Online reputation online is a fascinating area, partially because eBay, through their feedback score, is the only company to have reached scale. Startups like Rapleaf and iKarma are still young and struggling.
Perhaps their flaw has been in taking the high road, and going out of their way to ensure that reputational feedback is being left by verified identities.
New startup Gorb, which I first read about on David Berlind’s blog, takes no such high road. Gorb allows, even insists on, anonymous comments and ratings about an individual. Like someone? Hate them? Tell Gorb all about it, using their handy Ajax slider to rate them from 1 - 10 in their professional and personal lives, and leave written comments as well.
Arguing that a “non-anonymous system also contains “noise,” as reciprocity creates a fake positive response,” Gorb founder Leonard Boord (trash or glorify him here) thinks that anonymous feedback is the only way to go.
They do have some checks on the wholesale slaughter of people’s reputations. Each written comment can be voted, Digg style, up or down by other users. If lots of people agree with you, your reputation is enhanced. If they disagree, your reputation suffers. The person being discussed may also respond to each comment.
I agree with Boord that services like LinkedIn are often a farce - people leave good feedback on others in the hope that the gesture will be returned. And since the user must approve feedback before it is published to the site, only gushing testaments to perfection ever see the light of day.
Rapleaf does a much better job than LinkedIn at getting balanced feedback from users. But there is still a cost to posting something negative - Rapleaf isn’t an anonymous service, and comments are at least tied to a user name.
With Gorb, there’s absolutely nothing to lose by telling someone how bad they smell, or how much you dislike the tone of their voice. Libel away.
I think Gorb goes too far, and will appeal mostly to people who have highly negative things to say about others. Without fear of being held accountable for their words, people may go a little overboard in their quest to “help” people know the truth about themselves.
But Gorb also has the smell of success about it. People will be drawn to this in the same way they slow down when they pass a highway accident. They are tapping into basic human psychology, and may make a buck or two on the back of what is sure to be the misery of others.
When you can rate places anonymously most of the time what you get are negative reviews. Like say, if you go to a restaurant and have a terrible experience, you really want to vent off, but if you actually liked it, the last thing you’d do is going to the net and write wonders about it. It might work differently when rating people, we’ll see.
If they enhance their integration with social sites/blogs/businesses and push this, they might have success.
The internet lack a lot of trust, on other hand, with anonymous comments and ratings, anyone could game the system and boost their trust and gain business/blog referral.
So i am not sure of the system yet.
It is an intriguing problem - getting feedback on everyday folks. Do a little bit of this and you get reviews leaning on the bad; a little bit of that and you get stuff leaning on the good.
I guess the challenge will be for sites to determine a couple of practical uses of their service and pin down to cater to them.
-Zaid
These services will end with the first libel/slander suit.
Dan, you are more optimistic than I am:) Most of these will be lucky if they are alive to take their first suit.
But then again, it only takes one amongst these to *really* buckle down and take a few lessons from Wikipedia and create something meaningful. I don’t know what that can be - but I can almost smell there is something worthwhile to be done in this space IF done well.
–Zaid
I don’t know what this reputation is used for, all I know is I just don’t want an entry at all. I’ve a rough idea of my reputation and the last thing I need is to see it numerically.
Thanks for the review.
The team at TheGORB knew we were building something that would create controversy. We were confident that in the end people are good and will behave accordingly. So far 90% of our comments are positive ones, look for yourselves in the browse function at the home page.
People use pseudonimity ( anonymity with a nickname ) on this and every blog. And we are comfortable with it. We think we know who these people are. This creates a false sense of security.
Like you have all said anonymity has a negative connotation, however it is used everyday, 360 corporate surveys and pollsters use them to get closer to the truth.
I agree with Dan. Has anyone read the FAQ? (http://www.thegorb.com/faq.gorb#question11) I think that it is not a good idea to have a feedback system where someone can just post lieblous feedback and do not provide the affected party with a mechanism to remove it.
I think it is probably impossible to build a perfect feedback/member rating system. The problem that I see for these companies (gorb, ikarma, rapleaf, etc. etc.) is that it must be very hard to get user adoption since there is no underlying service. Does anyone know if they have been able to implement their feedback system with third parties? If a company wants to outsource its feedback system it must not be that important to them since their competition could benefit from it.
I have noticed a correlation with some powerful execs and people who don’t like to be talked about behind their back, and will do anything to stop it, legally or financially. So, this is definitely going to hit a brick wall. Till then, somebody’s going to have a good time. The internet and its free information capability has its up and downs for this kind of thing. But you got to respect free speech. They may have a chance with moderation or the ability to defend oneself in the service. At least allow people to defend themselves from slander. Maybe that will be the pay service.
Dan
For a rating to mean anything, there has to be a transaction or interaction to be rated. The idea of an individual having a page where anyone can rate them after reading about them on a blog without any dealings is silly.
Ebay’s feedback 2.0 that is being released in May is more interesting than this or rapleaf, though it is not portable.
“They are tapping into basic human psychology, and may make a buck or two on the back of what is sure to be the misery of others.”
Oh the irony…
I don’t like this idea though if its here to stay it would be beneficial to have it incorporated with openid.
All I see is another way to artificially rate yourself/competition. You know that there will be pay per ratings as long as its anonymous.
Ebay should just open up their feedback like a spin off. They already have a lot of Data and trust, plus they have been playing the feedback game a long time now.
A few questions:
1) are they really targeting feedback on average people? if they want people to rate you and i in addition to political, movie, tv, sports celebrities, then then certainly need a critical mass of ‘ratings’ to get good coverage
2) what would be the use for this system? do i really want to spend time giving feedback for random people? what is the value back to me?
3) i see an advertising model. any other way to monetize?
interesting site, i hope they make it.
1.- Open ID is in the works
2.- We want feedback on interpersonal relations. Let’s say you were a programmer who just met a new client. Would you not want to know how they treated others in the past?
3.- Monetize: Ultimately (local search) you want to know who is the most reputable plumber not the closest one.
4.- Honest and constructive feedback is hard to give, we all tend to become defensive when even the hint or crticism is in the air. This way if you see that 11 people “digg up” an opinion then it is probably a consensus view.
5.- Just like in real life you do not opt in our out of your reputation.
Thanks for allowing me to participate in the dialog.
Anonymity ? Accountability ?
Every opinion you make about another is open to being approved or rejected by that persons community.
This approval / rejection will be placed on your profile. As a sign of the way you treat others. So yes, your comment will be anonymous but the community approval or rejection will stick to you and be part of your reputation.
We could have asked you to create nickname, but what is the value of knowing that some person named Peter3456 said anything? Isn’t it the same as an anonymous opinion?
You can not opt out of this?
That is crazy. Good luck with the lawsuits.
Sounds like a good idea to me. Makes the feedback more reliable.
http://www.youtubemyblog.blogspot.com
hard space to make money…lots of hate versus love.
Just like in real life… You can’t opt out of your reputation. It exists all around you, people speak about you. I think it is better to know
Let’s look at ebay. I have bought from a supplier who had few comments that read ” he never sent the product and kept my money” the other 94 comments were good so I dismissed the one off comment.
We learn to be consumers of information.
Most of us have excellent reputations and great communities to back us up.
Try it ask your community for anonymous feedback, and learn what they think.
This service looks like great fun!
Can’t wait until they provide a quick link to Gorb’s ‘Shit List’. Wonder where Tucker Max will rate?
Seriously though, this looks like an email address collector. Imagine all the self-help and image improvement books you could push through this channel?
Clever.
And just like in real life, people will sue you to protect their reputation.
Both people in an ebay transaction have made an agreement to interact in a transaction where they know feedback is an option, it is a very different situation.
If ebay’s legal department believed that they needed to provide a mechanism for removal of feedback and opting out of the process, what makes you think your service is any different?
If you want to spam the system, just keep rating yourself or anyone else and add a + sign to the e-mail that is doing the rating like so:
foobar+blah@foo.com
foobar+blahblah@foo.com
You can raise or drop any rating in seconds spoofing their system. They don’t even have the most basic of checks for duplicate ratings. This is a poorly thought out and implemented system.
I believe that feedback good or bad is necessary, so I doubt anyone reading a testimonial with only positive feedback is on guard
So, this is Hot or Not, without the pictures.
TheGorb is a great concept. Controversial? Of course. Leonard hit the nail on the head when he said: We do not opt in or out of our reputation in real life. The safeguards are in place to ensure things go smoothly. When they get rocky, like all great startups, the community will help make things smooth again. This is going to be a homerun.
-JLB
Most users will take the time to put up negative comments about someone after a bad experience….what’s the incentive to put up good comments/rating?
How do you prevent fraud? (e.g. create a list of dummy emails for the purposes of feedback?) Can I rate some one multiple times? (e.g. On ebay you can rate a person per transaction)
I’d be curious on how you can create critical mass of users on such a site…without which it will fail.
Interesting concept! Will only use it for fun sake if at all!
Somehow, I cant imagine a world where people or their personalities are rated, nor would I like to see such a world
Seems like a credit score for personality .. scary!
I agree that ebay’s feedback system is great but at the same time, it is serving a specific purpose. Outside the ebay world, the same guys have no reputation. Such systems do serve their purpose e.g elance has a feedback and rating system for their professionals, but at the same time, my elance performance should not be used for determining whether I am a good seller on ebay or whether I am worthy for a specific job or not!
Although it would be nice to know what people think about me, especially anonymously, but at the same time, I would not like such data (whether positive or negative) to be used when lets say I am going to buy a car of rent a hotel room. I agree that we all should learn to consume information but such systems, if not tied to a particular purpose, may result in something extremely negative for someone.
If not opt-out, I should atleast have the option of limiting people’s comments to me only .. now that is something which is going to serve a positive purpose, without hurting any specific individual or group!
Dear Chandra, we have an algorithm that was developed by two academics that looks into the in-degree (page rank if you will) of all emails. It measures how many email opinions any email has and then how many are above those. So we measure your realness.
If you are willing to invest the time to create 10 emails and 100 over those to make them real then we check for other factors, like your systematic bias. If you only vote in our direction all the time then you will ( like in real life ) your opinion losses value.
As an additional check we also look at the “time” in which these votes were received if the happen quickly we treat them differently than if they happened over a longer period of time.
We think we have developed a unique rating system from a mathematical point of view.
There are other attributes we also look into.
Thanks for the great questions.
Also, Mike it would be interesting if you start assigning such ratings to startups you write about and let your users vote on whether the startup is + or -.
Based on the comments on this forum, I know what’s happening to TheGorb
don’t like the idea.
i’m sure a couple of lawsuits will take care of this.
this is just like one person traveling the world posting stickies about someone they don’t like (or do like). without the other person’s understanding, it becomes slander. so this won’t fly. just like “don’t date him girl” website. same idea. same problem.
I’m NOT a lawyer, but I’ve been reading up on the issues surrounding sites like this. It seems that current law is going in the direction that sites like Gorb are utterly immune from libel/defamation suits. Look up the “section 230″ defense. Any anonymous person can write the most malicous and reckless disregard for truth about you, and Gorb doesn’t even have to remove it. They have zero liability for false material, no matter how damaging.
That’s not what people inituitively THINK is the case. But it seems to be the law, based in recent developments in this area. And it’s going to be defended by ISP’s.
I’m a longstanding civil-libertarian. But I find this very troubling.
Sounds like Gorb is trying to class this place up a little… I Like It!!!
@Leonard (28)
I say that your Gorb service is a cleverly structured scam to collect live email addresses which you will later spam as a function of the rating notification and validation process.
For example, Gorb could append a footer ad on notification and validation emails - similar to the way AOL does with user email since the service became free. Appending an ad is fair game, because Gorb has to pay for this ‘rating’ service somehow?
Perhaps, you’ve found a loophole in the current opt-out legislation?
Eventually you’ll need provide an email opt-out. But not before you’ve collected thousands upon thousands or gullible user addy’s (myspace kids) who are likely in the sweet-spot demographic for your ad campaigns.
Your rating service is so full of holes it is meaningless.
- Where is the clause in your TOS which specifies email addresses will never be sold or shared?
- Instead of email address why not identify rating targets with their cell phone or office number? A phone number is unique? You could still automate the notification process with an automated dialer system.
I say sham. What say you?
Great Concept. Great group of people behind the project. I am sure is going to be a hit. Good luck guys!
Interesting concept… It’s inevitable that something like this will catch on and hit critical mass…
Whether we like it or not, the internet is perfectly geared to this type of system… I see ‘reptimization’ being a major growth industry in the near future…
We will never sell or share email addresses.
As an avid internet user I hate spam as much as anybody. I don’t want to contribute to the problem.
I should ask though, why the hell ‘the GORB’? If this service is to go anywhere, a name change is definitely in order…
this service is a dream come true for all the techcrunch haters who trash comapanies profiled in the comments section! what a place to vent!
Seth,
Their problem will be the mass of lawsuits, not losing any single case.
The guy that owns theripoffreport.com has to live as a hermit avoiding being served in lawsuits and moving to avoid death threats. If you refuse to remove anything without a lawsuit, you get lawsuits and angry people.
“Also, Mike it would be interesting if you start assigning such ratings to startups you write about and let your users vote on whether the startup is + or -.”
ooooh i like it. you could have several ratings: whether it will make money, originality of idea, etc…
would gaming be an issue? i doubt it…
Garth: So far, it doesn’t seem to have worked that way. “Don’t Date Him Girl” is currently being sued on exactly this issue, though that seems to have some details that make it less than a pure test. People sometimes think Wikipedia will get sued, but they’ve so far managed to keep any such lawsuit from being filed, in part based on the idea that it’d be an almost certain loss, so why waste the money.
The countervailing factor seems to be that ISP’s want the defense to be as broad as possible, so there’s plenty of top-flight resources to expand the immunity in libel/defamation cases.
The Gorb stands for the Good or Bad… GorB.
The folks who post on this site are asking for a libel/defamation suit by those who they’ve injured. While Gorb itself is immunized under Federal law the identity of the individual poster can be obtained via a subpoena.
As many downloaders of pirated music know from the RIAA’s crusade, it doesn’t matter if you provide a false name, the IP address that Gorb’s servers record will lead the injured party directly to the poster’s door.
Unless there is some truth to what is being said, false accusations cause people pain and threaten their livelihoods.
There’s nothing useful in providing anonymity to cowards who hide in the darkness and stab others in the back.
I’m not sure what problem this is trying to solve, what pain point this smoothes over. Also it looks like it presents a technical solution (an algorithm) to a non-technical problem (how to trust people).
Perhaps it helps out those that want to do business solely over the internet.
Lawsuit waiting to happen. By now allowing to opt out, you are just inviting libel. I’d sue the sh*t out of you if I found out a bunch of negative crap left by trolls about me. Just like in real life, speech is not free!
This site will fail.
I, for one, think this is an awesome idea. You’re probably right that most of the feedback will be overwhelming negative, because when you give people anonymity and an audience, we all turn into trolls and griefers, to some extent.
But it’s also the only way you’re ever going to get honest opinions from people, without them pandering to your ego or worrying about what you’ll say about them in return. You have to open it up and let the trolls in, in order to get feedback that’s worth anything.
I agree with the opinion part, it is just the potentially negative implications of that opinion on ur personal or professional life that makes me scary .. Also, opinion is one thing, but assigning a score to your personality based on that opinion is altogether different.
Just a simple scenario: I break up with a girl, she writes loads of s..t about me .. Dude, everyone breaks up just that now, everyone will know u had a break up ..
Greg - A problem is that people aren’t asking for this feedback.
TheGORB.com is a hit cause theGORB.net is not available any more. LOL, yes I would I have liked to buy it too.
Lets see how long before mr.ceo gets threats or worse. just like in real life, everything you do comes with a cost. i’d invest 10k to protect my reputation. Karma is a bitch, and life is cheap…