Kettle calling the Pot black? . Review on Five Worst Reviewers on MouthShut

If you are reading this review to find out who are the five worst reviewers on Mouthshut, I am sorry you will be disappointed. Then why write a review? This review is an opinion, may not be one that does a 100% justice to the topic in question but it in my opinion questions the topic in itself.

The fun about being a reviewer on a site like MS is the freedom that is bestowed on you while being able to critique anything and everything under the sun without ever being held responsible for the consequences. However, do we care about the hard part? That freedom comes with responsibility. How many of us are up to terms with a statement I seem to repeat too often, “once I decide to critically analyze something and make my opinion public, I should also be open to accept the public’s opinion on my opinion.”

I must admit that I too for a considerable part of my stay at MS had been very passionate about the site and my reviews. Anything that was written in the negative about the site or me did bring about in me a sense of denial. How could such a wonderful site or ME be wrong? Today when I look at it, I realize that reviewing and passion do not really go hand in hand at least in most cases.

I have also begun to realize that universal acceptability is a utopian concept. When two people speak about the same thing in two completely different ways, it is not always a necessity that one amongst them is wrong. The pluralistic nature of our individuality and society is not something that we need to fight or worry about instead it is something that needs to be celebrated.

Coming back to the topic and the two reviews written on it, the first one was a rather bold attempt by a newcomer. He decided to take on five very popular writers on MS and express why he thought they were amongst the worst. I reserve my judgment on his choices and by doing this I am not breaking any convention at MS, I am just following the most time-honored one at the site, which states - “though I do not agree entirely with your list, I will rate you high, because you have explained the reason for your choices.”

However, in this case the reviewer’s competency was questioned. How many reviews have you written/read/commented on, before attempting to malign these popular writers? At this point, I must ask, “In how many movies should I have acted before I start nailing five popular actors as the worst that Bollywood has seen?” In a film industry that has no shortages for actors like Kishen kumars, Chunky pandeys and their likes, is it justified to classify SRK or the Big B amongst the worst five? I am not for a moment, questioning the prerogative of a reviewer to express his/her opinion. I think it is fashionable to criticize popular personalities; than, to write about the ones who really deserve the stick. Criticizing popular personalities also helps create controversies and attract attention. However, before we attach motives to a review or the reviewer let us just sit back and ask ourselves if we too are living in the same glass houses?

I would have appreciated if members RRCed the review with a little more objectivity and reacted to the review in a way they reacted to reviews which are in the category of best/worst. Maybe it has to do with the fact that this review was about one amongst us judging us, I sense a certain amount of defensiveness and a lot of wrath in the comments section. In several comments, the reviewer was attacked not the review, his personal qualities were questioned, not the logic (or the lack of it) expressed in the review. When we tell the reviewer that he/she does not have the right to judge anyone, are we not taking away one of the essential features of MS, which is platform built to judge products/services and personalities? If the member’s id was disabled for writing on a topic provided by MS and sticking to the requirements of the topic (biased or unbiased), I fear that we are getting a little too touchy. There are tons of biased and completely one sided reviews (including mine) on MS, will all the members who have written them also face the same punishment?

Coming to the second review, which was written by a seasoned reviewer, which was much more diplomatic. Rather than taking names, the author hinted at symptomatic defects that could help us identify worst reviewers. I should however emphazize upon something that the author to has subtly done, that some of the symptoms mentioned in the review were more pointers leading to poor reviews and not poor reviewers. Poor review(s) do not always make a poor reviewer. I strongly believe that it is the intent that is more important than the result. I am not suggesting that we condone mediocrity, instead I mean that not all of us are gifted enough to be writing elaborate reviews one after the other, while keeping the reader engrossed informed and entertained.

Take a situation where I do not have any decent writing skills. I find something on the net that I think is something very vital for other netizens to know. In my eagerness to spread awareness, Or I am new to Mouthshut and am awestruck by some great reviews written here, so to make an impressive beginning I copy paste something as a review, am I to be grouped amongst the worst reviewers? I think – not in all cases. I do not support plagiarism; I too believe that rather than copy/paste something from some other site as one’s own, it is better to give a link to that site. Still I would rate a person with a genuine intention but copied review as a better reviewer than one with a stupendously original review but with malicious intent.

In my opinion people who log on to the site with an intention to flare up controversy, to malign a country, creed, class of people or an individual are the worst sorts. Members, who log in with multiple ids, indulge in revenge rating and mud slinging in comments section should be considered bad influences. Reviewers who think they are above criticism and indulge in double standards while judging a product or a review should be considered as members who have scope for improvement (not necessarily to be grouped amongst the bad or the worst).

Anyone who logs on to MS spends time and money, (especially considering the fact that MS does not reward you monetarily for your effort) to write reviews and genuinely contribute towards global awareness is a good person at heart. He/ She cannot be clubbed amongst the five worst reviewers’ category for the lack of verbosity, writing skills, originality or sense of humor.

While the general rule to be followed on the site should be, evaluate the review not the reviewer; for this topic, the focus should be on reviewers not reviews. That brings me to the question that first came up to my mind while seeing this topic and is still unanswered – Why have this topic when most of us do not know the distinction between the above two scenarios?

Ratings do not matter, Comments and Interactions will be highly appreciated.