Street View Trusted and the LG Program.

[Pea]

I have a suggestion which may be unpopular with some LG SVTs, so I welcome your comment too: SVT for-hire photographers should not be part of the general Local Guides program, they should either be entirely separate or some kind of ring-fenced subset - if they must remain part of the LG program their review functionality should be turned off and existing reviews purged.

There is a problem with SVTs who are paid to photograph a place and then give it a review - naturally this is always 5 stars - who would give their new paymaster anything less than a perfect review!? This is clearly a Conflict of Interest and against Google's content policy but these SVTs are never sanctioned for their behaviour even when their reviews are flagged.

SVTs whose attention is drawn to this will often say there is no conflict of interest as their review is 'honest'. That's like a politician accepting a bribe and saying "No, this was purely a coincidental gift". Reviews don't just need to be clean, they need to be seen to be clean.

The entire Maps review system is based on trust and credibility, without that it becomes worthless. In this new post-fact world, sooner or later the spotlight will be put on fake reviews. The way a blind eye is being turned to this will be a source of embarrassment and I guess hurried remedial action, long after the horse has bolted.

Edit: I posted this suggestion earlier and had a reply from @LucioV but both my original post and the reply disappeared. So I'm posting again just in case LV was thinking I'd deleted it because I didn't want a comment 

[Pea]

There is a problem with SVTs who are paid to photograph a place and then give it a review - naturally this is always 5 stars - who would give their new paymaster anything less than a perfect review!? This is clearly a Conflict of Interest and against Google's content policy but these SVTs are never sanctioned for their behaviour even when their reviews are flagged.

SVTs whose attention is drawn to this will often say there is no conflict of interest as their review is 'honest'. That's like a politician accepting a bribe and saying "No, this was purely a coincidental gift". Reviews don't just need to be clean, they need to be seen to be clean.

The entire Maps review system is based on trust and credibility, without that it becomes worthless. In this new post-fact world, sooner or later the spotlight will be put on fake reviews. The way a blind eye is being turned to this will be a source of embarrassment and I guess hurried remedial action, long after the horse has bolted.

Edit: I posted this suggestion earlier and had a reply from @LucioV but both my original post and the reply disappeared. So I'm posting again just in case LV was thinking I'd deleted it because I didn't want a comment 

[LucioV]

Ops... now i don't have the time to argue! I will reply again later!

[Pea]

Forgot to put this in my initial post. The other reason to to keep SVTs separate from LGs are the clear rules about not allowing businesses to join:

"Organizations, brands and businesses are not eligible for the program. If you offer services for hire (such as marketing yourself as a Street View trusted provider), you are not allowed to bundle such services with your Local Guide membership."

SVTs that are businesses are currently also Local Guides.That business might only be one person but it might be two, or ten staff. Or maybe 100 staff and ten shops. Where do you draw the line?* It's clearly confusing even for Moderators https://www.localguidesconnect.com/t5/How-do-I/Cambiar-mi-nombre-de-perfil/m-p/137724/highlight/fals...

*Answer. The line can be drawn very clearly - make the programs separate.

[LucioV]

Yes, it's confusing.

As a SVT photographer i have a MyBusiness page (i don't rate, obviously).

As a point of honour i release reviews (not always 5*) only to customers (and not customers, obviously) i was a customer myself.

Anyway, could be easier to join LG program using another account (i have a business account that, occasionally, sent some contributes).

I think that the ultimate honour code should be the famous claim "don't be evil".

[Csaba]

Sorry @Pea but I do not agree. SV Photographers are just a tiny fraction of the "review business" (on the other hand, there are hundreds of sites like this for instance) and I am pretty certain most won't abuse the system. To be really safe, I could imagine that if a SV Photographer publishes photo spheres of a business (although I would only use it for certain kind of businesses), he/she could not post a review (Google engineers could solve this, I am sure) but to completely ban LG's from reviewing, I am sure would be an overkill. 

Google has its guide lines and any serious LG follows them. There is enough spam to fight with, and I am sure Googlers constantly keep an eye on it and once it's clear that someone systematically abuses the system, his/her reviews can be removed (or even completely excluded from the LG program) but everyone should enjoy a presumption of innocence until proven contrary.

[Akbab-Baba]

@PeaRIP my friend. Nobody here noticed that you are writing no more posts here.

[LucioV]

Why necroposting @Akbab-Baba? Btw, hi @Csaba! We miss you!