Thai defamation law and online reviews

[BadCash]

I read in a topic here that a poster was advised not to post the name of a place where he had a negative experience (he was scammed), because of supposedly "insane" defamation laws in Thailand. Several of the replies seemed to indicate that there is a substantial risk of being sued for defamation by posting a negative review of a business on Tripadvisor, Google Maps, etc. even if the review is true. Some even recommending never posting anything negative about any business in Thailand (which of course defeats some of the purpose of sites like Tripadvisor, Google Maps, hotel booking sites, etc.).

 

Are there any documented cases of this happening in Thailand?

 

Also, I found this article where a guy in the US was sued by a hotel for slandering them on Tripadvisor. So I'm wondering, what makes the defamation laws in Thailand "crazy" compared to other countries?

 

I'm a pretty active reviewer (mostly on Google Maps), and of course once in awhile you have negative experiences - sometimes even catastrophic ones. Should I be worried about posting my experiences online??

Edited November 21, 2017 by BadCash

[midas]

I'll give you an insane example of how I was threatened five years ago.

I'm an Australian and I was trying to get a consistent and regular supply of an Australian product on the shelves of one of the big supermarkets in this country.So I simply sent an email to Australia and explained that their agent in Thailand ( also Australian apparently) didn't seem to be ensuring that there was an uninterrupted supply of their product here.

After a while I received an email totally out of the blue from their Thai lawyer who was threatening me with defamation proceedings because of my email. It came to nothing but I think it was because the Australian manufacturer stuck up for me and probably told them to back off.

But it's a very uncomfortable feeling when you receive such a threatening email. But that shows how this law is being abused in this country.

[tifino]

 

I've never had any qualms in saying it how it is, and the Reviews I did on Booking.com are still there 3 years later...

 

missus was at the time worried from what I wrote;

but realised I was simply sticking up for her, in a logical/calm manner... 

 - for her being treated at the breakfast buffet, as if she were one of those other bargirls sitting nearby...

 

by the next day, missus is instead fuming/scheming -  she's gunna put a spell on the old staffgirl concerned, hoping a job will be lost

[Jeffrey346]

People complain about Thai vs Foreigner pricing.. Though I have never had an issue a read about complaints about Lazada. Haven't heard of any Attorney letters or law suits.

Keep in mind, free speech seems to be a myth...

The bottom line.. anyone can sue anyone

[dotpoom]

I listen to my local "phone in" programme from back home daily (Western Europe). As you might imagine, a lot of the callers are complaining about something or other.

  The most frequently used remark by the show's host is..."please don't mention any names".

   So I guess it's not just Thailand.

[TomAikins]

The Thai police could care less what is written on TripAdvisor or other sites unless it's a lese majeste situation. I know. I complained about TripAdvisor reviews and got nowhere.

[BadCash]

1 hour ago, dotpoom said:

I listen to my local "phone in" programme from back home daily (Western Europe). As you might imagine, a lot of the callers are complaining about something or other.

  The most frequently used remark by the show's host is..."please don't mention any names".

   So I guess it's not just Thailand.

I always thought that was because they're not allowed to give any unfair advantage/disadvantage to commercial businesses on public radio? At least where I'm from the radio hosts will be quick to add "and there are of course many other companies selling XYZ" if some caller mentions a business by name. It got real funny a few years back when radio shows started having their own Facebook pages - for a while they were like "visit us on that big social network site - but remember that there are other sites like it as well" ? 

 

I think they've either changed the regulations or found a loophole by now though, because now they tell you to go to Facebook, Twitter and whatnot at the end of most shows....

Edited November 22, 2017 by BadCash

[rufanuf]

You perhaps ought to be asking yourself a different question. Why would you wish to post negative reviews about a business? Would it not be simpler simply to vote with your feet and never return? There's an old saying that goes "If you haven't got something positive to say, don't say anything at all."  Its conventional wisdom that proceeds the internet by about ten thousand years, and generally is the right way to deal with society.

 

If your a business owner and you have had ANY negative reviews on these pathetic websites you would feel as though it is grossly unfair if you are simply doing your best to make your way in the world. I actually don't think Thai defamation laws are insane AT ALL. I think it's right to suggest that publicly bad mouthing someones right to try and earn a crust by providing a service or facility that encourages MASS criticismn is wrong, which is effectively what the internet allows, and the parasite organisations that live off this criticism ought to be shut down. You try writing something negative on Trip Advisor about Tripadvisor. See how far it gets you!

Edited November 22, 2017 by rufanuf

[BadCash]

18 minutes ago, rufanuf said:

You perhaps ought to be asking yourself a different question. Why you wish to post negative reviews about a business? Would it not be simpler simply to vote with your feet and never return? There's an old saying that goes "If you haven't got something positive to say, don't say anything at all."  Its conventional wisdom that proceeds the internet by about ten thousand years, and generally is the right way to deal with society.

 

If your a business owner and you have had ANY negative reviews on these pathetic websites you would feel as though it is grossly unfair if you are simply doing your best to make your way in the world. I actually don't think Thai defamation laws are insane AT ALL. I think it's right to suggest that publicly bad mouthing someones right to try and earn a crust by providing a service or facility should never be open to MASS criticism, which is effectively what the internet allows, and the parasite organisation that live off this criticism ought to be shut down. You try righting something negative on Trip Advisor about Tripadvisor. See how far it gets you!

Yeah, the world would be a better place if all businesses on Google Maps had only 5 star ratings - the decision making process of choosing business A or B would be a lot easier! 

 

Seriously though, I get that you're probably a business owner who've had unfair bad reviews - I'm a developer who've had my share of unfair reviews online as well. But I actually found that most people give honest and good feedback - so the average would be quite accurate even if there are some morons leaving a 1 star review because they were too stupid to even read what they're buying. I think most platforms allow business owners to post a reply to reviews though, which I always do to help others avoid the mistake that the 1-star guy did. 

 

At the end of the day, if you're really doing your best with your business, a few bad reviews simply wouldn't affect you since the good ones will be in majority. Otherwise it probably means you're doing something wrong, so learn from the criticism and improve instead of blaming the reviewers. The reviews are valuable feedback not only for potential customers, but for you as a business owner as well. You might be alerted to misbehaving employees etc.

 

If I had a real world business like a restaurant, I would hand out a QR code that links to Google Maps, Facebook, Tripadvisor - you name it - along with the check, so that more people would review my place. Getting more people to review would improve the accuracy of the average, drowning out the few potential morons who leave bad reviews because of something petty. But to each his own.

Edited November 22, 2017 by BadCash

[rufanuf]

11 minutes ago, BadCash said:

Yeah, the world would be a better place if all businesses on Google Maps had only 5 star ratings - the decision making process of choosing business A or B would be a lot easier! 

 

Seriously though, I get that you're probably a business owner who've had unfair bad reviews - I'm a developer who've had my share of unfair reviews online as well. But I actually found that most people give honest and good feedback - so the average would be quite accurate even if there are some morons leaving a 1 star review because they were too stupid to even read what they're buying. I think most platforms allow business owners to post a reply to reviews though, which I always do to help others avoid the mistake that the 1-star guy did. 

 

At the end of the day, if you're really doing your best with your business, a few bad reviews simply wouldn't affect you since the good ones will be in majority. Otherwise it probably means you're doing something wrong, so take learn from the criticism and improve instead of blaming the reviewers. The reviewers are valuable feedback not only for potential customers, but for you as a business owner as well. You might be alerted to misbehaving employees etc.

 

If I had a real world business like a restaurant for example, I would hand out a QR code that links to Google Maps, Facebook, Tripadvisor - you name it - so that more people would review my place. Getting more people to review would improve the accuracy of the average, drowning out the few potential morons who leave bad reviews because of something petty. But to each his own.

The world would be a better place if people where not given a platform by which to defame anything they decide is not to their taste. Yes I am business owner and developer too. Our business has a ***** rating on Trip Advisor. It doesn't make TripAdvisor any better though does it? I mean they always wash their hands of what they publish anyhow....sadly though the general public often make their decisions on ONE bad review as opposed to hundreds of good ones, and much of what is written amounts to no more than some ones subjective opinion which is exactly what TripAdvisor uses to exclude itself from responsibility for what it allows to be published on its useless platform.

 

You should try reading some of the horror stories at the hands of Trip Advisor and other "beyond the law" internet platforms. Its an eye opener. Some perfectly responsible and capable business owners have been ruined by it unfairly.

 

Not sure if I am allowed to type a link here but try typing in Google tripadvisor warning dot com.

 

 

Edited November 22, 2017 by rufanuf

[rufanuf]

What needs to change with review websites to make them fair is that KNOWONE should be able to publish reviews under a "nickname" or unverifiable ID. Strangely enough all these platforms are up in arms about this simple but fair idea, because they know they would be out of business in the blink of an eye. I wonder how many visitors to Trip Advisor wishing to publish a negative review would still do so if their name and address was up there in all its glory along with the businesses?

[rufanuf]

16 hours ago, tifino said:

 

I've never had any qualms in saying it how it is, and the Reviews I did on Booking.com are still there 3 years later...

 

missus was at the time worried from what I wrote;

but realised I was simply sticking up for her, in a logical/calm manner... 

 - for her being treated at the breakfast buffet, as if she were one of those other bargirls sitting nearby...

 

by the next day, missus is instead fuming/scheming -  she's gunna put a spell on the old staffgirl concerned, hoping a job will be lost

You honestly wrote a negative review about this? I rest my case BadCash!

Edited November 22, 2017 by rufanuf

[BadCash]

27 minutes ago, rufanuf said:

The world would be a better place if people where not given a platform by which to defame anything they decide is not to their taste. Yes I am business owner and developer too. Our business has a ***** rating on Trip Advisor. It doesn't make TripAdvisor any better though does it? I mean they always wash their hands of what they publish anyhow....sadly though the general public often make their decisions on ONE bad review as opposed to hundreds of good ones, and much of what is written amounts to no more than some ones subjective opinion which is exactly what TripAdvisor uses to exclude itself from responsibility for what it allows to be published on its useless platform.

 

You should try reading some of the horror stories at the hands of Trip Advisor and other "beyond the law" internet platforms. Its an eye opener. Some perfectly responsible and capable business owners have been ruined by it unfairly.

 

Not sure if I am allowed to type a link here but try typing in Google tripadvisor warning dot com.

 

 

Thanks, I'll have a look at that warning website. 

 

Personally I don't use TripAdvisor any more because of two reasons:

 

1. I find the opposite to be true - people on Tripadvisor are hyping everything up. Even if something is just "ok" or "nice" there will be a lot of "amazing!" and "spectacular!" reviews. It's like they've never left their houses before. One effect of this is that the top "things to do" anywhere in Thailand will always be temples, temples, and another temple. Come on, they are rarely the most interesting attraction in any area, especially if you've been here more than a few days.

 

2. Locations on TripAdvisor are always - literally 100% of the time in my experience - incorrect. On the rare occasion that I do use Tripadvisor, I always find out the location on Google Maps so I don't have to spend hours driving around looking for a place that's not there. 

 

Not sure how Google Maps stands up to the criticism you have for Tripadvisor, but as a reviewer they are very fast to either approve or deny edits to place details at least. 

Edited November 22, 2017 by BadCash

[BadCash]

5 minutes ago, rufanuf said:

You honestly wrote a negative review about this? I rest my case BadCash!

Define "negative review" first. Is anything that is not 5 stars (i.e. 4, 3, 2, 1 star) a "negative" review? Personally I would define a "negative review" as 2 stars or less. 

[rufanuf]

Just now, BadCash said:

Thanks, I'll have a look at that warning website. 

 

Personally I don't use TripAdvisor any more because of two reasons:

 

1. I find the opposite to be true - people on Tripadvisor are hyping everything up. Even if something is just "ok" or "nice" there will be a lot of "amazing!" and "spectacular!" reviews. It's like they've never left their houses before. One effect of this is that the top "things to do" anywhere in Thailand will always be temples, temples, and another temple. Come on, they are rarely the most interesting attraction in any area, especially if you've been here more than a week.

 

2. Locations on TripAdvisor are always - literally 100% of the time in my experience - incorrect. On the rare occasion that I do use Tripadvisor, I always find out the location on Google Maps so I don't have to spend hours driving around looking for a place that's not there. 

 

Not sure how Google Maps stands up to the criticism you have for Tripadvisor, but as a reviewer they are very fast to either approve or deny edits to place details at least. 

I think if they removed reviewers rights to staying anonymous a lot of the flaws in the review industry would be solved, after all it levels the playing field, as the business owner has NO RIGHTS we cannot even DELIST

[rufanuf]

2 minutes ago, BadCash said:

Define "negative review" first. Is anything that is not 5 stars (i.e. 4, 3, 2, 1 star) a "negative" review? Personally I would define a "negative review" as 2 stars or less. 

I would define a negative review as any criticism of a business full stop. The business may not want the listing they have forced upon them, let alone the criticism, and that should be their right.

Edited November 22, 2017 by rufanuf

[rufanuf]

4 minutes ago, BadCash said:

Define "negative review" first. Is anything that is not 5 stars (i.e. 4, 3, 2, 1 star) a "negative" review? Personally I would define a "negative review" as 2 stars or less. 

This guy is saying he wrote a damaging review because he felt his partner was being treated like a bargirl. Define then how a Bargirl should be treated in comparison to the privelaged one? I thought everyone deserved the same levels of respect and decency? So this business got a negative review because the world is full of Bigots? Is that really fair?

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

There's a lot of irrelevant posts above on this topic...

 

Here's the problems with defamation in Thailand, as pertaining to online reviews.

 

1. Unlike more modern countries where defamation is a civil offense, here in Thailand it also can be a criminal offense. And, it doesn't require the police and/or prosecutors to be the ones to initiate a criminal defamation case, although they certainly can. A private party by themselves can initiate a criminal defamation case against you, which considerably lowers the bar and removes any notion of government discretion on whether the case is warranted.

 

2. As far as the defamation law here is concerned, again unlike more modern countries, the truthfulness of something put out in the public domain is not considered an absolute defense. Here in Thailand, something can be absolutely true, and you can still be found guilty of criminal defamation, meaning a potential jail sentence, if it's found that your assertion caused harm to the reputation of your accuser.  Is that really a judgment you want to leave in the hands of Thailand's esteemed judiciary???

 

My best sense of this is, typically, bigger public facing companies don't bring these kinds of criminal defamation cases because they have their reputation on the line, and don't want to look like they're trying to jail their customers. More often, it seems to be the private party individual or small business owner who feels aggrieved and wants to go to court over it. But either way, Thai law allows it, and that's potentially a very dangerous thing.

 

If you notice, in recent years, there have been a number of bloggers, journalists, activists who basically have had to leave (flee) the country because of having been embroiled in criminal defamation cases, or facing potential cases. The law in this area is NOT on your side.

 

 

Edited November 22, 2017 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[rufanuf]

4 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

There's a lot of irrelevant posts above on this topic...

 

Here's the problems with defamation in Thailand, as pertaining to online reviews.

 

1. Unlike more modern countries where defamation is a civil offense, here in Thailand it also can be a criminal offense. And, it doesn't require the police and/or prosecutors to be the ones to initiate a criminal defamation case, although they certainly can. A private party by themselves can initiate a criminal defamation case against you, which considerably lowers the bar and removes any notion of government discretion on whether the case is warranted.

 

2. As far as the defamation law here is concerned, again unlike more modern countries, the truthfulness of something put out in the public domain is not considered an absolute defense. Here in Thailand, something can be absolutely true, and you can still be found guilty of criminal defamation, meaning a potential jail sentence, if it's found that your assertion caused harm to the reputation of your accuser.  Is that really a judgment you want to leave in the hands of Thailand's esteemed judiciary???

 

My best sense of this is, typically, bigger public facing companies don't bring these kinds of criminal defamation cases because they have their reputation on the line, and don't want to look like they're trying to jail their customers. More often, it seems to be the private party individual or small business owner who feels aggrieved and wants to go to court over it. But either way, Thai law allows it, and that's potentially a very dangerous thing.

 

If a lesson in how it worked was required then you wrote it well. But actually which society is more backwards? The one that discourages public humiliation, or the ones that allow it? I think Thailand's defamation laws keep things civil in the public domain, it's hard to argue that's bad thing, and I suspect it comes out of the Thai culture of respect. If you have a legitimate grievance with a supplier perhaps its better off being dealt with one on one and privately?

Edited November 22, 2017 by rufanuf

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Thailand's defamation laws aim to prevent ordinary citizens and the news media from being able to effectively point out wrongdoing by private parties and government officials. Even the police here have threatened defamation cases against people who have complained about police misconduct.

 

The people mostly being "protected" here are those seeking to hide and preserve wrongdoing.

 

[BadCash]

11 minutes ago, rufanuf said:

This guy is saying he wrote a damaging review because he felt his partner was being treated like a bargirl. Define then how a Bargirl should be treated in comparison to the privelaged one? I thought everyone deserved the same levels of respect and decency? So this business got a negative review because the world is full of Bigots? Is that really fair?

First of all, neither of us are qualified to comment on his review since we have no idea what he wrote. He could have given 4 stars instead of 5 for all I know, I certainly wouldn't consider that a negative or damaging review, if the actual text in his review reflects reality.

 

Second of all, no, that place got a negative review because it apparently treats bargirls as lesser humans than the rest - i.e. it got what it deserved.

 

9 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

There's a lot of irrelevant posts above on this topic...

 

Here's the problems with defamation in Thailand, as pertaining to online reviews.

 

1. Unlike more modern countries where defamation is a civil offense, here in Thailand it also can be a criminal offense. And, it doesn't require the police and/or prosecutors to be the ones to initiate a criminal defamation case, although they certainly can. A private party by themselves can initiate a criminal defamation case against you, which considerably lowers the bar and removes any notion of government discretion on whether the case is warranted.

 

2. As far as the defamation law here is concerned, again unlike more modern countries, the truthfulness of something put out in the public domain is not considered an absolute defense. Here in Thailand, something can be absolutely true, and you can still be found guilty of criminal defamation, meaning a potential jail sentence, if it's found that your assertion caused harm to the reputation of your accuser.  Is that really a judgment you want to leave in the hands of Thailand's esteemed judiciary???

 

My best sense of this is, typically, bigger public facing companies don't bring these kinds of criminal defamation cases because they have their reputation on the line, and don't want to look like they're trying to jail their customers. More often, it seems to be the private party individual or small business owner who feels aggrieved and wants to go to court over it. But either way, Thai law allows it, and that's potentially a very dangerous thing.

 

Thanks for getting the thread back on topic. 

 

I couldn't really find any documented cases where someone has been sued for writing a potentially damaging review online though? (except when it relates to the monarchy, or when journalists are involved). Are there any?

Edited November 22, 2017 by BadCash

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Just now, BadCash said:

I couldn't really find any documented cases where someone has been sued for writing a potentially damaging review online though? (except when it relates to the monarchy, or when journalists are involved). Are there any?

 

That question covers a lot of terrain. Just for a single person writing an online review on someplace like TripAdvisor or Google something, I can't specifically recall an actual  case like that, though I wouldn't be surprised that attorney warning letters have been sent in those kinds of situations where the matter never makes into the public news.

 

Actual filed defamation cases more often seem to originate with something that someone has said or alleged either in news media outlets or on bigger platforms like Facebook, etc.

[BadCash]

10 minutes ago, rufanuf said:

If a lesson in how it worked was required then you wrote it well. But actually which society is more backwards? The one that discourages public humiliation, or the ones that allow it? I think Thailand's defamation laws keep things civil in the public domain, it's hard to argue that's bad thing, and I suspect it comes out of the Thai culture of respect. If you have a legitimate grievance with a supplier perhaps its better off being dealt with one on one and privately?

 

You're a business owner in Thailand, right? Then what's the problem? Just sue the ones who give you a bad review, problem solved. Good luck with that...

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

BTW, this issue is the reason, I presume, that ThaiVisa has a policy forbidding "name and shame" in posting. They're trying to avoid being the potential target of defamation cases.

 

 

[tifino]

15 minutes ago, rufanuf said:

This guy is saying he wrote a damaging review because he felt his partner was being treated like a bargirl. Define then how a Bargirl should be treated in comparison to the privelaged one? I thought everyone deserved the same levels of respect and decency? So this business got a negative review because the world is full of Bigots? Is that really fair?

 

obviously not naming names, nor which booking website the Review went on to;

but the Review I have at the time, tallied up to a 7.1 for the entire establishment.

 

The accommodation part all got fairly good marks, but they were fed back about problems that had not been righted, even after 13 days there.

The Meal component was done separately, as the place was actually well-divided up in it's physical layout.

I addressed the Serving staff problem at the appropriate point in the review

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

BTW, it's not just the defamation law that can get one in hot water here. There's also the Computer Crimes law, as our PM so thoughtfully reminded everyone today:

 

Quote

 

ONLINE CRITICS were warned to be careful what they say about the government’s performance, as Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha yesterday ordered all state officers to elevate their monitoring of Internet comments and enforce the laws relating to them.

 

They were told by Prayut to strictly enforce the new Computer Crime Bill, which punishes online dissemination of information “deemed controversial to national security”. The offence is punishable by fines of Bt 20,000–200,000 and/or up to 10 years’ imprisonment.

 

 

 

Although this particular article references content relating to "national security," as best as I understand it, the full CCA law has a much broader scope and has been used to prosecute people for other things entirely unrelated to "national security".

 

Here's one recent example of the law's broader reach:

 

https://news.lovepattayathailand.com/video/two-women-topless-facebook-crimes/

 

Quote

 

The two women who recently went topless on Facebook live as part of a promotional stunt were charged on Thursday with violating the Compute Crimes Act.

Thanyakarn “Meya” Rojin, 23, and Kanchanaicha “Kik” Buranon, 21, handed themselves in to the Khen district police after a warrant was issued for their arrest on Tuesday after an official complaint was made over their behaviour.

 

 

Edited November 22, 2017 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[Ulic]

1 hour ago, rufanuf said:

You perhaps ought to be asking yourself a different question. Why would you wish to post negative reviews about a business? Would it not be simpler simply to vote with your feet and never return? There's an old saying that goes "If you haven't got something positive to say, don't say anything at all."  Its conventional wisdom that proceeds the internet by about ten thousand years, and generally is the right way to deal with society.

 

If your a business owner and you have had ANY negative reviews on these pathetic websites you would feel as though it is grossly unfair if you are simply doing your best to make your way in the world. I actually don't think Thai defamation laws are insane AT ALL. I think it's right to suggest that publicly bad mouthing someones right to try and earn a crust by providing a service or facility that encourages MASS criticismn is wrong, which is effectively what the internet allows, and the parasite organisations that live off this criticism ought to be shut down. You try writing something negative on Trip Advisor about Tripadvisor. See how far it gets you!

This is too funny. I take peoples reviews as recommendations. If your

business's reviews are on the whole negative I would not be likely

to patronize your business. If positive yes I would patronize your business.

A wise business owner sees the reviews as feedback that will help them

identify weaknesses in their business and they would have a chance to

correct them. Of course their are reviewers that want a 5 star experience

for a 2 star price and who complain about everything but that is why a

large number of reviews on a site like Trip Advisor is good. You can

see people who are whiners and also reviews that are  "friends" of

the business. I do review, I generally have positive experiences and

write so. Occasionally negative experiences and leave that review

hoping the deficiencies will be corrected. Of course I also vote with my

feet and usually never go back to a place that has been a disappointment.

[Thai Ron]

3 hours ago, dotpoom said:

I listen to my local "phone in" programme from back home daily (Western Europe). As you might imagine, a lot of the callers are complaining about something or other.

  The most frequently used remark by the show's host is..."please don't mention any names".

   So I guess it's not just Thailand.

That's because they don't want to be sued for giving the grievance a platform; not because the complaint is defamatory.

[rufanuf]

7 minutes ago, BadCash said:

First of all, neither of us are qualified to comment on his review since we have no idea what he wrote. He could have given 4 stars instead of 5 for all I know, I certainly wouldn't consider that a negative or damaging review, if the actual text in his review reflects reality.

 

Second of all, no, that place got a negative review because it apparently treats bargirls as lesser humans than the rest - i.e. it got what it deserved.

 

Thanks for getting the thread back on topic. 

 

I couldn't really find any documented cases where someone has been sued for writing a potentially damaging review online though? (except when it relates to the monarchy, or when journalists are involved). Are there any?

I

 

31 minutes ago, Ulic said:

This is too funny. I take peoples reviews as recommendations. If your

business's reviews are on the whole negative I would not be likely

to patronize your business. If positive yes I would patronize your business.

A wise business owner sees the reviews as feedback that will help them

identify weaknesses in their business and they would have a chance to

correct them. Of course their are reviewers that want a 5 star experience

for a 2 star price and who complain about everything but that is why a

large number of reviews on a site like Trip Advisor is good. You can

see people who are whiners and also reviews that are  "friends" of

the business. I do review, I generally have positive experiences and

write so. Occasionally negative experiences and leave that review

hoping the deficiencies will be corrected. Of course I also vote with my

feet and usually never go back to a place that has been a disappointment.

Its too funny that the vast majority of people do not understand the real issues about review websites. The vast majority of the reviews for bigger organisations are professionally placed. The most damaging negative reviews about smaller business are usually posted for malicious and personal purposes. yet people who join in the review "fever" believe they are doing some kind of social good, when in fact they are just masking the real nature of review websites, that being that they are currently open to all kinds of manipulations, yet the owners of these business can make small fortunes off the general publics belief that this is a useful tool for selecting a service.

[Thai Ron]

I've left plenty of less than stellar reviews for services and products I've used and bought in Thailand.

Everything from visa/border run services to restaurants.

No comeback but a few apologies and some compensatory offers.