←back to thread

270 points ilamont | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.005s | source
Show context
wyldfire ◴[] No.21973326[source]
> Not all of these fake reviews are one stars – some give five star or other highly rated ratings. The catch with these highly rated reviews is many of them are created to give the false appearance that they were written by Tomlinson to raise his own Goodreads ratings, spoofing his name and photo and sometimes even using his own copyrighted writings.

Wow, that's devious. I wonder if any of the fake product reviews I've seen are obvious fake endorsements placed there by the competition.

replies(2): >>21973501 #>>21974868 #
degenerate ◴[] No.21973501[source]
This problem isn't one born with the internet. Think about all those "WE BUY HOUSES 4 CASH" signs you see at stop lights. Why can't the city simply look up the phone number on them and convict the business owner for breaking advertisement laws? Because there is no proof he put the sign there. It could be the competition trying to frame him! Thus, the signs are simply thrown out... and he can put new ones out tomorrow.
replies(5): >>21973565 #>>21974177 #>>21974243 #>>21975186 #>>21976871 #
burundi_coffee ◴[] No.21974177[source]
"Hello, I saw a sign that says you buy houses for cash, can I set up a meeting?"

"Yes, when are you available?"

> Ladies and gentlemen, we got him.

Surely can't be that hard to find out if the business owner set up that sign, right?

replies(5): >>21974209 #>>21974217 #>>21974232 #>>21974257 #>>21974671 #
drharby ◴[] No.21974217[source]
Circumstantial.

Go watch Zodiac to get an idea of how circumstantial evidence is insufficient

replies(1): >>21974600 #
1. tzs ◴[] No.21974600{3}[source]
That's a common misconception. See [1] for more.

[1] https://www.dummies.com/education/science/forensics/direct-v...

replies(1): >>21975196 #
2. drharby ◴[] No.21975196[source]
Huh - TIL