competence but she'd probably send me a solicitor's letter for "Being Naughty" or something. :rolleyes:

    I'm pretty sure I'm one of the least anonymous people on Boards.ie.

    I agree that their site is awful btw. Said so earlier.

    adam

    In fairness she does have a point, most people do hide behind their computer on boards.ie. How many people get called names online that the poster wouldnt dare call to your face.

    Personally i dont think a very negative attitude has been taken to her efforts to address the concerns and while Im not saying that she is incorrect with her views on individual's tales, she is making the effort to address them.

    If you feel that strongly about it and want to avoid flame wars online, why not just give her a call?

    EDIT: Im not trying to diss you or your opinion either. If it was me and i felt as strongly as you, I would probably call her to discuss my concerns. But then again Im a kranky fart and so stuff like that!


  • #62
    dahamsta
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,659 ✭✭✭✭dahamsta


    Why should I give her a call? I posted my opinion, she reverted with - imho - bull****, I called her on it and she got snippy. I should spend my money to call someone about their failings? I don't think so Tim.

    Anyway, I'll leave it there, there's nothing to be achieved in dragging it out further.

    adam


  • #63
    faceman
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,647 CMod ✭✭✭✭faceman


    DaMelodrama wrote: »
    Why should I give her a call? I posted my opinion, she reverted with - imho - bull****, I called her on it and she got snippy. I should spend my money to call someone about their failings? I don't think so Tim.

    Anyway, I'll leave it there, there's nothing to be achieved in dragging it out further.

    adam

    So basically what you are saying is:

    * You voiced your opinion online
    * Said company in a rare move, comes online to voice their response
    * You arent happy with response but rather than following up, you are going to leave it at that.

    Resulting in:
    * Said company continues as is

    That is why we Ireland is the way it is.

    Oh and me name isnt Tim, its Faceman ;):p


  • #64
    Jumpy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,606 ✭✭✭Jumpy


    DaMelodrama wrote: »
    Why should I give her a call? I posted my opinion, she reverted with - imho - bull****, I called her on it and she got snippy. I should spend my money to call someone about their failings? I don't think so Tim.

    Anyway, I'll leave it there, there's nothing to be achieved in dragging it out further.

    adam

    I just read that page on your blog, personally I think you come out very badly on it.
    There is very little snippiness, but its mainly from you.

    Im not defending Sandra here, but you really do come across as quite confrontational for very little reason.


  • #65
    AARRRGH
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,382 ✭✭✭✭AARRRGH


    AARRRGH wrote: »
    can anyone who has had their negative reviews removed (within 300 days) confirm they were offered a free meal (via menupages) in the restaurant they reviewed?

    Can anyone confirm they were contacted by menupages and offered a free meal after their negative review was removed from the site?

    At this stage I'm feeling a bit sorry for menupages :o so I hope some people can confirm the above!


  • #66
    dahamsta
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,659 ✭✭✭✭dahamsta


    faceman, while I appreciate that someone from the company came to respond to the complaints, I believe that people are being fed a line of bull here. Only one person has confirmed that they received one of these invites, and then only after the fact. Several other people complained about reviews being deleted, and they've neither confirmed nor denied that they received invites. If people come along and confirm then that's great, but I don't agree that the new methodology employed by menupages is fair or transparent anyway.

    The OP had their say, I had my say, they responded, I don't believe them and I don't like their procedures or their site and I said that, what more is to be said? I'm already repeating myself, how many more times would you like me to do it? Or I could just leave it at that, like I said. Isn't that the sensible thing to do?

    BTW, I don't agree with you that Ireland is staying as-is. The fact that the OP complained here in the first place is progress. It's an important first step. Now we just need to get companies to respond in better ways. If Sandra is a good marketer she will learn something from this and respond in a better way the next time. Fessing up and apologising is an approach I appreciate. Getting personal and accusing people of "hiding" is one I don't. If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen. Arf arf.

    Jumpy, I don't agree with you. So let's leave that there too.

    adam


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    frecklier
    Registered Users Posts: 75 ✭✭frecklier


    I put a bad review on menupages, and at the same time my bf wrote a letter of complaint to the restaurant. We received a €50 voucher from the restaurant, so I actually took it upon myself to update my original review on menupages stating this. I can see where menupages is coming from with their idea, all restaurants can have bad days, so if they are willing to let you try again for free, give them the second chance. If they are still crap, then by all means put/leave up your crap review.


  • #68
    olaola
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,139 ✭✭✭olaola


    I can confirm the non-posting of negative reviews. Especially (it seems) if they are a sponsor. Which is rather irritating, as I visited this place as it HAD good reviews. Now I realise all the bad ones for this place were removed.

    Menu pages my hoop!


  • #69
    Darragh29
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,097 ✭✭✭Darragh29


    olaola wrote: »
    I can confirm the non-posting of negative reviews. Especially (it seems) if they are a sponsor. Which is rather irritating, as I visited this place as it HAD good reviews. Now I realise all the bad ones for this place were removed.

    Menu pages my hoop!

    Mother of Jasus, you couldn't make sh*t this up! One rule for restaurant owners that don't pay menupages for advertising and a completely different rule for those that do. Basically, if you sponsor the site you're given the kid glove treatment and you don't have to worry about poor reviews and if you don't sponsor the site, well you better start giving out free dinners!


  • #70
    boardsie08
    Closed Accounts Posts: 304 ✭✭boardsie08


    I'd also like to confirm that a number of my less than glowing reports were also deleted.

    Neither did I ever receive a reason why, or any offer of a free meal or otherwise either from the restaurants in question or Menupages itself.

    Can't say I'm too pleased about all of this, I know I'll be avoiding menupages in future!

    What's the point in a review site if only the good is published??

    For shame!


  • #71
    Sizzler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,430 ✭✭✭Sizzler


    Darragh29 wrote: »
    This site won a Golden Spider Award last year. It says a lot about the judging process and the depth of review by the adjucators if a site that claims to review restaurants actually sensors out negative opinions, which in all reality is one of the key reasons why you would visit this site before going to a restaurant!

    Any website can put themselves into contention for one of those awards by forking out a few grand for a few tables on the night ;)
    olaola wrote: »
    Menu pages my hoop!
    Sums it up pretty nicely lol


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    Darragh29
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,097 ✭✭✭Darragh29


    Sizzler wrote: »
    Any website can put themselves into contention for one of those awards by forking out a few grand for a few tables on the night ;)

    Sums it up pretty nicely lol

    Funny you say that, I've heard that several times, that when it comes to getting a golden spider award, it's all down to buying a table, which explains how this website got anything other than a fine for promoting a website of this standard... Kind of the same approach used by menupages, "become a premium member and we'll treat you like royalty, or else stay down there with the peasant restaurant owners who don't pay us a couple of grand and maybe you'll see that it's better to pay a couple of grand and then we'll be nice to you..."


  • #73
    KhanTheMan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 292 ✭✭KhanTheMan


    I can confirm that ive just checked and a couple of my not so hot reviews are gone too.

    Some pints on this voucher in return for a new review though.

    If i post a review then that is a review of my experience there and should not be taken down subject o me getting an offer of a free meal. Any further experience is a new experience and therefore should be reviewed separately.

    I also dont believe there should be any refund or offer of free meals after bad reviews. Menupages should publish the review and butt out. Its the only fair way, otherwise they can make up all sorts of stupid reasons, like people are trying to scam the site etc just so they can remove the review.

    Make it so there is absolutly no reason to publish a review leaning one way or the other apart from the experience the establishment gave you.

    I have a brother in the business and he says that all he has to do is call menupages and the reviews will be removed for him. This is not a fair system to the people who take the time to write reviews.


  • #74
    AARRRGH
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,382 ✭✭✭✭AARRRGH


    KhanTheMan wrote: »
    I have a brother in the business and he says that all he has to do is call menupages and the reviews will be removed for him. This is not a fair system to the people who take the time to write reviews.

    Interesting.

    Does your brother have to offer a free meal for the reviews to be taken down?


  • #75
    boardsie08
    Closed Accounts Posts: 304 ✭✭boardsie08


    And so the plot thickens..


  • #76
    KhanTheMan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 292 ✭✭KhanTheMan


    AARRRGH wrote: »
    Interesting.

    Does your brother have to offer a free meal for the reviews to be taken down?

    I dont know. I must ask him. Though he's so tight i doubt it :)

    IMO the review should not be taken down whether you get offered a free meal or not anyway.


  • #77
    dahamsta
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,659 ✭✭✭✭dahamsta


    The only reason UGC should be removed on a site is if it's clearly abusive or libellous. If there needs to be a right to reply, the tools for that should be made available. If you're not competent to create the tools, you're not competent to run a web-based business.

    adma


  • #78
    LolaDub
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,181 ✭✭✭LolaDub


    I logged in recently after not logging in in a while to see i was missing a ton of points. When i emailed them about it they said i had points for my published reveiws-they had erased all negative or bordering negative reviews and deducted the points from my account. Its absolutely ridiculous, what is the point of a review site that is only positive!


  • #79
    wyndham
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,284 ✭✭✭wyndham


    Somebody has been dishing up porkie pies, and it wasn't one of the restaurants. ;)

    Sandra, come back and dig that hole you are working on a bit a more, its not deep enough yet.


  • #80
    nava
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,739 ✭✭✭nava


    I think they should change the slogan from "Dublin's Restaurant Guide - As Reviewed by YOU!" to "Dublin's Restaurant Guide - As Reviewed by YOU! but Deleted by us"


  • #81
    zAbbo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,987 ✭✭✭✭zAbbo


    This is absolutely riduclous, somewhere along the way - Menupages have lost track of what the function of the website is.

    Personally I find the website frustrating to search and filter.


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    KhanTheMan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 292 ✭✭KhanTheMan


    LolaDub wrote: »
    I logged in recently after not logging in in a while to see i was missing a ton of points. When i emailed them about it they said i had points for my published reveiws-they had erased all negative or bordering negative reviews and deducted the points from my account. Its absolutely ridiculous, what is the point of a review site that is only positive!

    Maybe Sandra can clear that one up. Oh wait shes not even here anymore. She has been caught out and isnt showing her face anymore :)


  • #83
    dudara
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,518 ✭✭✭✭dudara


    I'm going to ask posters to refrain from posting anything overly negative, until we get a chance to hear from Sandra at Menupages.


  • #84
    Mr Benevolent
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,456 ✭✭✭✭Mr Benevolent


    Glad I read this thread. A lot of my friends use Menupages telling me it's great. I shall be correcting them very shortly.

    For shame :mad:


  • #85
    Darragh29
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,097 ✭✭✭Darragh29


    zAbbo wrote: »
    This is absolutely riduclous, somewhere along the way - Menupages have lost track of what the function of the website is.

    Personally I find the website frustrating to search and filter.

    The problem here clearly is the business model. Once you start selling advertising or upgraded membership benefits/products to restaurants that are being rated on the site, problems and conflicts of interest are inevitable.

    You can't be all things to all people, which is what is being attempted here.


  • #86
    TheBigLebowski
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,470 ✭✭✭TheBigLebowski


    TheBigLebowski wrote: »
    Yep, one of my negative reviews removed. Nonsense. Won't be using the site again, that's for sure.......pity cos I used to enjoy it but now it's not worth reading reviews and the whole thing becomes pointless.

    OK it seems my review went past the 300 days and this is possibly why it is now gone. Although I didn't see any mention of this 300 day rule on the site and I personally think 300 days is too short. People are able to see the date of the review for themselves and if all negative reviews were a long time ago and positive reviews are more recent, they can make the decision for themselves. I thought this was the idea of showing the date of the visit?

    I can see how this may skew the star ratings as if the restaurant have really upped their game recently, the old ratings might be dragging them down. A possible suggestion might be to leave all of the reviews but have the star rating based on their more current form.


  • #87
    AARRRGH
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,382 ✭✭✭✭AARRRGH


    AARRRGH wrote: »
    Does your brother have to offer a free meal for the reviews to be taken down?
    KhanTheMan wrote: »
    I dont know. I must ask him.

    Any update on this KhanTheMan?


  • #88
    TheBigLebowski
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,470 ✭✭✭TheBigLebowski


    OK, from looking through the menupages website, it appears that there are countless negative reviews for all kinds of restaurants, including premium members, some of which are fairly damning and are still in place so anything that is going on is obviously not widespread.

    I know in my case, the review was removed because it went past the 300 day rule and I wasn't aware of this and I'm wondering if this is the case for many other people who think that their reviews were removed for being negative.

    Comments such as the person who said that they know someone who owns a restaurant and all they have to do is call menupages and a review is removed is, frankly, horse manure because it is impossible to verify these claims and in my opinion should be deleted. If this was true, there would be no negative reviews on the site. Anonymous people on message boards who say that they know a friend of a friend who does something can not be taken seriously.

    Anywho, sorry if I sound like a menupages employee but I think that menupages have gotten a lot of stick for removing reviews and I'm not sure if any of it is deserved.


  • #89
    KhanTheMan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 292 ✭✭KhanTheMan


    duplicate post


  • #90
    wyndham
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,284 ✭✭✭wyndham


    TheBigLebowski wrote: »
    Anywho, sorry if I sound like a menupages employee but I think that menupages have gotten a lot of stick for removing reviews and I'm not sure if any of it is deserved.

    They should not be removing reviews period, unless the content is libellous, in which case the part considered libellous can simply be edited out where feasible, with the gist of the review unaffected. Where this occurs, why not ask the reviewer to rephrase/rewrite, rather than binning it in it's entirety?


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    KhanTheMan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 292 ✭✭KhanTheMan


    AARRRGH wrote: »
    Any update on this KhanTheMan?

    Actually i asked him last night. He says all he has to do is call them and the negative reviews are taken down. Hes never been asked to give a free meal by menupages at all. Most establishments dont go looking at menupages so dont even realize they can call them to get bad reviews removed.


    Forgot to mention. When he calls them there is a little hint about sueing them thrown in too :) You know, like the you are responsible for what appears on your website as if you yourself had written and so are liable for any damages i may have to claim in the future, kind of thing.


  • #92
    Gran Hermano
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,330 ✭✭✭Gran Hermano


    Many thanks all, this thread has ensured I'll never use menupages. I'll look for reviews somewhere impartial and without a conflict of interest.


  • #93
    dahamsta
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,659 ✭✭✭✭dahamsta


    KhanTheMan wrote: »
    Forgot to mention. When he calls them there is a little hint about sueing them thrown in too :) You know, like the you are responsible for what appears on your website as if you yourself had written and so are liable for any damages i may have to claim in the future, kind of thing.
    I run a popular forum and get this all the time. Solicitor's letter threats every second month. I've never actually received one, never mind had someone act on the threat.

    As wyndham says, there's no excuse for it. You're either running an impartial review site or you're not. This crowd obviously aren't, and that means the website is effectively useless to consumers.

    adam


  • #94
    aidan_walsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,208 ✭✭✭✭aidan_walsh


    When he calls them there is a little hint about sueing them thrown in too
    Nullifies your point.


  • #95
    KhanTheMan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 292 ✭✭KhanTheMan


    aidan_walsh wrote: »
    Nullifies your point.

    How so. 1 phonecall and its removed was my point.


  • #96
    aidan_walsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,208 ✭✭✭✭aidan_walsh


    KhanTheMan wrote: »
    How so. 1 phonecall and its removed was my point.
    Which you made sound like it was a standard practice - even going so far as to call out the Menupages rep to explain herself over it, not because your brother acted the prick on the phone, threw his toys out of his pram and threatened to sue over a bad review. Wonder if he would take the same stance if he was poorly reviewed in a newspaper rather than a website?


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    AARRRGH
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,382 ✭✭✭✭AARRRGH


    A compromise to this might be to replace removed reviews with "This review was removed at the request of restaurant name". It's not ideal, but it should be fairly obvious the restaurant is asking for negative reviews to be removed.


  • #98
    faceman
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,647 CMod ✭✭✭✭faceman


    KhanTheMan wrote: »

    Forgot to mention. When he calls them there is a little hint about sueing them thrown in too :) You know, like the you are responsible for what appears on your website as if you yourself had written and so are liable for any damages i may have to claim in the future, kind of thing.

    Whats his restaurant's name? Must add that to the list of "kips never to visit"


  • #99
    aidan_walsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,208 ✭✭✭✭aidan_walsh


    faceman wrote: »
    Whats his restaurant's name? Must add that to the list of "kips never to visit"
    Or, visit once and throw the plate against the wall threatening legal action because there wasn't enough dressing on the salad.


  • #100
    AARRRGH
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,382 ✭✭✭✭AARRRGH


    faceman wrote: »
    Whats his restaurant's name? Must add that to the list of "kips never to visit"
    aidan_walsh wrote: »
    Or, visit once and throw the plate against the wall threatening legal action because there wasn't enough dressing on the salad.

    You're both being a bit harsh. I think his point is valid: it is easy to get negative reviews removed.


  • #101
    LolaDub
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,181 ✭✭✭LolaDub


    AARRRGH wrote: »
    You're both being a bit harsh. I think his point is valid: it is easy to get negative reviews removed.


    I'd agree, either the restaurants can remove the negative reviews themselves or they can't. They obviously can, showing this site to be a farce


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement