Review???? (Suggestions for removal)

[ROBCamra]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/3317/

A "review" that needs to disappear I think.

I assume it's a sarcastic comment as he gives the pub a 1.

[Strongers]

Made me laugh!

[Conrad]

Good spot, gone now.

[ROBCamra]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/15636/

Another one possibly.

[Conrad]

Hi ROB,

Not as bad as some, but pointless. Now removed.

Thanks for that.

[ETA]

Another one brewing? Nothing too bad yet, but the hallmarks are there - single poster replies aggressively giving 10/10... http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/4618/

[Strongers]

A bit too defensive if you ask me!

Yesterday I spotted a pub I had already reviewed had been commented on and I had a look and what looks like a husband and wife team have given glowing reviews. My review was very favourable towards the pub and mentioned many of the things they had, but they both felt the need to mark my comment as unhelpful - some people eh!

[Conrad]

The 'was this review helpful' tool was meant to help find the good reviews, it seems to just be an excuse to spam reviews people don't like. I may have to do away with it as it is seeming largely pointless.

[ROBCamra]

Another one to delete.

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/57213/

[Conrad]

Blimey, also reported in the self promotion thread.

Gone now.

Thanks for that.

[Strongers]

Most comprehensive review of the month (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/33762/)

[Conrad]

Do you think it should be deleted, I assume it was just a way to get their 5 rating recorded

[Strongers]

It's not doing any harm and I didn't think about the fact that a rating cannot be given without a comment.

[ROBCamra]

Bit of a co-ordinated effort going on here I think. :)

Nothing for ages and then 4 in a week.

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubreviews/21616/

[Conrad]

I think that one was mentioned in the review thread, if it was the one I think it is, then 3 of them were members of the same family (who we think were the owners). No point in deleting it is my feeling, it is stupidly blatant though :)

[Farway]

Looking at the pictures http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubpictures/21616/ one shows a rear pub garden, trees around. But from what I can see the pub is middle of town & no trees, wrong picture perhaps?

[Conrad]

I don't think so, interesting layout though (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&q=http:%2F%2Fwww.pubsgalore.co.uk%2Fkml%2Fpub%2F21 616%2Fpub.kml&ie=UTF8&ll=53.387549,-0.335072&spn=0.001104,0.002411&t=h&z=19).

[oldboots]

Bit of a co-ordinated effort going on here I think. :)

Nothing for ages and then 4 in a week.

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubreviews/21616/

Looks like the James Fletcher review is unrelated, Moya Hodges admits she's the landlady (naughty to leave a rating) the other two may well be genuine reviews along the lines of "if you enjoyed your stay please leave a favourable comment on this or that pub review site" .

[ROBCamra]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/47387/

This Aberdeen pub is apparantly one of the best pubs in Dundee. Hell of a walk. :confused:

[ROBCamra]

Looks like the James Fletcher review is unrelated.

I'll bet it is though. :D

[Conrad]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/47387/

This Aberdeen pub is apparantly one of the best pubs in Dundee. Hell of a walk. :confused:
Now informed, they may change it.


Looks like the James Fletcher review is unrelated, Moya Hodges admits she's the landlady (naughty to leave a rating) the other two may well be genuine reviews along the lines of "if you enjoyed your stay please leave a favourable comment on this or that pub review site" .
Yeah, that was not the one I was remembering, I can't see anything obvious having rechecked our info.

[ROBCamra]

Now informed, they may change it.


They have. :)

[aleandhearty]

Hi Conrad

Hardly worth the effort of registering:

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/62342/

[ROBCamra]

Hi Conrad

Hardly worth the effort of registering:

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/62342/

Ye Gods, and I thought Barearts in Todmorden was pink!!!

Or was it cerise a & h?

[aleandhearty]

Ye Gods, and I thought Barearts in Todmorden was pink!!!

Or was it cerise a & h?

:D I'm obviously not going to live that one down in a hurry. Which reminds me, must finish my half-written review.

[Conrad]

Hi Conrad

Hardly worth the effort of registering:

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/62342/
It is a Facebook user, so again I suspect they are treating it as a proxy for their wall on Facebook, easily enough done if you have played with both (and registration is ridiculously simple through Facebook, 2 button clicks).

Review seems harmless, so unless anyone objects I will just leave it there.

[ROBCamra]

Most pointless review ever???????

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/9891/

[Conrad]

Most pointless review ever???????

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/9891/
It serves a purpose until we sort out a way of showing historical names.

Truthfully though I have to admit I prefer not to criticise members who have contributed large amounts to the site, if they think it is of value I would rather take them seriously.

I think this thread is falling a little out of hand for me. If a review is rude and needs to be removed fair play. If someone is being disingenuous be it a landlord or a normal reviewer then pointing and laughing is fine. But where a review is not up to whatever standards we hold but does no harm I am not sure what this achieves, I think deleting them and saying that they are not good enough is hardly going to want to make the person come back. And similarly if they see remarks like this on the forum it is hardly going to harbour good will.

[Farway]

Have to agree with Conrad on this [can't find an arse licking icon], perhaps because I add the historical names where I know them, and sometimes the fancy new name is dropped & pub reverts to historical name

For instance this one (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/13547/) in Portsmouth

[NickDavies]

I was thinking that - sometimes you might want to check out a pub you knew years back, maybe visit it for old time's sake. If you knew it as the Hasp and Staple you'd still have half a chance of knowing it was still there, albeit mindlessly refurbished into the Kebab and Calculator, and save your bus fare.

[oldboots]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/26191/ hmmmm?

[Conrad]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/26191/ hmmmm?
Good spot, deleted last night and I should have replied then.

[oldboots]

This one (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/48317/) looks a wee bit extreme,

[ETA]

This one (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/48317/) looks a wee bit extreme,

Even the postcode looks rude...

[Conrad]

Yep, one for Environmental Health, not us. Now deleted, thanks again OB.

[Strongers]

some pointless comments - I think he may have been drunk when posting! (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/userinfo.php?name=Charlie+Rooney) Gallopers and Winston Churchill to go for sure?

[Rex_Rattus]

some pointless comments - I think he may have been drunk when posting! (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/userinfo.php?name=Charlie+Rooney) Gallopers and Winston Churchill to go for sure?

And he's apparently the new manager of the newly re-opened Napoleon. Things looking up for that part of the world then!

[Conrad]

This one has spawned its own thread (http://forums.pubsgalore.co.uk/showthread.php?4499-Can-t-flag-any-reviews-as-Unhelpful.) so I shall deal with it there.

[ROBCamra]

More pointless comments

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/userinfo.php?name=boatzer

[Conrad]

Hi ROB,

Now removed.

Thanks for that.

[oldboots]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubreviews/40946/
oh dear, one for the Good Pub-dog Guide perhaps?

[ROBCamra]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/64236/

Hot barmaids galore?

Actually that's not a bad idea. I'd better register it quickly or Conrad & Dave might nick it. :D

[Farway]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/64236/

Hot barmaids galore?

Actually that's not a bad idea. I'd better register it quickly or Conrad & Dave might nick it. :D

We had a jokey Pervs Golore thread somewhere, maybe it slots in there?

[Conrad]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubreviews/40946/
oh dear, one for the Good Pub-dog Guide perhaps?
It is rubbish, do you think it needs deleting?


http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/64236/

Hot barmaids galore?

Actually that's not a bad idea. I'd better register it quickly or Conrad & Dave might nick it. :D
Definitely not a bad idea, review removed before anyone else gets it.

[oldboots]

looks like something nasty is about to kick off here (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/35441/)

[Conrad]

looks like something nasty is about to kick off here (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/35441/)
Yeah, first review was just about ok, second one had no content. On closer analysis though it looks very very likely that the two users were the same person. So we have deleted all content by those '2' users and blocked the computer from the site.

Thanks for pointing that out.

[ROBCamra]

I suspect that you won't want this one leaving on. Why wait so long anyway?????

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/62255/

[Conrad]

I suspect that you won't want this one leaving on. Why wait so long anyway?????

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/62255/
Bizarre isn't it. Fairly well written, and you would hope something was done about it, but you don't post it on a website, and you certainly shouldn't post it with an address attached. They have posted it on other sites as well :eek:.

As well deleted this morning. Thanks for pointing that out.

[aleandhearty]

Hi Conrad

You might want to have a look at Chris Storm's review of the Stag's Head in Newtown....No bitterness there then.

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/37867/

[Dave M]

Hi A&H,

Thanks for pointing that one out, just got rid of it. Not the sort of thing I like seeing on the site.

[Al 10000]

Hi Conrad,

I have just read a review of the Slug and Lettuce in York and it seems more like a
message than a review of the pub itself,it is not offensive but a waste of space in my opinion.

I have also read on the home page of Pubs Galore today a review of the Leeman in York this is by a first time reviewer and he mentions my name and says that my geography is wrong,the pub is in a very small area of York that is close to holgate which is why i put the pub in that area.
I am not going to do a tit for tat reply saying what i have said here i just wanted to get it off my chest.

Alan.

[Farway]

I agree with the Slug & Lettuce bit, more like some sort of message board

However, WRT the Leeman, the new poster is over 70 years old & was born within 100 yards of the pub, IMO as rank outsider & southern softy my vote goes to the 70 year old plus newbie, if he does not know the area he was born in, who does?

No doubt the proposed tags for districts will resolve this one

[Conrad]

Ok, well WRT to Slug & Lettuce, it doesn't do any harm, is about the pub, so I see no reason to delete it at the moment.

As to the Leeman, this is the sort of thing that has led up to us suspending areas for the moment, how many people are going to be searching for pubs in the Leeman Road area? For me it is just an ongoing time waster.

THIS SITE IS ABOUT PUBS

As both reviewers have clearly found said pub it is not placed that badly! As suggested when the new areas aspect of the site is done it will allow the pub to be in either area, pleasing all searchers hopefully.

I swear to God if I am ever looking for a spare time project I will build a site listing every house in the UK and allowing people to suggest what areas they are in as it seems to generate far more interest than any other thing I have worked on :moremad:

[Al 10000]

Hi Conrad,

Sorry to bother you again but i have read another review on the Pubs galore home page which mentions my name and says i have had too many shandys this is the from what i think is the landlord of the Queens Head in Heather i put this review on a sunday but visited this pub on a saturday when there were no meals available and the front door was shut on my visit.

This is putting me off putting any more reviews on PG or just shorten them to beers available,or i may change my name on Pubs Galore and put a different one on,i am a bit confused as what to do at the moment.

Alan.:confused:

[Conrad]

Hi Conrad,

Sorry to bother you again but i have read another review on the Pubs galore home page which mentions my name and says i have had too many shandys this is the from what i think is the landlord of the Queens Head in Heather i put this review on a sunday but visited this pub on a saturday when there were no meals available and the front door was shut on my visit.

This is putting me off putting any more reviews on PG or just shorten them to beers available,or i may change my name on Pubs Galore and put a different one on,i am a bit confused as what to do at the moment.

Alan.:confused:
I am a little hesitant to remove his review as it at least mentions they do lunches on Sunday and doesn't quite cross the line (although after the wife commented that she disliked the review I did an admin edit to make it clear how some of the site worked.

Beyond that it is clearly not that bright, you are a reviewer with over a 1000 reviews, he has 1, I know whom I trust more. With the racing I would suggest I think he is just wrong. As to the entrance being on the front/side, looking at your picture I wouldn't like to guess which side is the front, especially as 2 of the sides have writing on, I am guessing you have different opinions of the front. And as to you going to the wrong pub then I reiterate in my last sentence the bit where I said "looking at your picture".

Under the circumstances I think it is perfectly understandable to change your name on the site.

If anyone has a suggested resolution let me know.

Edit: Pub in question is here (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/20374/).

[sheffield hatter]

... this is the sort of thing that has led up to us suspending areas for the moment, how many people are going to be searching for pubs in the Leeman Road area? For me it is just an ongoing time waster.

THIS SITE IS ABOUT PUBS

As both reviewers have clearly found said pub it is not placed that badly! As suggested when the new areas aspect of the site is done it will allow the pub to be in either area, pleasing all searchers hopefully.

I swear to God if I am ever looking for a spare time project I will build a site listing every house in the UK and allowing people to suggest what areas they are in as it seems to generate far more interest than any other thing I have worked on :moremad:

Nice one, Conrad! That'll keep those pesky "users" away and stop them messing up your nice tidy website!;)

Seriously though, I can appreciate your frustration at getting entangled in what would appear to be a side issue. Yes, the website is about pubs. :)

But on the other hand it's a natural human desire to try to impose a semblance of order onto an apparently random collection of objects. The longer the list of pubs in a town/city, the more impenetrable it appears to be. The repetition of names (six Royal Oaks and 17 Red Lions) only adds to the confusion. Putting them into groups makes them easier to control, for us primitive hunter/gatherer types (or "users").

Once your solution to the areas/sub-districts/villages problem is in place you shouldn't be dragged into this sort of dispute any more and can concentrate on your new project. :D

[NickDavies]

I am a little hesitant to remove his review as it at least mentions they do lunches on Sunday and doesn't quite cross the line (although after the wife commented that she disliked the review I did an admin edit to make it clear how some of the site worked.

Beyond that it is clearly not that bright, you are a reviewer with over a 1000 reviews, he has 1, I know whom I trust more. With the racing I would suggest I think he is just wrong. As to the entrance being on the front/side, looking at your picture I wouldn't like to guess which side is the front, especially as 2 of the sides have writing on, I am guessing you have different opinions of the front. And as to you going to the wrong pub then I reiterate in my last sentence the bit where I said "looking at your picture".

Under the circumstances I think it is perfectly understandable to change your name on the site.

If anyone has a suggested resolution let me know.

Edit: Pub in question is here (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/20374/).

I wouldn't get too stressed. After all any guvnor is going to be protective of his business and gloss over any shortcomings, at least publicly, if he thinks he can get away with it. I had far worse slaggings off on another pub review site. A few more reviews - either way - from the more regular contributors would give a more rounded impression of the pub. Is anyone maybe passing that way anytime soon?

[rpadam]

I am a little hesitant to remove his review as it at least mentions they do lunches on Sunday and doesn't quite cross the line (although after the wife commented that she disliked the review I did an admin edit to make it clear how some of the site worked.

Beyond that it is clearly not that bright, you are a reviewer with over a 1000 reviews, he has 1, I know whom I trust more. With the racing I would suggest I think he is just wrong. As to the entrance being on the front/side, looking at your picture I wouldn't like to guess which side is the front, especially as 2 of the sides have writing on, I am guessing you have different opinions of the front. And as to you going to the wrong pub then I reiterate in my last sentence the bit where I said "looking at your picture".

Under the circumstances I think it is perfectly understandable to change your name on the site.

If anyone has a suggested resolution let me know.

Edit: Pub in question is here (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/20374/).
The first sentence does offer some factual information so I can see the sense of leaving it there (together with your clarification about the dating of reviews). However, the second is: a) getting personal; and b) not helpful, so is the sort of thing which could (and perhaps should?) be edited out.

[Quinno]

The first sentence does offer some factual information so I can see the sense of leaving it there (together with your clarification about the dating of reviews). However, the second is: a) getting personal; and b) not helpful, so is the sort of thing which could (and perhaps should?) be edited out.

I was just about to type the same thing...

[Conrad]

so is the sort of thing which could (and perhaps should?) be edited out.
It can, and that is a solution that I have used, when the review is so thin on the ground though I prefer the global delete option. I have some concerns about editing reviews in that it is a lot of work, but mostly that it makes the review as much the editors work as the reviewers in some respects, where should one draw the lines in editing?

Being honest as well if I edited that it would make the review better, as it stands I think it says all I need to know about whether I want to visit :whistle:

[Conrad]

Nice one, Conrad! That'll keep those pesky "users" away and stop them messing up your nice tidy website!;)

Seriously though, I can appreciate your frustration at getting entangled in what would appear to be a side issue. Yes, the website is about pubs. :)

But on the other hand it's a natural human desire to try to impose a semblance of order onto an apparently random collection of objects. The longer the list of pubs in a town/city, the more impenetrable it appears to be. The repetition of names (six Royal Oaks and 17 Red Lions) only adds to the confusion. Putting them into groups makes them easier to control, for us primitive hunter/gatherer types (or "users").

Once your solution to the areas/sub-districts/villages problem is in place you shouldn't be dragged into this sort of dispute any more and can concentrate on your new project. :D
I know what you are saying (I think :)). And the key thing is that where members are editing the areas they are doing their best to improve the site.

The bit I found funny(humorous) about this being honest is Alan is unhappy because someone is correcting his correction of location. Welcome to my world! ;) (and to be clear here, I know that is my job.)

It just ends up feeling thankless and missing the point where the site is not currently equipped to handle it, hopefully soon though :)

Edit: Just in case there is any doubt I am mostly joking, clearly glad people want to fix the site. Sorry having communication problems after a week long cold and not really sure what I am writing any more.

[rpadam]

Being honest as well if I edited that it would make the review better, as it stands I think it says all I need to know about whether I want to visit :whistle:
True enough!

[Farway]

Never having visited the Queens Head I think Alan had it right, he merely reported what he found, there was no speculation or guessing, the bit about entrances is really nit picking from landlord and should be ignored, [I missed a disabled entrance, which landlady, very politely, corrected]

WRT to horse racing, guess the landlord either doesn't know what is going on, or classes horse racing as something else

I'm with Conrad on this one, the landlord response tells anyone all they need to know about visiting or avoiding, just a good job the beer was OK, hate to think what response would be if it was a bad pint

[Conrad]

Hi Conrad,

I have just read a review of the Slug and Lettuce in York and it seems more like a
message than a review of the pub itself,it is not offensive but a waste of space in my opinion.

I have also read on the home page of Pubs Galore today a review of the Leeman in York this is by a first time reviewer and he mentions my name and says that my geography is wrong,the pub is in a very small area of York that is close to holgate which is why i put the pub in that area.
I am not going to do a tit for tat reply saying what i have said here i just wanted to get it off my chest.

Alan.
And to add further fuel to the fire (http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/1692973.m5ec/?from=ec&to=1692973&l=just_where_does_holgate_end). It looks like Trevor Bailey has a mission in life, one that apparently has little to do with pubs and more to do with areas, he'll love that new site I have planned ;)

[Al 10000]

Hi Conrad,

Well it looks like that York councilor has proved me right about that pub being in Holgate.

Regarding the ID*** landlord at the Queens Head in Heather i visited this pub on saturday 25 September 2010,this was the 10th pub i had visited that day i have an half pint of usually bitter in each pub so this was my 10th half making it 5 pints consumed i can and often visit more than 20 pubs in a day so i was well within my limits and i have never had a shandy while on a pub crawl.

I would also like to thank you and the other people on this forum who have posted messages of support as his review did bother me when i first read it.

Thanks Alan.

[Farway]

i can and often visit more than 20 pubs in a day so i was well within my limits.
Thanks Alan.

I take my hat off to you Sir, I would be flat on my back, or face down in the gutter :notworthy::notworthy::notworthy:

[Farway]

A new poster venting their rage ref Stanley Arms, Wirral (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/27333/)

[Conrad]

A new poster venting their rage ref Stanley Arms, Wirral (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/27333/)
Removed, thanks for pointing that out.

[Farway]

Another disgruntled first time poster, mostly OK but not sure about claim of made ill by the burger

Lanner Inn, Lanner (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/4988/)

[Conrad]

Another disgruntled first time poster, mostly OK but not sure about claim of made ill by the burger

Lanner Inn, Lanner (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/4988/)
Bit of a non-event that one, ultimately pointless but the made ill line as you say is an instant delete.

Thanks again for pointing it out.

[Evil Gazebo]

Some guy advertising his taxi firm. Twice (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/65931/).

[Farway]

Some guy advertising his taxi firm. Twice (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/65931/).

Just beat me to it, and he is SHOUTING (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/65931/)

[Conrad]

Thanks for that, both now gone.

[Farway]

Another unhappy person (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/51167/), and from review seems like it is a club not a pub

Harwoods, Greenock

[Conrad]

Another unhappy person (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/51167/), and from review seems like it is a club not a pub

Harwoods, Greenock
Now gone. Tried looking round the web and it seems to be a pub, not at all clear though.

[Maldenman]

This person's couple of reviews seem to need a look.

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/userinfo.php?name=steviemonkey


You could of course point out that the turkey I'm currently in charge of cooking will be fine if he wants to pop round :eek:

[Evil Gazebo]

The Tom Lock in Peterborough (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubreviews/62644/) has had three reviews posted in the last three weeks. Two of these are from one-time posters, the other from someone who has posted only one other review (a glowing, 10/10 of a nearby pub).

These reviews look suspiciously similar to me, not only in their harshness, but also in the language used. All three use (incorrectly) the word 'disinterested' and all three complain about the lack of 'english' (sic) spoken by waiting staff. Might be a coincidence?

Ha ha - just noticed that the fourth review down (19th September) is another similar diatribe from a one-off poster, and another coincidental 'english' user!

[Farway]

A pointless offering here (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/53618/) 10/10

Waterloo, Stockport

[Conrad]

This person's couple of reviews seem to need a look.

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/userinfo.php?name=steviemonkey
Thanks for that, I deleted it back when you reported it :).

The Tom Lock in Peterborough (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubreviews/62644/) has had three reviews posted in the last three weeks. Two of these are from one-time posters, the other from someone who has posted only one other review (a glowing, 10/10 of a nearby pub).

These reviews look suspiciously similar to me, not only in their harshness, but also in the language used. All three use (incorrectly) the word 'disinterested' and all three complain about the lack of 'english' (sic) spoken by waiting staff. Might be a coincidence?

Ha ha - just noticed that the fourth review down (19th September) is another similar diatribe from a one-off poster, and another coincidental 'english' user!
Whilst they are all poor, the evidence at our end does imply they are all different users, so with heavy heart I think they should stay. Also think I will be avoiding that pub :)


A pointless offering here (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/53618/) 10/10

Waterloo, Stockport
Pointless but harmless I think.

[Delboy20]

The Tom Lock in Peterborough (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubreviews/62644/) has had three reviews posted in the last three weeks. Two of these are from one-time posters, the other from someone who has posted only one other review (a glowing, 10/10 of a nearby pub).

These reviews look suspiciously similar to me, not only in their harshness, but also in the language used. All three use (incorrectly) the word 'disinterested' and all three complain about the lack of 'english' (sic) spoken by waiting staff. Might be a coincidence?

Ha ha - just noticed that the fourth review down (19th September) is another similar diatribe from a one-off poster, and another coincidental 'english' user!

They do look very similar to me as well. I don't think I would fancy having a meal in there:sick:

[ROBCamra]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/33367/

No rating without review. (Trainman's mantra) :p

[Farway]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/33367/

No rating without review. (Trainman's mantra) :p

Just beat me to it

[Conrad]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/33367/

No rating without review. (Trainman's mantra) :p
Now removed.

Thanks for that.

[Rex_Rattus]

Is it me or is there a spate of people posting on here over the last day or so to moan about dodgy meals?

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/38733/

This one might object to badly cooked food, but I also object to gross abuse of the English language.

[Conrad]

Is it me or is there a spate of people posting on here over the last day or so to moan about dodgy meals?

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/38733/

This one might object to badly cooked food, but I also object to gross abuse of the English language.
That one confused me, they had deleted it themselves by the time I got there. As you say was a crime against the language though.

[Soup Dragon]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubreviews/35845/

I think Diva's in Guildford needs a looking at, chaps

[Millay]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubreviews/35845/

I think Diva's in Guildford needs a looking at, chaps

Why? If the pub/bar is to be included on PuG then we should expect, and maybe be thankful, that people are reviewing it, good or bad. The ownerrs have identified themselves as such and refuted previous claims, I see nothing wrong in that. They even appear to have recruited a couple of new PuG members to leave, albeit maybe biased, reviews.

There may be some fears that PuG reviews will end up with the flame wars that we have seen elsewhere but surely that is no reason to start deleting reviews and pubs just because they don't correspond with what some of us would wish.

I have no problem with members bringing these issues to the attention of Conrad and Dave but I would hate it if they felt that they had to react to the wishes of a few, albeit active, members. This is a pub review site and it relies on activity.

[Conrad]

I think we need to bring a new rule to this thread whereby you mention what you want done and for what reason. I am not always sure.

Bit late at the moment and it looks like it will cope until I have a chance to chat with Dave tomorrow, but there are 2 things with Diva's, the less important is to just check that the owner is not using multiple identities (different writing styles make me think not). The other is to possibly delete the complaint - it is the sort of thing that is better suited to Police (public indecency) or Environmental Health (lack of cleanliness) and as such the sort of thing that opens us to litigation, I have to admit I am inclined towards that again as it is a 1-drop complainer as well.

If all is as it appears though I think the owner has dealt with it admirably.

[sheffield hatter]

I agree the owner appears to have dealt with it admirably. However, if you delete the original nasty review (which smacks of ignorance and homophobia) it will make the subsequent responses kinda meaningless, so I would be inclined to leave all the reviews in place.

I agree also with your comment about being specific. If we think something needs fixing, we should say what and why. Your job must be hard enough without having to try to guess where we're coming from. :)

[oldboots]

Just to add my two pennyworth, I can see exactly where Soupy is coming from, as Millay says we do fear "flame wars" and if they get to a certain level Conrad and Dave should just delete the whole series of posts. However in general I think all reviews should stand unless they are obscene, potentionally libellous, or are disguised adverts. I'll put up with a few "nuff said"s, bad spelling, worse grammer and even misplaced apostrophes:D.

[Conrad]

Right well upon discussion, we have decided that the review left by Sarah Davis was unsuitable and would have been deleted had anyone requested it (or we had spotted it). So with that in mind we have amended it so that the text is now gone, the stub is still there though so that it is obvious that the new reviews are replying to something that we have removed.

Edit: Just in case any one was wondering as well, the evidence suggests that all the replies are by different users rather than multiple accounts, so well done to the owner for rallying such support and handling it.

[Soup Dragon]

Just to add my two pennyworth, I can see exactly where Soupy is coming from, as Millay says we do fear "flame wars" and if they get to a certain level Conrad and Dave should just delete the whole series of posts. However in general I think all reviews should stand unless they are obscene, potentionally libellous, or are disguised adverts. I'll put up with a few "nuff said"s, bad spelling, worse grammer and even misplaced apostrophes:D.

I completely agree with Millay, in that we don't want to get over-protective and I don't object at all to people complaining as long as it sticks to complaining about crap beer, or a miserable landlord - indeed, i am about to review the Robin Hood in Willenhall that has a little disagreement going on at the moment. I do object though if it goes beyong complaining at gets into being viscious, or things that may have legal ramifications.

In future i will offer my reasons and a suggested course of action, as requested. Further, i think it also makes a complete mockery of the rating system - which i do not use. When one person rates it as a 1 and the others, as 10 - excepting for the owner that gave it an 8!

[Conrad]

In future i will offer my reasons and a suggested course of action, as requested. Further, i think it also makes a complete mockery of the rating system - which i do not use. When one person rates it as a 1 and the others, as 10 - excepting for the owner that gave it an 8!
So there is a way of viewing the rating system that is not mockery?

I'm still awaiting the request to make it out of 11 :whistle:

[Soup Dragon]

So there is a way of viewing the rating system that is not mockery?

I'm still awaiting the request to make it out of 11 :whistle:

That would be daft - but i think you should allow ½'s and ¼'s:muppet:

[Farway]

Bit OT, but I like Hondo's new reviews, is it damming with faint praise I wonder?

Standard beers, pub has dart board Love it, concise a to the point

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/48891/

[ROBCamra]

Bit OT, but I like Hondo's new reviews, is it damming with faint praise I wonder?

Standard beers, pub has dart board Love it, concise a to the point

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/48891/

Hondo? Concise? Surely not. :D

[Conrad]

As a point of interest Diva's are now promoting us off their Facebook page (http://www.facebook.com/pages/DIVAS-Bar-Guildford/115519208468855) :)

[Soup Dragon]

what happened to the Robin Hood, Willenhall reviews?

[Conrad]

I am not sure I want to know.

It is one that is evolving.

D C left a review that deserved to be removed, and we would have done had it been reported. It was basically a rant at the landlord, nothing that actually crossed the line, but not what I would call a review.

Tog Isaacs left a review that countered the D C review, but only had one line about the pub, was just saying that the D C review was rubbish, still not a review, but nothing wrong with it beyond that.

Andy Vaughan left a review that countered the D C review, got a little personal about D C, a little more about the pub, but most was a counter to the D C review. Again not really a review and also personal comments, not too bad, but not what I want.

Andy Vaughan sent us feedback to tell us that the D C review should be removed and quoted our terms and conditions at us (please don't do that, it is very irritating) and basically told us that any review that anyone disagreed with should be removed. At this point I have still not read this.

D C removes his review.

I read Andy Vaughan's Feedback and purge the 2 replies that are now replying to nothing, had I had the opportunity I would have also purged D C's review.

D C has since been in and left a more balanced review that is not just a ranting letter of complaint. I still don't like it as I saw his initial review, but can see nothing wrong with it to cause a deletion sadly.

I am guessing it is a case of watch this space (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/39112/).

[Farway]

Conrad, reading the above I do not envy your task trying to steer a line between reviews and rants, rather you than me and well done for at least not going round and murdering someone [tongue in cheek, not an invitation to slaughter]

:notworthy::notworthy::notworthy:

[Conrad]

I have to admit, with some of these you just end up feeling a little vindictive. All of these people are just dropping one review as well, very tedious.

I forgot to mention that upon deleting Andy Vaughan's review I did invite him to leave a review of the pub since he seemed to have good things to say underneath the venom. Of course now D C has dropped another review in between this could just escalate again.

I guess at least it gives us something to look at, at work :).

[Conrad]

Ah well it is continuing invisibly in the background. D C has proceeded to make a number of what look like good reviews in the broad area (as in it doesn't seem to be an attempt to push people to local competitors), I have to admit I think D C is doing an excellent job with the exception of his bizarre initial review.

We have however now received feedback from a member who we assume is the publican (has not deemed it worthy of mention in either the review or the feedback) asking us to delete D C's review as it is misleading.

We have refused on the grounds that D C's current review is subjective.

One suspects this is still not over :(

[ROBCamra]

I have to admit I think D C is doing an excellent job :(

Having been in 3 and reviewed 2 of the 6 pubs he has reviewed I suspect we're looking for different things in a pub.

I'm tempted to try and go to the Robin Hood one day as I suspect I'll like it, simply because he doesn't. :p

[Conrad]

Having been in 3 and reviewed 2 of the 6 pubs he has reviewed I suspect we're looking for different things in a pub.

I'm tempted to try and go to the Robin Hood one day as I suspect I'll like it, simply because he doesn't. :p
That is definitely fair enough though, I really want to try and make the site more about reviewers. As you say it is all about what you are looking for in a pub.

Maybe we should do an Amazon-esque "Reviewers who liked this pub, also liked" ;)

[ROBCamra]

That is definitely fair enough though

It certainly is (even though I suspect he's marked one of my reviews as unhelpful :))

We all know people who frequent pubs called something like "The Scabby Bucket" who think their local is the best pub in the world. :confused:

This is of course possibly because they've been barred from all the decent local establishments. :p

[Evil Gazebo]

A review ticking all the boxes here (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/63021/)

One-drop poster … check.
BLOCK CAPITALS throughout … check.
Barely comprehensible grasp of the English language … check.
Incoherent ranting … check.

She didn’t leave a rating, however, so it’s difficult to judge what her overall impression was.

[Rex_Rattus]

And aberrant apostrophes as well! But seriously, what do you think Conrad should do about it? It's critical of the meal, but it's not abusive or racist, and nor does it allege anything illegal. I would leave it up.

[Evil Gazebo]

And aberrant apostrophes as well! But seriously, what do you think Conrad should do about it? It's critical of the meal, but it's not abusive or racist, and nor does it allege anything illegal. I would leave it up.

Yeah, fair enough. I'm not necessarily arguing for its removal, it's just the kind of review which annoys me, and doesn't - in my opinion - add much of worth. Only my opinion, though.

[Rex_Rattus]

it's just the kind of review which annoys me, and doesn't - in my opinion - add much of worth. Only my opinion, though.

Mine as well. We do see some naff reviews on here, and this is a prime example.

[Soup Dragon]

We do see some naff reviews on here.

Perhaps we should have a Naff Reviews Committee:p

I have had to start sticking emoticons on, or people take me seriously!:D

[Conrad]

The problem I have with these sort of review is that it is clearly rubbish, but fairly harmless. As soon as I delete it the poster gets an email saying 'Complaint not a review of the pub', (or whatever excuse I can come up with).

This then tends to go one of 2 ways an escalating cycle of deletions until they are banned, or they leave a ridiculously prejudiced review of the pub that we have no good reason to delete.

I am happy enough to delete it though.

[ROBCamra]

Perhaps we should have a Naff Reviews Committee:p

I have had to start sticking emoticons on, or people take me seriously!:D

Damn, I was just about to volunteer for that committee as well. :p

[Farway]

I'd leave it as harmless rant, most casual readers would I assume take it as just that

Shame looks like a nice pub from the outside

[Al 10000]

[QUOTE=Farway;26227]I'd leave it as harmless rant, most casual readers would I assume take it as just that

I dont think so Farway some people who i know have used this site to look for opening times or if a pub does food if they read that review then nobody would have a meal in that pub again,it may have been a bad meal but most eating establishments have sent out bad meals at one time or another and if they get a review like that as the saying goes mud sticks.

[Soup Dragon]

Damn, I was just about to volunteer for that committee as well. :p

I suggest you and DC, ROB - stand back and light the touch paper!

[sheffield hatter]

I don't think deletion is the answer to rants like this. As has been said, the quality of the writing gives the reader a good idea of what the customer is like. The solution is to get someone to do another review. This is what I did at the Miltons Head and the Old Clubhouse, both in Buxton, for example, where someone lodged a complaint, sorry, posted a review and gave these quite decent pubs a ridiculously low rating. I tried to redress the balance by writing a reasonably worded review and giving a rating that would bring the average up a bit. I don't know how much attention users pay to ratings, probably not much, but a well-written review to balance the rant is surely better than deleting anything that the Naff Reviews Committee doesn't like.

[Conrad]

I have just taken a bit more of a look at that review. It is one posted using a Facebook membership, which I felt it might be due to some of the personalisation of the wording, I suspect as much as anything they just wanted a moan on their wall that their friends would see.

As to the content it is a fairly bulk standard thing, we see moans about roasts every week and frequently it is the case that it will be an older generation doing the moaning (as indeed this one is). I do suspect part of it is that the expectations of roasts has changed quite a bit in the last 10-20 years.

I think it is fair game for deletion, so if anyone wants it deleted feel free to say so and give the reason you would give the member leaving the review.

[sheffield hatter]

Conrad,

I know it's an ugly thing, but it's a review. You said elsewhere that you hope to stimulate other reviews, that's one of the aims of the website. If you delete everything that displeases, there's no stimulus there for anyone to respond to.

I agree that the nasty piece of homophobia that was recently scrubbed deserved binning - your solution of leaving a stub to show what had prompted the subsequent favourable reviews was spot on. This latest example is nowhere near being in the same category.

Deletion should be reserved for reviews that can be shown to be factually inaccurate, obscene or potentially the subject of litigation, in my view. Apart from anything else, it's easier for you to explain to the contributor why you were compelled to delete their review if you can quote one of the above reasons (which is not meant to be a complete list, by the way).

I'd be interested to see other views on this. If most contributors feel that badly written rants like this should go, I'd be happy to go along with the majority. But you've got to be able to give the ranter a good reason for deleting their review, something that they can look at and say, "oh yes, I see what you mean".

[Farway]

As you will see from my earlier posting on this review, I agree entirely with SH, it is a review, it is certainly not a glowing one, but if the trend is going to be no rants about food / service / beer / parking etc then the site will become like QVC, never finds anything wrong with any item, except maybe a lowly mention of twigs that offend the eyes of some ;) or only serves lager

[Soup Dragon]

As you will see from my earlier posting on this review, I agree entirely with SH, it is a review, it is certainly not a glowing one, but if the trend is going to be no rants about food / service / beer / parking etc then the site will become like QVC, never finds anything wrong with any item, except maybe a lowly mention of twigs that offend the eyes of some ;) or only serves lager

I do agree with you both, the moot point is when does a rant become abuse, or a twig, a branch?;)

[Conrad]

When they only have 1 review ;)

[Conrad]

And in the ongoing saga of the Robin Hood, anonymous feedback:

comment: Dear Administrator to this web site, may I request that you remove your comments in your forum regarding DC as you mentioned the question was asked by someone about what has happened to the reviews for the Robin Hood he did not ask for you to discuss events regarding Andy Vaughan Tog Isaacs having no need for you to mention the deleted comments that DC left, I feel that you need to remove this with no question as it is irrelevant to mention why you have deleted it as you claim your personal opinion only prolongs what you have deleted to be further questioned in the forum area by the named and other inquisitive people, I feel that it should of been said that there was inappropriate wording within that subsequently as the administrator felt we had to remove reviews. The slate would then be cleaned for no further comments or questions I have since left your website and wish you the very best name removed

I value your commentsThe name that was removed is one of the players in this saga, but their data on accessing the site suggests they are using a different computer to that used before, so it could well be someone trying to pass themselves off. For the record though you need to include an email address if you want a reply, on the offchance you read it here, my response is:

Firstly I am not clear on what you are asking. But we will not be deleting any posts from our forum, this is a community run website where we actively try to give the community a hand in how the site is run. This includes decisions on what content is reasonable to accept, on the site they donate so much time to improve. Also there is no information available on the forum which is not available on the pubs audit page which shows all activity that has taken place against the venue:
http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/reports/pubactivity.php?pub=39112

Sorry we can’t be of help on this occasion,

Conrad
Galore Network Admin team

[Farway]

Conrad, sometimes you must just idly wish that the "friendly bombs" would fall elsewhere than on Slough ;)

[Conrad]

Conrad, sometimes you must just idly wish that the "friendly bombs" would fall elsewhere than on Slough ;)
I would never think that sort of thing, I am a nice person.

:whistle:

[Maldenman]

Not sure whether this one has been looked at but it is not a review as far as I am concerned and the web link is listed already on the page. Having said that I suppose it doesn't do any harm.

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/35965/

[Conrad]

Not sure whether this one has been looked at but it is not a review as far as I am concerned and the web link is listed already on the page. Having said that I suppose it doesn't do any harm.

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/35965/
Certainly not a show stopper, but a waste of space.

Now gone, thanks for that.

[Maldenman]

Another iffy one.

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/61698/

[Dave M]

Another iffy one.

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/61698/

Thanks for that, had to go.

[aleandhearty]

Looks like The Foxhill, Oswaldtwistle is the place to be:

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/16958/

Four reviews today and all with a score of ten! I'd love to know the licensee's name above the door and the realtionship between Robert Berry and the Shorrocks. Not so much a case of smelling a rat, more like send for the Pied Piper...

[Evil Gazebo]

Does anyone know if they have something to suit everyone's taste?

[Conrad]

Looks like The Foxhill, Oswaldtwistle is the place to be:

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/16958/

Four reviews today and all with a score of ten! I'd love to know the licensee's name above the door and the realtionship between Robert Berry and the Shorrocks. Not so much a case of smelling a rat, more like send for the Pied Piper...
There is a new rule in this thread that you have to tell me what you want to do about it.

The landladies name is Sarah Shurrock, so she has posted 2 reviews (under different names) and presumably got her sister in law to post a review as well. Robert Berry would appear to just be a friend who spotted their comments on Facebook and decided to join in.

Nothing there that particularly worries me. If it is just for amusement chuck it in one of the other review threads in chit chat (sorry if that comes across as catty, but this thread confuses the heck out of me).

Also think yourself lucky that you don't have to see the pictures, we particularly like the one of 4 people smoking in the stairwell :o

[aleandhearty]

There is a new rule in this thread that you have to tell me what you want to do about it....Nothing there that particularly worries me. If it is just for amusement chuck it in one of the other review threads in chit chat (sorry if that comes across as catty, but this thread confuses the heck out of me).



Hi Conrad. I've not been on the boards for a while, so I guess it was just a soft target for my pent up cynicism! I agree there's nothing particularly worrying, but this just seemed like the obvious thread to pass comment. I understand what they're trying to do, but it's not exactly subtle. (For comments I found genuinely offensive I would always suggest a reasoned action.)

[Conrad]

I am trying to pare this thread back to just reviews to be deleted. Other review threads are: Oh dear, self promotion FAIL (http://forums.pubsgalore.co.uk/showthread.php?2549-Oh-dear-self-promotion-FAIL) & Self Promotion - Success (http://forums.pubsgalore.co.uk/showthread.php?3840-Self-Promotion-Success). Now let me think about which one this belongs in ;).

Hope you are well! I had noticed you were on less.

[aleandhearty]

Now let me think about which one this belongs in ;).

Hope you are well! I had noticed you were on less.

:D I'm a lot better thanks. Meeting 'ob' and 'ROB' tomorrow for the NWAF. That should certainly flush away any residual toxins!

[ROBCamra]

:D I'm a lot better thanks. Meeting 'ob' and 'ROB' tomorrow for the NWAF. That should certainly flush away any residual toxins!

And add quite a variety of different ones I suspect!! :p

[Al 10000]

Hi Conrad,

Sorry to bother you on this thread but i have just read the latest review of the Waterloo in Stockport does this review add any value to this site, i think not.

Alan.

PS I did'nt know which of the other threads on this subject i should have put this on.

[Conrad]

Hi Alan,

The choice of thread is up to you. But I am trying to get it so that only reviews that should be deleted are posted in this thread, and if you want a review deleted then a reason for that deletion should be given.

Specifically for The Waterloo (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/53618/) in Stockport, the review adds no value whatsoever, but it also doesn't really do any harm. I am happy enough to let it stand, with a bit of luck it will motivate someone more coherent to actually do a review.

[Soup Dragon]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/16336/

just how much do these people (this person?) want to complain??????

[Farway]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/16336/

just how much do these people (this person?) want to complain??????

Looks to me they are all getting what they paid for, buy one get one free all for £6.95, I do wonder what folk expect at under £3.50 for an all you eat carvery, Gordon f******g Ramsey?

Actually if GFR was serving there it would make great tele as he set about the customers who complain at stringy meat & tasteless gravy for £3.50

[Conrad]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/16336/

just how much do these people (this person?) want to complain??????
And you want me to do what about it? :p

I love those sort of reviews (not so much that I want them on the site).


I hate this place and no one should go there
When I went back for some reason they still gave me terrible service

I bet that learnt the pub! ;)

To be fair I guess Pavlov did do his experiments on dogs :whistle:

[Evil Gazebo]

Here’s an easy one (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/56290/) (it amuses me that he bothered to leave a rating).

[Conrad]

Here’s an easy one (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/56290/) (it amuses me that he bothered to leave a rating).
Just a bit, now deleted.

Thanks for that.

[Soup Dragon]

And you want me to do what about it? :p



I want you to take over the place and either improve the flaming food, or stop :muppet:'s from going in!!!!!!

[Conrad]

I want you to take over the place and either improve the flaming food, or stop :muppet:'s from going in!!!!!!
I think that if I take it over then we can guarantee at least 1 :muppet: there. As to improving food, Pot Noodles all round, at least I should be able to steal the Wetherspoon's crowd (reference to my comment on another thread).

[Farway]

Allegations of wacky baccy smoking

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/42149/

[Conrad]

Allegations of wacky baccy smoking

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/42149/
Now removed, thanks.

[oldboots]

Allegations of two types of illegal behaviour at this pub (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/29389/)

and

he alludes to it again in the review of a neighbouring pub (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/29381/).

[ROBCamra]

Allegations of two types of illegal behaviour at this pub (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/29389/)

and

he alludes to it again in the review of a neighbouring pub (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/29381/).

I'm surprised you didn't pick him up for the grammar as well. "They was going to come in for a drink." :D

I think you need to check these out OB as they're on your doorstep. :cheers: (just noticed that you are doing)

[oldboots]

I'm surprised you didn't pick him up for the grammar as well. "They was going to come in for a drink." :D

I think you need to check these out OB as they're on your doorstep. :cheers:

I was coming in for a drink in that village last night and I noticed the review before I added my own effort. It looks like a local dialect form of words the bloke is using /reporting and to be fair there's only two apostrophe catastrophes in the three reviews, oh and a couple of capitalization errors. On the other hand the meaning is clear. :D

[Conrad]

Allegations of two types of illegal behaviour at this pub (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/29389/)

and

he alludes to it again in the review of a neighbouring pub (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/29381/).
Ok, first one gone, as you say shouldn't be there. Second one was a bit more awkward, whilst there was no real review in there I still felt some sympathy for part of the message, so I ended up heavily editing it down to remove the innuendo about the first pub, I do wonder if I should have just deleted it given I deleted half of it.

Thanks for pointing those out.

[ROBCamra]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/61433/

Not a review just a whinge and a bunch of unsubstantiated allegations. One to remove I think.

[Conrad]

I don't know, I always enjoy reading a bill of rights :).

Probably for the best to remove it though as you say, now gone.

[aleandhearty]

Hi Conrad

I don't think this rant from a once only poster adds anything to the Barnes Wallis Inn, North Howden:

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/55797/


Cheers.

[Conrad]

Now deleted. Galling if true however.

Edit: Sorry forgot to say, thanks for pointing that one out a&h.

[aleandhearty]

Galling if true however.

Agreed. However, he'd posted the same review verbatim on 'the dark side' and not expanded it beyond the allegation there either. (One time reviewer there also.) We'll never know.

[Brewguru]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/60581/

Not sure if its worth deleting as the obvious repetition of the comments shows his bias

[Conrad]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/60581/

Not sure if its worth deleting as the obvious repetition of the comments shows his bias
I have no problem with that, by doing it twice as you say they have clearly shown their bias.

[Al 10000]

Hi Conrad,

Having just read the latest review of the Oddfellows Arms in Chester by W.Eyton do you think this is a serious review or a P*** take.

Cheers Alan.

[Maldenman]

I think it is essential reading, pure quality!

[Conrad]

Personally I just think it is someone who can't hold their drink.

They are a Facebook user and I think mixing up how to use the sites. Not particularly bothered at the moment, will delete it if people are particularly bothered, but as happy to wait for him to just get bored.

[ROBCamra]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/20709/

Allegations of drug taking from a one post poster. Probably a remove or at least an edit.

[Conrad]

Deleted that one now. Shame really they were relatively coherent, now if they would just review a pub they liked.

[Farway]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/16918/

Bit of slagging off, good reply from landlord, but with his e-mail address so maybe remove the address?

[Conrad]

I was actually fairly ok with all of that until we noticed that he had gotten his email address wrong. So ended up just deleting both reviews.

Thanks for that.

[aleandhearty]

Hi Conrad

This place has limited access and for my money is against the spirit of the site. The first two lines of the review sum it up nicely. Delete entry?

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/62686/

[sheffield hatter]

If it's open to Camra members, as the previous review mentions, I'd say it should remain an entry, but the latest plug makes no mention of this. Perhaps Conrad could enquire whether this concession still applies?

[Conrad]

I don't think I care enough to enquire. I am inclined to delete it on the basis of the latest review, I take it no one actually knows the history of the place though? It is an odd conjunction of reviews.

I have to admit on reflection even if it was open to CAMRA members I would be inclined to delete it, not quite sure what makes CAMRA support better than showing sports on TV.

[aleandhearty]

If it's open to Camra members, as the previous review mentions, I'd say it should remain an entry, but the latest plug makes no mention of this. Perhaps Conrad could enquire whether this concession still applies?

Having read James Joines' review ( which I admittedly overlooked) I've softened my stance a little, but with three years in between reviews it probably needs clarifying. I know we're both CAMRA members, but casual visitors shouldn't have to jump through hoops to gain entry.

[Farway]

I read the review yesterday and thought then it should be removed, and as a non CAMRA member, and also someone who is extremely unlikely to ever be near the place, or even in the county I still think it should be removed

As has been done to death on the forum, the general consensus of a pub is somewhere any member of the public can walk in off the street & buy an alcoholic drink, without need to buy food, join CAMRA, hang around outside to find someone willing to sign them in etc

Or shall we now include all British Legions, RAFA or RNA clubs? Open to ex servicemen but not Joe Public or CAMRA members unless signed in by member

[Conrad]

Or shall we now include all British Legions, RAFA or RNA clubs? Open to ex servicemen but not Joe Public or CAMRA members unless signed in by member
I have always liked the idea of showing the British Legions myself, as you say we have yet to come up with a good definition of what a pub is.

[Al 10000]

I have always liked the idea of showing the British Legions myself, as you say we have yet to come up with a good definition of what a pub is.

I thought Pub was short for Public House and a Public House is open for anyone aged 18 or over to have drink without signing in,paying a fee or buying a meal.

[Conrad]

I thought Pub was short for Public House and a Public House is open for anyone aged 18 or over to have drink without signing in,paying a fee or buying a meal.
Ok, what I actually meant to say was, we have yet to come up with a good definition of what an acceptable building is that we allow to be listed on Pubs Galore.

Maybe you want to join in on this thread (http://forums.pubsgalore.co.uk/showthread.php?560-What-should-be-included-on-PG), that was the last good outing this issue had if I remember.

[shoggie]

The brookside Commecial club in, south elmsall. Has been listed on this site for some time now, but suddenly gets removed.

I understand the site is a community maintained site however think removing it is a bit unfair.

The 1st revue that was on was many years old and mentioned it was a members club. But it had not been removed then.

Also if you search for social club or working mans club it brings up quite a few
are they going to be removed as well?

Just becouse it is a members social club does not mean it is off limits to the public they can easly get in by being signed in. It is also a CIU affiliated so anyone who is affiliated can gain entry, also if you are a serving member of HMF or a Cameron's Member.

On top of that compaired to some of the normal pubs you have in the area it is also a place you can enjoy a drink, dance to a disco or watch a live band for free knowing there will be no trouble.

Sky sports don't exclude it from ther web site as a place you can watch 3D sports so why should Pubs Galore.

I think the atitude to Members clubs is now becoming a bit arcaice with todays affares and so many pubs shutting down why not mention theses sort of places. The only reasone why they have a membership base is its down to licence laws and trying to change is ni on impossible

[aleandhearty]

Hi 'shoggie'.

Welcome to the site. As I was the one who suggested the Brookside for deletion, maybe it should be me who explains why. On another thread (which i've just bumped) it was debated at length what should be included on PuG. The majority at the time felt that any clubs that required membership should not be eligible for listing. However, as one or two were in favour of social clubs being included, I've suggested we debate it again.

The reason the original review probably wasn't commented on at the time is because the site is now a lot busier, with more active members. With all new reviews accessed from the front page, any queries are picked up quite quickly.

[shoggie]

Hi

Thanks for the reply please keep me informed of if this subject is debated again so I may join in

Thanks

[aleandhearty]

Hi

Thanks for the reply please keep me informed of if this subject is debated again so I may join in

Thanks

If you click on the 'Chit Chat' section, on the forum page, you should see 'What should be included on PG?', on the menu. Feel free to add your two penn'orth!

[Millay]

Assuming this review has come through on the Twitter feed could I suggest it goes back there.

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/26301/

Thanks

[Conrad]

Facebook, but same difference, shouldn't be there and no longer is.

Thanks for that.

[ROBCamra]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/38394/

I think the last one here needs to go away as well. Obviously an ex disgruntled member of staff.

[Strongers]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/38394/

I think the last one here needs to go away as well. Obviously an ex disgruntled member of staff.

The one by J Horton is very depressing as I have a brother that I love very much, but I’m unsure why the last review is obviously from an ex disgruntled member of staff.

[ROBCamra]

The one by J Horton is very depressing as I have a brother that I love very much, but I’m unsure why the last review is obviously from an ex disgruntled member of staff.

The one I was referring to has already gone. Whether removed by Conrad/Dave or a rethink by the reviewer I don't know. :)

[Blackthorn]

I don't think Marnie Yaz's review adds anything particularly useful -

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/22231/

[Strongers]

The one I was referring to has already gone. Whether removed by Conrad/Dave or a rethink by the reviewer I don't know. :)

That explains it... I thought that you had some insider knowledge!

[Farway]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/38394/

I think the last one here needs to go away as well. Obviously an ex disgruntled member of staff.

Have to agree with Strongers, unless of course there were two posts & the ex staff one has been removed already. Otherwise a fair enough review of poor and rude service

PS, just noticed last review date was Nov 2010, so I assume the one Rob was on about has gone

[Evil Gazebo]

The one I was referring to has already gone. Whether removed by Conrad/Dave or a rethink by the reviewer I don't know. :)

It was removed by an admin - you can click the page activity (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/reports/pubactivity.php?pub=38394) box, and bring up when reviews, pictures etc were added/deleted, and by whom.

In this case, the contributor in question added a review on 15th march, then deleted it immediately, and a few days later added the one referred to above before it was deleted following Rob's original post on here.

[ROBCamra]

It was removed by an admin - you can click the page activity (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/reports/pubactivity.php?pub=38394) box, and bring up when reviews, pictures etc were added/deleted, and by whom.

In this case, the contributor in question added a review on 15th march, then deleted it immediately, and a few days later added the one referred to above before it was deleted following Rob's original post on here.

So you can. You learn something every day. :notworthy:

I think I'll go for a rest after all that education. :D

[Farway]

Add me to the learn something everday list, thanks EG

[Conrad]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/38394/

I think the last one here needs to go away as well. Obviously an ex disgruntled member of staff.

It was removed by an admin - you can click the page activity (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/reports/pubactivity.php?pub=38394) box, and bring up when reviews, pictures etc were added/deleted, and by whom.

In this case, the contributor in question added a review on 15th march, then deleted it immediately, and a few days later added the one referred to above before it was deleted following Rob's original post on here.
It was indeed me, in a rush and I just made a mental note to post it next time I was on the forum, which is now. Thanks for that EG.


I don't think Marnie Yaz's review adds anything particularly useful -

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/22231/
I can't see any reason to delete it, and as one of the original purposes of the site was to allow old pub friends to link up it is actually fairly legitimate (may even be why it was posted given the age of the review).

[Farway]

Allegations of theft

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/16141/

[Conrad]

Thanks Farway, removed that element of the review.

[Al 10000]

Hi Conrad,

I think you should have a look at the review of Bar Liquorice by Robert Reid

[Farway]

Hi Conrad,

I think you should have a look at the review of Bar Liquorice by Robert Reid

Agreed, possible dash of racism in there

Richard Reid (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/16145/) certainly takes no prisoners in his reviews, but some are glowing so not just an angry man who finds grotty pubs

[Conrad]

Yeah we have been debating it in the background, now deleted. I am inclined to think it wasn't racist unless someone wanted to interpret it that way, as someone who thinks political correctness can go a little too far I choose to not interpret it that way :). Other elements of the review went too far though, and it was hard to edit the review in a balanced manner, so now gone. Hopefully Robert Reid won't take offence as he is doing a balance of reviews rather than rants for rants sake.

[ROBCamra]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/16206/

Last review is an advert not a review. Delete I think.

[Pubsignman]

And the rest...

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/userinfo.php?name=JAS007

[ROBCamra]

And the rest...

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/userinfo.php?name=JAS007

Indeed, he's been a busy boy. :muppet::muppet:

I caught his first one as I checked his contributions at the time to make sure he hadn't done any more. :p

[Conrad]

They did indeed multiply quite quickly. Thanks for that allowed me to block them before they caused too much annoyance. They also complained that they couldn't leave reviews after I blocked them :rolleyes:.

[ROBCamra]

They did indeed multiply quite quickly. Thanks for that allowed me to block them before they caused too much annoyance. They also complained that they couldn't leave reviews after I blocked them :rolleyes:.

Like I said. :muppet::muppet:

[ROBCamra]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/19107/

A couple of very old reviews that are just a spat rather than reviews. Probably better off without them?

[Conrad]

We probably are better off without those reviews, but as soon as we delete them the reviewers are informed we have deleted their reviews. I can live with them rather than encourage the posters to come and leave new ones.

We are thinking about disabling emails if someone has been inactive for over a year, but that is a piece of work that is some way off at the moment.

[Farway]

Not quite sure on this one (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/1956/), comment about overcharging on credit card by a first time poster

[Conrad]

Was borderline in that what they actually said wasn't necessarily illegal, but given they were using a pseudonym and had nothing useful to say it was a definite delete, and now gone.

Thanks for that.

[oldboots]

I'm not sure about this one (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/41013/), it has the look of a vendetta, I've only been to the pub once so I can only comment that my experience was unlike these one stop negative reviewers. If they are all unrelated, poorly served punters then fair enough but if there is any proof of naughtiness it is undesirable.

[Conrad]

Hmmm, well the composition of some of those reviews is similar, the Columbo review, all going smoothly until the end where they have just one more question which seals the case.

From an IT perspective though not really, 3 different locations used, and the 2 that used the same location used different devices, so clearly a word of mouth issue in there.

I think we need to come up with some way of pointing out someone has left only 1 review in a similar way to the over a year old thing. Don't want to be as negative as the year old is, but want it highly visible.

[Farway]

I think we need to come up with some way of pointing out someone has left only 1 review in a similar way to the over a year old thing. Don't want to be as negative as the year old is, but want it highly visible.

Does not the [User has posted 1 recommendations about 1 pubs]
give a clue here? Maybe it could be in bolder type / colour?

Thus 395 reviews of 390 pubs posted by User are also highlighted, as is the 1 review

Readers can draw their own conclusions then

[Old Blue]

Agree entirely with Farway, the review count speaks for itself and if anything making it slightly more prominent would help. Though I don't think it actually needs that. I suspect the alternative of somehow demoting the status of single posters could have unintended consequences, e.g. ranters posting another review to get out of it (and possibly a positive one of somewhere else to conceal their motives).

[Conrad]

If you want to debate this, please start a new thread as this wont be being seen by everyone, and I would rather it is not coming up as work for me to do (in the that doesn't go there forum).

Edit: New thread created here (http://forums.pubsgalore.co.uk/showthread.php?7007-Reviewer-reputation).

[ROBCamra]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/69075/

Claims of racism.

[Conrad]

http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/69075/

Claims of racism.
Removed, thanks for that.

[Farway]

Fountain Inn Chichester (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/39466/)

There is no easy way to say this, and I do not for one minute doubt regular reviewer Old Blue on the probable cause of his dodgy tum, I believe him, but is it just opening up possible hate mails from publican?

Perhaps a "may" or "could have" inserted could help?

Apologies again Old Blue, no offence meant, we seem to follow each other around, Plymouth a fortnight ago, Chichester now

[Old Blue]

Fountain Inn Chichester (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/39466/)

There is no easy way to say this, and I do not for one minute doubt regular reviewer Old Blue on the probable cause of his dodgy tum, I believe him, but is it just opening up possible hate mails from publican?

Perhaps a "may" or "could have" inserted could help?

Apologies again Old Blue, no offence meant, we seem to follow each other around, Plymouth a fortnight ago, Chichester now

No need to apologise Farway. Perhaps you're right.

I did think hard about that review, and I think it's very fair - I did say I 'suspected' their burger was at fault - whereas actually I'm pretty sure it was - and I made clear I liked the pub. I don't see why a one-off bad food experience mentioned on the site in this way ought to be problematic. At one point I added "Just as well my girlfriend didn't have the burger as they'd run out of toilet roll in the ladies", but had second thoughts about that. I was actually just rying to be honest, rather than trying to make allegations.

[Conrad]

I have just removed the offending paragraph.

In isolation I have no problem with your comment, but we are making a strict policy of removing any implication of hygiene or criminality. Trip advisor were being pursued over it (must check what is happening with that one). This site earns no money, so if anyone were to litigate us then that is pretty much the end of the site as we could not even afford to defend ourselves.

The honest truth is as well, that if you think you got food poisoning there you should report it to the local environmental health.

Just to be clear Old Blue, the review was fine and I wish we could display it, but it isn't worth the risk to us.

[Farway]

I have just removed the offending paragraph.

In isolation I have no problem with your comment, but we are making a strict policy of removing any implication of hygiene or criminality. Trip advisor were being pursued over it (must check what is happening with that one). This site earns no money, so if anyone were to litigate us then that is pretty much the end of the site as we could not even afford to defend ourselves.

The honest truth is as well, that if you think you got food poisoning there you should report it to the local environmental health.

Just to be clear Old Blue, the review was fine and I wish we could display it, but it isn't worth the risk to us.

Super injunction any one? Now that would be a first for a pub / chain

[Old Blue]

Okay, thanks both, will be super-careful in future as I couldn't afford a super-injunction either.

[ROBCamra]

The Bridge Inn (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/12490/)

This review's been on here for a while but it shouldn't be. Allegations of drug use.

[Galore Admin]

Thanks ROB,

Now gone.

[ROBCamra]

The Adam & Eve (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/54575/)

Advertiser/Sales rep. Bye Bye.

[PaulOfHorsham]

The Adam & Eve (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/54575/)

Advertiser/Sales rep. Bye Bye.

I just stumbled across that one - there is, at least, no doubt that it's the manager's post although the standard of the grammar has me wondering what else may not be up to my high standards. :rolleyes:

[PaulOfHorsham]

PG front page suggests that you saw a review that has subsequently been deleted...

[Millay]

I just stumbled across that one - there is, at least, no doubt that it's the manager's post although the standard of the grammar has me wondering what else may not be up to my high standards. :rolleyes:

I thought the same thing Paul, and here's another one http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/40282/ little or no punctuation and poorly constructed.

I have no problem with people promoting their own pubs with factual information, provided they declare their interest, but to do so in such an amateurish way probably does them more harm than good. Presumably they wouldn't allow this to appear on a flyer or a newspaper advertisment so why do people think it's acceptable on the Internet.

[Farway]

I thought the same thing Paul, and here's another one http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/40282/ little or no punctuation and poorly constructed.

I have no problem with people promoting their own pubs with factual information, provided they declare their interest, but to do so in such an amateurish way probably does them more harm than good. Presumably they wouldn't allow this to appear on a flyer or a newspaper advertisment so why do people think it's acceptable on the Internet.

It does seem a trend on internet & e-mail to just type it in, no punctuation, paragraphing, white space etc.

Personally I just do read them as I consider it is not my job to decipher the message if the originator cannot be bothered to do it

My guess as to why not in flyers newspaper adverts etc is because there is a professional intermediary before publication, like a sub editor, printer etc

Like you, no problem with management puffs if obvious, which these two are

[PaulOfHorsham]

I thought the same thing Paul, and here's another one http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/40282/ little or no punctuation and poorly constructed.

Aahh - but with this one, the 'reviewer' has only awarded their pub 6/10! I'm in awe of the honesty......

[Rex_Rattus]

Just for the record - as no-one is asking Conrad to do anything about these reviews, this exchange should really be in the "Self-Promotion Fail" thread, which is for drawing other users' attention to just this sort of thing.

[ETA]

I just stumbled across that one - there is, at least, no doubt that it's the manager's post although the standard of the grammar has me wondering what else may not be up to my high standards. :rolleyes:

But it's not a review, is it? Surely that disqualifies it from being on here. Is there any way of maybe just deleting the rating so that it isn't skewed?

[oldboots]

I think everyone (except Paul of Horsham in #219) is getting a little confused here. The review ROB asked to be removed was an advert from someone selling cheap casks of beer not the existing review from the licensee. We normally allow those when it's obvious don't we, regardless the standard of literacy?

[Galore Admin]

oldboots is right, the original review pointed out by ROB (thanks for that ROB) has been removed, we just forgot to post on here we did it. It was just an advert to the trade and had no place whatsoever as a review.

Reviews by landlords are encouraged, all we ask is that they mention their relationship to the pub so that people can properly assess their review. As to the rating no we won't be stopping it from 'skewing' the average, if we do that we encourage the sort of gaming we are asking people not to do. And as has been repeatedly stated the average is a load of bull anyway so no need to expend effort on that one.

As Rex has said if there is anymore to say on this please post it on another thread.

[sheffield hatter]

This one is just a plug (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/52475/). Please delete. (I've copied their web address to where it belongs.)

Cheers

[Galore Admin]

Hi sheffield hatter,

Now gone, thanks for that.

[sheffield hatter]

There's a rather nasty one here (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/50335/) which looks libelous and should be removed.

[sheffield hatter]

Actually, don't bother, the reviewer deleted it herself at exactly the same time as my post!

[Conrad]

They did indeed, a not very bright review as you correctly say. Thanks for pointing it out.

[Farway]

The Old England (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/59218/)

"What a shit hole this pub is now" Slander, libel; or honest opinion?

Only four post by Dave Hunter, who seems to be ex publican so should know what he is talking about, and to be fair some he praises, so if Conrad / Dave object to profanity maybe just edit?

[Galore Admin]

I didn't like it but went with the edit approach in the hopes it doesn't discourage the author.

Thanks for bringing that to our attention Farway.

[aleandhearty]

Hi Conrad / Dave

I think the latest aggressive comment at The Kirkland Hotel, Outwood adds very little and is only likely to initiate a slanging match.

The Kirklands Hotel (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/41357/)

[Galore Admin]

Hi a&h,

We removed that and the one it was replying to as somehow it was from a user that has left the site, something had broken there, but I am not sure what.

Thanks for that.

[Farway]

The somewhat confusing posting by John Wild asking to be banned, seems a pointless posting and adds nothing but confusion

Golden Guinea (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/391/)

[Galore Admin]

The somewhat confusing posting by John Wild asking to be banned, seems a pointless posting and adds nothing but confusion

Golden Guinea (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/391/)
Thanks, now deleted.

[Farway]

Just a slagging (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/54723/)g off, without any details by one off poster

[Galore Admin]

Hi Farway,

Now deleted, thanks for that.

[Farway]

Publicising the landlord's conviction for child sex offence

[oldboots]

Publicising the landlord's conviction for child sex offence


I noticed that one too, but you may want to remove the pub's name from your post Farway.

[Galore Admin]

Thanks, dealt with that one now.

I've removed the links to the pub as knowing Google it'll start showing the pub if people search for child sex offence. :rolleyes:

[Farway]

Thanks, I realised I probably should have not put the pub name, but too late as I was out & about before I thought of it :eek:

[oldboots]

A couple of dodgy ones

Allegations of under age drinking[/URL]

Allegations of violence from door staff[URL="http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/66642/"] (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/18628/)

both one drop reviews and they're probably both OK without the last few words.

[Soup Dragon]

A couple of dodgy ones

Allegations of under age drinking[/URL]

Allegations of violence from door staff[URL="http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/66642/"] (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/18628/)

both one drop reviews and they're probably both OK without the last few words.


If i am reading it correctly, there were half a dozen people in the pub (6). The rewiewer, was with someone and the person who was viewing the pub (she states 'WE' were with......) that means that they account for 3 in the pub, so even if all all the others in the pub were underage it would actually mean that the majority were not underage, unless of course she, or the person she was with was under 18 as well - as one assumes that the person viewing the pub would be old enough to actually make an offer. If she mean't that half a dozen were at the bar and there were in fact lots of other people in the pub, they made not need the custom, as they are busy enough; in which case, he should buy it. Anyhow, i wonder if he made an offer?:rolleyes:

[Galore Admin]

Thanks ob,

Now both removed.

[Al 10000]

Please have a look at the Chery Tree in Canterbury, a one off reviewer has left a review that no pub deserves in my opinion.

Thanks Alan

[Galore Admin]

Hi Alan,

Absolutely right, now removed.

Thanks for that.

[Farway]

OK, we get the message (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/32654/) from Michael Bailey (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/userinfo.php?name=Michael+Bailey), he does not like the place, so the second succinct posting on same day by same person "rubish" [sic] is superfluous

[Galore Admin]

Hi Farway,

We have deleted the second, at some point if they are not going to post more reviews I may happily delete the first.

Thanks for pointing it out.