Intolerable

[ivanos]

As an avid Google local guide, I’ve been encountering enormous hide of my reviews. Guess what? I mean EVERY WORD in EVERY review of mine. But hey, Google simply keeps hiding some of my reviews with no reasonable reasons. Some Google defender once said to me: But you only got three reviews hidden? What? You should appreciate such low standard? You know how much effort I had put into those three hidden reviews (and guess what! Now the number turns to 4!)?

if you’re lousy or sloppy to your review writing and therefore have no issue to 10-20 reviews hidden. Then save it for yourself. Not every local guide is as sloppy as you. Ok?

[ivanos]

It really amazes me that Google of California of the US simply conducts some kind of censorship as what the Chinese communist has been doing. Really amusing

[turbotapeworm]

You’re obviously triggering some kind of content filter - have you tried rewording the reviews?

Sometimes sharing them on here can help people to point out where things might be causing issues.

What I will say is that the reviews of yours I did see when I had a quick look have made me incredibly hungry and seem to be of a really decent standard so there’s clearly something amiss with the ones you aren’t getting published that’s most likely just the AI not reading something in the way you’ve intended.

[ivanos]

Believe me. I’ve been a long time participant of the “Thread” (you should know it) of contributions being hidden and some kind of “way out” was just release a few months ago. And I’ve been filling the forms to get my hidden contributions reinstated, and then the new ones were hidden, and then forms submitted and reviews reinstated… etc

please know the context first. Thanks

[ivanos]

I say this now and will say it again and again: Google’s tolerance of low quality really amazes me. AI? Deep Learning?

Give me a break. Don’t fool yourself. You’re still way way far from IT.

[ErmesT]

Hi @ivanos

On one side I understand your rant, and having some hidden reviews (1 or 100 it doesn’t really matter) is indeed discomforting. I know this because it happened to me too (the moderator status doesn’t protect, just to be clear)

On the other hand, I know that fake reviews are a big plague, and all the companies that manage reviews (not just Google) are constantly working on algorithms to filter these reviews.

Blocking inappropriate reviews has become a priority for those who manage them, as many companies have had legal problems due to fake, or inappropriate, reviews. The same happened to Local Guides who were called to court for defamation.

The algorithms, based on AI, are constantly evolving, but obviously they are not perfect, and some members can suffer more or less depending on the words they normally use or the way they formulate their sentences.

That’s why we may have some “false positive” and that’s why we have an “appeal Form” to fill.

I would like to add a note: The Local Guides who respond in this community are, like you, volunteers, so I believe that their opinion, even if different from yours, should lead to a respectful exchange of views, which is the basis for in order to develop a constructive conversation.

Whoever answers you doesn’t want to minimize your problem. We come from different countries of the world, we use different languages and we have different cultures, but in this forum I think we should understand this, minimize the differences and be a little more understanding.

[turbotapeworm]

I kind of get an idea why some of your content might have been hidden (not removed) now @ivanos - good luck with your LG journey, I’ll try not to respond to you again.

[ivanos]

@ErmesT

Thanks for the reply. I would like to provide more of my observation further regarding your note. You mentioned some people’s review may be more prone to be filtered due to the wording they use. Well I believe this may not be the case. I’ve checked across a bunch of local guides here. Most of them constantly have 15-20 reviews hidden when the total number of their total reviews is by hundreds. I believe this has nothing to do with wording and sentences anymore. Rather, the mechanism of Google’s AI has also become a “plague” itself.

I have nothing to disrespect any “volunteer” here. What I do is just idea exchange and discussion of “facts” and nothing is personal.

[ivanos]

@turbotapeworm

Well, while I’m really curious about what your “understanding” is on why some of my content is “removed”, but as you said you would not reply anymore so be it. Oh btw none of my content is “removed”. It’s just hidden and will be reinstated after some time. Again, just talking about facts here and nothing is personal.

Good luck to you LG journey too. And wish the current 10+ hidden (not removed) reviews of yours will be reinstated asap, if that matters to you.

*Update: Just saw your reply in which the wording “removed” has been changed to “hidden (not removed)”. I however will maintain what I said as above as the reply to your original message just for the record.

[ErmesT]

You have a strange way to setup an “idea exchange and discussion of “facts””, @ivanos , by starting a post that is partly referring to a reply of a Local Guide on a previous post.

I would be happy to have a relaxed conversation about AI, and how to improve it, but I don’t see in your post any space for this.

On the contrary, I see a total closure about the subject.

What you don’t say is what is your vision about how the filter should work. Yes, I am talking about a filter, because I think that a filter, as I said on my previous reply, can remove a lot of inappropriate content, and more should be removed.

Here I just see just a rant, not constructive ideas of suggestions. Maybe I am wrong

[ivanos]

@ErmesT

On the other hand, it seems you have a closed view of this topic isn’t it. Instead of having some compassion on the frustration of local guides’ serious contribution being ignored, you just fix your view on the necessity of a filter. Sure a filter can do good but it also does harm. You focus on the good and I focus on the harm. There’s no need to accuse me of being closed.

And I think always talking about posters “attitudes” rather than focusing on the things being discussed is always not a worthwhile discussion.

[ErmesT]

I do apologize if I misunderstood your post, @ivanos , maybe because English is not my first language.

I’ve faced this situation well before the Known Issue post was released (I am one of the Local Guides who asked to have an official post), and then I had hidden reviews again, as I explained already in my first reply, so I perfectly understand the frustration. And I have hidden photos too.

However, I don’t believe in Google “hiding some [of yours] reviews with no reasonable reasons” nor “conducts some kind of censorship as what the Chinese communist has been doing” just to mention some of the sentences of your post and comments, nor in “serious contribution being ignored”.

I believe the “reasonable reason” can be wrong, and I believe an AI is not perfect, that’s why, when a review of mine is hidden a simple fill the form, for a human to check and to “teach the AI”, helping in this way the filter to improve.

I’ve read literally hundreds of posts about hidden reviews in the last year, trying to help the Local Guides to understand why some reviews are hidden and how to edit/ improve some of them.

And I’ve reported hundreds reviews in Google Maps, because inappropriate (offensive, stolen contents, duplicate reviews, promotional reviews, spam) so I am perfectly aware of the issue, in both sides. And I’ve responded to businesses who asked here for reviews to be removed.

Again, I don’t see a proposal nor an open discussion in your post. What is your practical proposal/suggestion for improving the system? As the title of the post is “intolerable”, what can be “tollerable” for you, generally speaking?

[ivanos]

@ErmesT

Thanks for the reply. And I appreciate your effort and actions to address all the issues related to hidden reviews since last year.

You mentioned some of my wording of some sentences in my previous posts. I stand by what I meant and would like to provide more clarification as followed:

• “Hiding some of my reviews with no reasonable reasons”: As you also mentioned, the “reasonable reasons” may be wrong. If the reasons are wrong then I believe they are not reasonable. I know the filtering mechanism is implemented to address “bad” reviews (l wil define all kinds of fake, spam, and relevant reviews as “bad reviews” from now on). But that doesn’t justify its causing harm to authentic reviews especially the ones in which local guides have invested a lot of his/her time/effort.

• “conducts some kind of censorship as what the Chinese communist has been doing”: All the fascists would tell you individual good shall be sacrificed for the “greater good”. In some way Google Al/filtering mechanism follows similar rationale: For the greater good of fighting bad reviews, individual good reviews can be sacrificed. You ask Chinese communist why it needs to censor the speech? “For the Nation and the People” they would say. The greater Good. So now Google wants us local guides to sacrifice ourselves for the greater Good it wants to achieve?

• “serious contribution being ignored”: I wil address this together with the 'tolerable" as followed

As a local guide, I guess l may first try to speak for a greater group of local guides regarding to the “tolerable” before I express my own opinion. Let a question be posed: Why would some one write a Google review or become a local guide, in the very first beginning? Many people I know do these things simply because they’d love to express their comments on some sites/shops, share their experiences, etc. Simple as that. And now because of Google’s implementation of some mechanism, whose purpose most of them do not care at all, many of their comments/experiences simply vanish. This is pure contradiction to those people’s original purpose of writing reviews. “Slap on the face” I would say can describe what they may feel in the first place. And this, in essence and from time zero, is intolerable. This is very straight forward. You can talk a lot about fake, spam, etc and what Google has been striving to do to “improve the world” or whatever but they just don’t care. They didn’t write reviews to fight bad reviews. They write because they want to write. And Google’s blocking their output simply contradicts to their simple intention and original expectation (“blocking” is the correct term because many of them don’t know the form-submission 'solution’ so can only bear with the frustration). No one can tolerate a slap on the face. On the other hand, simply click on the profile of any local guides of any Google Map site page. You will see in average 20-50 reviews of that local guides are hidden when total number of his/her reviews are by hundreds. Now what’s the impact in full scale? Huge. And this grand scale harm caused by the filtering mechanism is also intolerable in another way.

As for me, to be honest why would I be any different from the group of people as mentioned? Why did I write review and share experiences and join local guides as such in the very first beginning? Not to mention I may be even more avid and dedicated in these regards as I normally write reviews more comprehensive and detailed than the average. And now the total number of my reviews is higher than the average, too. If blocking their output is a slap on face for them, what would my feeling be like? Still, I can understand Google’s intention in another regard which brings about the filter (and all the trouble caused). What can be more “tolerable” for me after taking that into such consideration? I can accept current form-submission and review/photos-reinstation mechanism. But such mechanism needs to be better in the following two aspects: (1) the time needed to reinstate the contributions shall be far shorter. 2-3 weeks at least is way too long; (2) now there is no guarantee that after the further “review” the contributions will be reinstated because of “violation of policy”. But frankly speaking, based on what can some Google reviewers ensure his/her judgement is correct? We need better transparency here if an application to reinstate some contribution is rejected.

What (good) local guides what is simple. Show our contribution. That’s all. And the two aspects I mention may only demonstrate some basic respect to the time/effort spent/made by those contributors as well as their original intention/expectation to engage with Google Map contributions from the very beginning.

[ivanos]

I’ve posted a (long) reply. Why is it removed?

[ErmesT]

Hi @ivanos

I just released your post from spam quarantine. Our filter is working to protect the community and you from unwanted content, but sometimes it can be triggered by something and remove a legitimate post.

Moderators are patrolling the quarantine to release the good post so, if your post has been rejected, don’t post it again. Simply tag a moderator (check here and here).

For more information you can read: Why was my Connect post marked as spam?

I can’t respond to your long reply right now.

I will be here later

[ErmesT]

Hi @ivanos , sorry for the delay in responding, at least to the first part of your reply, for now.

Let me start by saying that if this had been your initial post it would have been easier to open a constructive conversation. Unfortunately not everyone reads the whole thread, so the initial post is always the most important.

Sometimes it is not easy to define a “reasonable reason”. As I said before, an AI is not perfect, and I am very interested in understanding how it can be improved. However, the contribution of AI into our daily life has become fundamental in many fields, from diagnostic medicine to driving cars, just to name a few. It can certainly be improved, but I don’t think it should be despised. If you are interested I could cite numerous examples where an apparently good review was actually spam, and vice versa. Of course, when the review that gets blocked is ours, everything changes, and the disappointment is certainly great. It is certainly difficult to accept that our review has been blocked because some spammer has used the same phrase ten times that we have (legitimately) used too, for example.

I would not speak of “censorship”, but of the need to improve the ability to distinguish “good” content from “bad” ones. There are many posts related to the practice of increasing the ranking of a business by the owner, or decreasing that of a competitor, through the purchase of fake reviews. In those posts, users ask to remove certain reviews. Is it censorship?
We have recently seen the use of reviews to politically attack an area, or a certain business, and Google’s reaction has been to block the possibility of contributing, by areas, or by categories of businesses, or for a specific business that was under attack. Is it censorship?
In my opinion no. Obviously it’s never easy to define the boundaries between what is correct and what is not, but I think that defining boundaries is important. According to Kant, and later Martin Luther King “My freedom ends where that of others begins”.

These are important points, which certainly deserve to be discussed and deepened.
Soon the second part

[ivanos]

I’m afraid your reply seems to miss almost all of my points and looks mostly like a vain attempt.

[ivanos]

Google’s censorship has again made its way into my contribution. My new review, which is with some of my most intense passion and 5-star recommendation, is again filtered and hidden. This is such a pathetic robot era.

I can’t concur with any of your EXCUSE now.

@ErmesT

@DeniGu

@InaS

[ivanos]

What is Google’s policy/intension in this regard now? To just be someone that can do things half good? In Mandarin we call this “半吊子”. Is this what Google wants to be? A 半吊子？

[Lewisbui]

Xin chào! Đã có cách khắc phục vấn đề này chưa?
Tôi nghĩ tài khoản của chúng ta đã nằm trong danh sách kiểm duyệt của google maps( Đối với tôi là vì hoạt động đăng hàng loạt đánh giá dưới 200 ký tự trong quá khứ).
Tôi muốn khắc phục dứt điểm vấn đề này! Nếu không, thật mất thời gian khi chúng ta phải điền vào biểu mẫu thường xuyên.