All our reject reviews have been considered "profane"

Accounting to Chuntley EVERY SINGLE review is printed except if it is profane!

Does that silly bint really believe this tosh. How dare they. We have all had reviews rejected for no rhyme nor reason, in fact I have fought tooth and nail with them to have one reinstated I was so mad.

OMG just heard she has ANOTHER jewellery design launching this week.

Grr

Chuntley has been on this morning doing Diamonique and acting like a complete airhead, also rivalling Claire in her silly, little girl act. Shame she doesn't realise she's not 14 any more, break it to her gently, someone.

When they actually work for QVC then nothing they say or do, ever surprises me. They spout all kinds of guff, some of them appear to believe their own lies and no level is too low if it bags them a sale or promotes a product. We all know that everything QVC sells is wonderful, amazing, cutting edge etc etc etc according to their presenters.
What DOES surprise me is how people who don`t work for Q can be so defensive towards negative comments to the point of being downright obsessed. They`re customers fgs and yet some of them come across as if QVC is their religion and by slighting QVC items even if the negative viewpoint is valid, you`re actually slighting them personally. Brain washing at its worst !

Ah so that explains why my review was rejected.

This is just the dog's boll*cks and f*cking amazing:mysmilie_19:

Trying to do a review (bad) ATM but it won't even submit! Are they trying to tell me something do you think.

loveallthingsitalian said:

Trying to do a review (bad) ATM but it won't even submit! Are they trying to tell me something do you think.

Click to expand...

Do you think they have flags when people put bad reviews and then monitor those people's reviews? I noticed that a couple of bad reviews that I have posted in the last 18 months have now been removed. Maybe they don't care if it's a product that's average or not a great seller (they could use these as an excuse to drop a brand) but they sure don't like bad reviews on Kim & Co.
CC

But as we all know it is a totally impartial outside company doing it.

Yeah and I am 6ft size 10 and look 20 years younger! Being paid by QVC and impartial are an oxymoron

I would say QVC have total control over their review system. I once read their rules on posting reviews, many years ago I admit, but there were many.

CC

Maybe it was true once upon a time that the reviews were independent. Being mischievous - perhaps they've enlisted the BTY Admin team to police the reviews now? In which case the dire products will end up with no reviews at all, and everything else will have glowing 4 or 5 star reviews.

I've found that in the main most of my reviews both good and bad have made it to publication.

I have never, ever, written a review using any sort of profanity (although Catherine may count referencing the dreaded high street as a profane remark).

I tend to describe my experience with the product, and a little information that would help others who have similar issues (whether that be skincare, clothing, cooking or what-have-you).

Any reference to price is no good. You find that on a lot of sites. It seems to be now that even referring to whether something represents good or bad value gets you in the grey area, same with talking about budgets.

amazon has the best review system you can go back to an old review and update it. also you can ask questions about a product and get answers. i love amazon

Ah, I understand now, I had a review rejected today. There was nothing profane about it, I believe a review is the honest opinion of the person giving the review so it should be published. If we were all to give 'oh great, lovely must get another, it's so beautiful, I'd urge others to buy this' tosh, without saying, 'well I've seen this cheaper elsewhere, I ordered two, both plants dead on arrival, surprised this woman puts her reputation on the line with rubbish like this' etc. etc. you get the picture.

If you can't be honest, what's the f';p;;;;;g point.

ohnonotshoppingagain said:

Ah, I understand now, I had a review rejected today. There was nothing profane about it, I believe a review is the honest opinion of the person giving the review so it should be published. If we were all to give 'oh great, lovely must get another, it's so beautiful, I'd urge others to buy this' tosh, without saying, 'well I've seen this cheaper elsewhere, I ordered two, both plants dead on arrival, surprised this woman puts her reputation on the line with rubbish like this' etc. etc. you get the picture.

If you can't be honest, what's the f';p;;;;;g point.

Click to expand...

Did you save your review before you submitted it to QVC?

I suspect if you did say "I've seen this cheaper elsewhere" that will be what has caused the rejection. One of my earliest rejected reviews was for Yankee candles: I said the unscented tealights were not as good as you could get elsewhere. Many sites are reluctant to publish reviews which mention the fact that their site isn't either the cheapest or the best site to get the item...

hmm, I wonder just what percentage are being rejected now...
I had a review rejected last week for Yankee Candles, and although I didn't save myself a copy (I've never had a review rejected before, so why would I), I'm quite sure I didn't break any of the 'rules' - I gave the candles 5 stars, my title was very complimentary, and, as I am very pleased with my buy - my review was very positive. So, the only reason it can possibly have been rejected is because I said I was looking forward to seeing more of the new fragrances in the same range.
Maybe QVC don't want their customers reading that, and searching elsewhere.... perhaps they don't want us to know that there might be other Yankee scents available that they don't stock? Am I really that influential? lol

frenchie said:

hmm, I wonder just what percentage are being rejected now...
I had a review rejected last week for Yankee Candles, and although I didn't save myself a copy (I've never had a review rejected before, so why would I), I'm quite sure I didn't break any of the 'rules' - I gave the candles 5 stars, my title was very complimentary, and, as I am very pleased with my buy - my review was very positive. So, the only reason it can possibly have been rejected is because I said I was looking forward to seeing more of the new fragrances in the same range.
Maybe QVC don't want their customers reading that, and searching elsewhere.... perhaps they don't want us to know that there might be other Yankee scents available that they don't stock? Am I really that influential? lol

Click to expand...

I think these days it's worth keeping a copy of what you write in your review so you can see if you pick up what the reason was for the rejection. They don't mind you saying you bought as a TSV, OTO, Event Price or BH.... but they don't like you mentioning easy pays... even if you're writing a 5-star review.

I think it is as random as 1 in every so many whether they are good or bad. Nice wee earner if you can get it as nearly every review has something they can point to if ever questioned.

To be honest I don't care enough to review or think about if it fits the guidelines or not. I had time on my hands yesterday and the same brand was being shown so I thought I would review otherwise I've got long past thinking of Q as a reputable company where reviews are taken notice of.

Thinking here of Lakeland who remark on poor reviews and I think contact the customer. Lordy even proprietors pay lip service to poor reviews on a Trip Advisor but good old Q just delete them

If something I've bought from Q is particularly dire, I feel the urge to write a review to warn others and I've had them published. All the luck of the draw I think as to whether it's accepted or not.

I have had no problems with any of my reviews .Some I have given 5 stars ,some just one .I think it's just down to some glitch maybe ,who knows but doubt it's about any easy pays or negative remarks .I have read few reviews about the item being on easy pay which made it affordable to buy .I doubt it's because of that .

I tell you what they should be rejecting... all the moronic "reviews" which say "I'm so excited for this TSV" and "I can't wait to order this TSV".

The guidelines state:

Helpful tips
To see your review featured on our website:

• Use the product before reviewing it
• Focus on the product's features and be specific
• Avoid...
  • info that changes, such as price and promotional details
  • inappropriate language and attitude
  • info about other companies and websites
  • personal info — we want to protect your privacy!
• Have something else to say? Contact Customer Service. (Your comment will be sent privately to our staff.)

Your review must be 50 characters or more.

Click to expand...

And by the Preview button...

Top tip:
Read our Review Guidelines before previewing your review. We can't publish reviews that don't follow them!

Click to expand...

So clearly they don't even follow their guidelines for would-be reviewers, as the numpties who are reviewing pre-TSV have failed at the first point on the list!

nope, still none the wiser - I didn't mention cost, easy pays, or any other brands, sellers or offers.
What interests me is that, if they are rejecting 5 star reviews for no reason at all.... just how many lesser reviews are being rejected? It rather suggests that the published reviews are just a selected snapshot of customer experiences - and they should be upfront about this as many people trust customer reviews before purchasing.
There is no point in having customer reviews unless they are all published - the only reasons to reject should be profane language, and direct mentions of the goods available through other sellers.

historymystery said:

Chuntley has been on this morning doing Diamonique and acting like a complete airhead, also rivalling Claire in her silly, little girl act. Shame she doesn't realise she's not 14 any more, break it to her gently, someone.

Click to expand...

You're not a teenager any more, Chuntley, you biatch! Grow up!

There.