Watchdog 30...

I agree that even though the system is hidden for determining the top 30, it still stays the same like susybell and karen said. I have ordered from companies that don't have the highest numerical rating (from the algorithm) with mainly good results. The problem with ignoring the top 30, is that it is really kind of hard to find a random small company with a high rating. When you click on a field to search within--such as Perennial seeds offered, you get every random company out there that sells Perennial seed in alphabetical order. I rarely make it through the B's before I say...Forget this I'm going back to the Top 30 or another company I've used before. The way the system is set up, it's easier to use as a sounding board for negative feedback. It's hard to find a reputable, small company through the search system.
I've been around since the ratings system was different and I remember all the conversations about how that algorithm was decided upon, so I understand that it's not as simple as giving a percentage of good to bad- though I could be reminded of why that doesn't work.

Is there a way that we could have a top 30 of all volume (like the one that exists), and maybe another list of rotating 100%companies just as honorable mentions that might be of interest to members? Like a "30 Best Undiscovered Companies" or something. I shop at mom & pop stores to help with the diversity of my local market...I don't want Chili's to take over my dining choices- so I make a stand for the small guy with my money and word of mouth. Same principle here I guess. There are amazing companies out there with 100 percent positive feedback that will never receive their due because of the volume rewards based system we have.

Karen, lol, I stumbled across one poor company that had something like 2 positives and 13 negatives-that's one I won't take a risk on!

Art _n, I like your idea of a 30 best undiscovered companies, or maybe some kind of Top 30 Gold for the companies that have consistently been at the top since GWD started-almost like retiring them out of contention, but they would still have the ability to lose their spot if they had some kind of meltdown. I also agree with the "Chili's" comment -I like finding smaller, good companies to do business with, particularly smaller, closer regional ones.
I will say that I have done business with a number of the top 30 and have had plenty of good experiences. And, maybe some of the little ones aren't prepared to handle the volume of business of, say, a Bluestone. But should they have to?

Enter your zipcode and you will get a list that includes the number of miles from the zip you entered. Makes it easier to find neighborhood places. I like to wander and look sometimes and really like this feature.

Hi Grammy, Yes, I've played with that feature and like it a lot, too. :)

If you don't want to look at the companies alphabetically, you can sort them by rating. Even though we don't see the scores anymore, you can still sort them that way, then you can look through the best companies first. I've found when I do this, you do get a fair number of those companies that have mostly good comments but not enough comment volume to hit the top 30.

Terry, this is a really interesting discussion. I wonder if we could highlight one well rated company each week in the newsletter. Or maybe at the home page of GW. This company could be highly rated but without the high numbers of ratings that would put it in the top 30.

Are we still only allowed one review per company?

I had the same question, elsie. It would seem to me that if the score is removed, we ought to be able to review them every time we place an order. The companies I've purchased from more than once, I've only used once in a year.

You already can review more than once. However, it's not a 'fresh' entry. It's an addendum to your original review, just like you do when the vendor resolves your problem. You can change your rating if you want. To my knowledge, there is no limit to the number of times you update. The problem though, according to Terry, is that currently, 'updates' are not treated the same as first-time reviews and consequently are under-weighted. They are hoping to modify this.

The score wasn't really removed--it's still there, we just can't see it anymore. I do like the idea of having updated reviews count for more--I hope that can happen!

I didn't realize you could sort them by rating- that's a great thing to know. I had been sorting them by zipcode, but when you're mail ordering it really doesn't matter.

I agree about the rating more than once counting for more. As it is, I'm a little bothered by the fact that an updated rating can have the same weight as one that is originally good. Somehow it seems like a company with excellent customer service and products the *first* time should be more rewarded than a company that has to cover their tracks. There are exceptions to this in my book, human error does happen...but you see where I'm going with that.

I think companies we each believe in so much that we add to our rating should benefit from our discernment, our experiences and our reputation--ie each added positive rating could add a couple extra points. However, now that I think about it...that system could be abused just. Those "false positives" could become more than just a small glitch in the system. I would like to believe that wouldn't sway the system, but maybe it could I don't know.

Elsie I think that's another great idea...somehow we as DGers should be sticking up for the little guy!!

I found it kind of interesting - I found a recent review from somone who had just signed up and the review was for an order placed two years ago. That negative review for Buggy Crazy wasn't even for an order - how is that a legitimate review? Just thought this was odd.

It will never be a perfect system - that's for sure. That is why I almost always read all the negatives and only a few positives. I feel I need to dig deeper on the nays.

We don't specify a time limit on reviews - if someone finds us two years after the fact and wants to comment - positively or negatively - on a company, that is their right.

A customer must have had personal dealings with the vendor in order to leave feedback. - that is the only requirement. That generally translates into a purchase, or attempt to purchase.

If we required "proof of purchase", we would create an administrative headache for ourselves trying to keep up with processing and cataloging the "proof." And we'd also find ourselves mediating messy legal disputes anytime a company wanted to contest the veracity of someone's comment.

The Watchdog is a free service, so our goal is to keep it as self-governing as possible, and stay out of the line of fire between companies and customers.

Hi Terry,

I just did a plant search in PF and discovered that when you click on "XX Vendor has this plant for sale" and get the list of vendors that the rating bar still shows up. Will you be removing that one, too?

Thanks - that should not have been displaying, so I'll let Dave know.

Although I do not understand any thing about your ways of counting numbers, I hope that you can make re-orders reviews count.
Next to my name you can see I have an X number of reviews, but in reality I have many more.
I do give feedback in WD everytime I purchase online.
So far, I've had one negative, unresolved, and one negative resolved so changed to neutral.

Just my few words.
Thanks, great discussion.

Christie

edit spelling

This message was edited Feb 7, 2008 11:12 AM

What Christie said...