First | Prev || Next | Last
¿Question #702?
wtrollkin2000: Shill ratings or shill busting ratings? Which is worse? Would you do either?

Woelf: Both are lame.
Hendal: I am more a shrew rater myself
familynight: Why does anyone care? The ratings are just an interesting phenomenon to observe. The rating of a game will not effect how much you enjoy it.
Junichirou: They are both bad.
JayAdan: Don't care either way.
aleo09: don't know
matthan: I don't know the difference.
Beyak: both bad, nope
Critical Mass: both and no
DHEK: I have no idea what are "shill ratings" or "shill busting ratings"... so I don't know...
Ebon Wendigo: I usually ignore all that, very boring
eddyspaghetti: All bad.
minordemon: shill busting ratings are good
bigbadsteve: nada
Dorque: Nope. Nope.
mats-k: Shill busting is worse on average.
RandomGraham: Shill. And no.
Mojo Jojo: Shill ratings and no but I'd endorse a method of hunting down and executing anybody who does
janiera: neither, no
brainrob: Both are bad
chaosbreaker: Shill busters are self appointed, over zealous witch hunters. I feel shill busting scares noobs from joining the BGG commnuity.
scriptorum: They're both stupid. No.
GrandpaDave: No
Thedalek: The nullify each other. Shill busters tend to overbalance, though.
skrutsch: shill busting. I wouldn't do either.
dakarp: Both are equally bad. Any time you give a game a rating that doesn't reflect your actual opinion of the game based on your experience playing it at least once, you are deceiving the BGG users.
puffinge: shill ratings are slightly worse. I couldn't be bothered.
saulsehy: I have no interest in shill busting.
anson: 3 Questions. Bad!
Lord_Prussian: Do neither
Gecko23: They both reek, and are both sad, sad practices. And No.
Randy Cox: Sill busting ratings may be a tiny bit "worse" but rating a game a 1 because you detest the style of game (e.g. wargames or word games or whatever) is fine. :)
sbszine: Shill ratings are worse. I wouldn't do either.
southaustin: What the hell are you talking about?
Quest22: No
Windopaene: Shill ratings are worse, I choose to do neither
Mark_WH: Shill ratings
Drewcooter: They are both lame.
Cromaa: They both suck and I would never do either.
TragicHeroBC: I don't involve myself in those, I just take them into account when trying to figure how good a score /should/ be.
m_r_tyler: Shill ratings are worse because they are the root of the problem. I might be tempted to be a shill buster, but I haven't done either.
isolated: You have to expect Shill-ratings from friends and family. So always ignore the first few high ratings for any item. Shill busting ratings is just wrong. No vendettas please.
jpact: Whatever, who cares? No.
Dave: Neither. Equally lame. Nope.
TG Mittler: same, no
gnomehome: Shill busting is worse. I don't do either.
Johan: Equally bad, would do neither
melissa: Shill busting is worse. Most games have only 1 or 2 shills, but may have many more shill busters. I do neither.
fsumarc: both suck. no.
GuyHill: dont shill
Ryno8: both bad.... wouldn't do either except with PoTSM
chad56s: Arrgh. I hate both.
Grimwold: Admittedly sill ratings are manipulative, but shill busting is purely vindictive. I wouldn't consider doing either
Cardinal Fang: Both are evil. I would never shill but I've been tempted to shill bust the shill busters.
Blackwind: both, both, both
Bluenose: no
sumo: They both make me mildly annoyed.
Jatoha: I have done both.............on the same game
netfilterz: Both are bad, and I wouldn't do it.
djflippy: I dislike both and I wouldn't do either one.
BobDodgerBlue: Both bad, I try to avoid them
Eric Haas: Why bother?
Vince Londini: both, no
raolsson: I don't think it is good to promote a bad game or bust a good game. I would not do either. Wait, we're playing Werewolf, right?
geberus: both are worse, I would do neither
chaddyboy_2000: Both are lame.
dietevil: I wouldn't do either. They are both unethical.
Torbin_Bequette: Shill Busting, because it's extremely hypocritical and even more dishonest. Neither.
louiseh: Ignore the lot of them and enjoy the arguments.
Ludocrazy: Both are wrong. Equally.
ValJor: Both are bad, I would never do any
CDRodeffer: Both are bad, but neither is worse. I don't do either.
snoozefest: the former. no.
ejmowrer: Shill ratings on made up accounts are as bad as shill busting, otherwise shill busting is worse.
Komodo: They are both retarded.
Shakar: Both are worthless, I support none and I will do none.
jttm: Nope. Both are equally bad.
richardolen2: Shill ratings are worse, but I don't do either.
queequeg: dunno
skelebone: Both are equally egregious, but I think shilling is slightly worse. No, though I have considered busting before I realized the stupidity of it.
djlg: Shill busting is worse. I don't like & wouldn't do either.
EYE of NiGHT: Shill ratings. When are people going to recognise that is is fraud? It's flat-out consumer fraud. Just ban shillers and delete their content (after a kangaroo court of course).
CortexBomb: Shill ratings are worse because they can be harder to detect. I would not participate in either though, I have better things to do