5 star rating system explained - abusive riders have 7X more votes than good riders

SafeT

Well-Known Member
5 STAR SYSTEM EXPLAINED


Let's say that four various riders rate you today as follows...

5 Stars - Normal courteous rule-following rider, no problems, passenger and driver happy
5 Stars - Normal courteous rule-following rider, no problems, passenger and driver happy
5 Stars - Normal courteous rule-following rider, no problems, passenger and driver happy
1 Star - Jerk.. tries to bring open beer containers, too many riders, abusive, you had to say no to something


After Uber averages the above ratings this is what happens to those riders who rated you.

4.0 – The normal courteous rule-following rider gets 1 star removed from his 5 rating (1 star theft)
4.0 – The normal courteous rule-following rider gets 1 star removed from his 5 rating (1 star theft)
4.0 – The normal courteous rule-following rider gets 1 star removed from his 5 rating (1 star theft)
4.0 – The rude rule-breaker still effectively gives you a 4 which is Uber-unacceptable (stole 3 stars from good riders)


Q: So what exactly happened here?
A: The rude passenger effectively stole 1 star from each of the courteous rule-following passengers.

Q: How did that happen?
A: With the 5 star system the 5 star is considered an up thumb, while 4 stars is considered a down thumb (think Facebook, YouTube). (4.5 being the medium rating for determining up or down) Any rating below 4 stars cuts into the other rider's 5 star ratings, which effectively gives the rude rule-breaking rider up to 7 votes (if they rate 1 star) to every 5 star vote for the courteous rule-following passengers, since he effectively nullified or deleted the three 5 star UP votes (as if they didn't exist) and turned them into DOWN votes (4 stars). making it the same as 4 down votes for the day, or 4 unhappy passengers.

So, to review. The rude rule-breaking riders effectively have 7 votes on the Uber system compared to all courteous rule-following passengers who only have 1 vote. The effect for the day? You get 4 down votes which is caused by the rude passenger stealing 1 star from each of the good riders.

Another example. You go to the polls to vote for President of the United States. According to recent election results a Democrat has about a 50/50 chance with a Republican contender of being elected. If we however use the Uber voting system, we would give Democrats 7 votes for every one vote a Republican makes. Giving the Democrats a 4 to 0 landslide victory on election day.

Before
Democrat 1 vote
Republican 3 vote

After Vote-Ubering
Democrat 4 Votes
Republican 0 votes (3 Republican votes were nullified then 3 new votes were given to the Democrats)

Q: What is the solution?
A: Change the system so everyone has the same vote…one vote! This is already in place on various websites. YouTube videos, Facebook and many more. Even the Uber chat help support system uses the up/down thumb system!

Giving the worst-of-the-worst passengers 7 times more votes than the passengers who are courteous and follow the rules only has the effect of sending Uber on a fast path race to the bottom where rude passengers rule the day and drivers can only keep good ratings by breaking laws and risking their personal safety. I can’t see how Uber management can possibly think this is a great idea for long term survival of the company.



 
Last edited:

annbanan

New Member
The up/down thumb system would feel better -- a less stressed, happier vibe for the drivers.

Many riders don't bother to rate me anyway. Many don't care to be bothered.

It's awful that Uber places so much importance on ratings. It's so heavy and causes so much stress, dread and misery because it's so unfair. It's like having an unfair boss who makes you sweat bullets everyday.

One time a rider said, "You drivers are so hard on yourselves." (I had been stressed, worried and apologetic about not finding him quickly enough). I said, "It's not just me?" "He said, "No, y'all are like that."
 

Coachman

Well-Known Member
The problem with all these analyses is that they assume there's something wrong with weighting negative scores more than positive scores. Think about it for a minute. If a negative riding experience carried the same weight as a positive one, then there wouldn't really worry too much about giving a bad ride. It's the fact that they hurt so much that we do everything we possibly can to keep the customer happy.

The system is designed that way. It's not a flaw.
 

SafeT

Well-Known Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #4
It's the fact that they hurt so much that we do everything we possibly can to keep the customer happy.
So you think it is a good thing that law breakers, drunks and rude riders should have more votes (4 to 1) than courteous riders who follow the rules? Sorry, I have to disagree. If that is the case, why not give people who REALLY REALLY like you 4 votes. Or, how about a system from -5 t0 +5 with ZERO being the default? That way people who hate you can punk you down -5 and people who love you can pump you up +5. That would also be more fair.
 
Last edited:

Adbam

Well-Known Member
You have a good point. I think you can dumb it down some and still get your point across.

The pax that rates between 4 and 1 effects your ratings more than the pax that rates you 5.

Uber could also fix this by allowing drivers to have a 2.5 rating or above to be on the platform.

With uber it's either perfect or fail.
 
Last edited:

Adbam

Well-Known Member
If you have a 4.9 rating after 10 rides. Then you get another 5* for the 11th ride your rating is now 4.909 (less than 4.91). If your 11th ride is a 1 star now your rating is a 4.545.

Bad rating pax effect your ratings way more than good rating pax. 1 rider effected my rating by more than 7% in my example.
 

Adbam

Well-Known Member
Let's make one more example. Uber supposedly takes your last 500 rides to make your current rating.

If you are rated 4.601 after 499 rides.

The next ride is a 5*. Rating is 4.602

The next ride is a 1*. Rating is 4.594

A good rating pax effects a normal drivers rating less than .02% (Rounded).

A bad rating pax effects a normal drivers rating about .16% (Rounded).

Even though the amounts are a lot smaller when it is spread over 500 rides. It still proves that a pax that rates you 1* effects your rating more than 9 times more than a pax that rates you 5*.

(And yes I didn't really "dumb" it down in this example either)
 

Dan Coogan

Active Member
So you think it is a good thing that law breakers, drunks and rude riders should have more votes (4 to 1) than courteous riders who follow the rules? Sorry, I have to disagree. If that is the case, why not give people who REALLY REALLY like you 4 votes. Or, how about a system from -5 t0 +5 with ZERO being the default? That way people who hate you can punk you down -5 and people who love you can pump you up +5. That would also be more fair.
Well the real problem is Uber expects drivers to keep a rating of 4.6 or better (somebody correct me if I'm wrong)... So just make 2.5 stars the norm and if you fall below that you risk deactivation.
 

Coachman

Well-Known Member
So you think it is a good thing that law breakers, drunks and rude riders should have more votes (4 to 1) than courteous riders who follow the rules? Sorry, I have to disagree. If that is the case, why not give people who REALLY REALLY like you 4 votes. Or, how about a system from -5 t0 +5 with ZERO being the default? That way people who hate you can punk you down -5 and people who love you can pump you up +5. That would also be more fair.
No matter what scale you choose, almost every rider is going to give you the top score. So low ratings are always going to have more weight than good ratings. Figure it out.

You seem to want a system where a single rider can't hurt your rating. That defeats the whole point. I don't think you understand that.
 

Adbam

Well-Known Member
No matter what scale you choose, almost every rider is going to give you the top score. So low ratings are always going to have more weight than good ratings. Figure it out.

You seem to want a system where a single rider can't hurt your rating. That defeats the whole point. I don't think you understand that.
No a 4* restaurant is a good restaurant and a 3* is decent. If a 3* restaurant gets another 3* it doesn't effect anything.

Uber makes its threshold to high giving the rider to much power and ability to effect your rating.

In school a B grade is a 4*. That's a good grade. With uber a B is a fail and a constant B gets you deactivated.

Figure it out and understand.
 

X-X_Driver

Member
Another viewpoint toward all of this is the fact that Uber provides No guidance or guidelines to riders, in regard to the meaning of the ratings. I've had the opportunity to discuss the rating system with a few riders and all were shocked that 4* was "bad". (One person had no idea that riders were being rated but that's a separate issue).

As has already been very thoroughly pointed out, in almost every 1 - 5 rating system in existence, 3 would be considered "average", 4 or 5 above average or excellent. 4 is equivalent to a "B" in school and that's considered very good. Most schools even consider a C (3) to be average or acceptable. So yes, the bar is set too high AND most riders have no clue that a 4* is "bad" for a driver. It's not a standard that makes any sense which is why it becomes so stressful.

I personally (your opinions may certainly vary) feel that 3* or higher should be acceptable. 2.5* probation. etc. ALSO - if a rider wants to enter a rating of 1* or 2* they should have to document their reasons for giving this rating and justify it. It's not that the system shouldn't allow low ratings or that a low rating shouldn't affect the driver, it's more the issue that low ratings should be understood and the riders should be forced to justify said rating if there is merit to giving it.

The other item then becomes - how do we properly and professionally educate the "good" riders about how the system works?
 
Last edited:

Dar-K

Active Member
I like the idea of 1* or 2* requires a comment in the text box.
This would allow the driver to understand where they need areas to improve versus being in the dark.

Also, if Uber felt that this was too generous & would lead to less deactivation's, just set the bar a little higher. As long as they review the comments of 1* or 2* and omit those that seem far-fetched, related to the fare cost (i.e., surges), or something of that nature.

Someone could rate 1* for no reason at all... And in some cases, it simply hurts the driver. 4* is hurting as well, but there are people who never 5* unless you provide extraordinary customer service. And that level is already high with Uber Pax.

So having a perfect 5.0* rating simply means you are a new driver. --
 

Paddyuber

New Member
Being new to Uber driving, I of course have issues about the rating system and its weighting that favours bad riders. I am surprised that with 36 ratings that include 29 by 5 star ratings, I am on 4.69. I have really had a few not so good pax including one who was a bit nasty and a friend to a rider who was quite drunk and few cases of riders not putting in sufficient location details. Of course a bad rating takes that down further. Riders are not taught about the value of ratings and some just don't bother giving perfect scores.

How do we therefore take this to Uber? The fact that a 4 star rating is not good enough is itself not good enough and Uber must know that. True pax may rate you 4 thinking they have done well for you not knowing they are sending you off the road.

Are the riders made aware of this?
 

McLovin

Well-Known Member
5 STAR SYSTEM EXPLAINED


Let's say that four various riders rate you today as follows...

5 Stars - Normal courteous rule-following rider, no problems, passenger and driver happy
5 Stars - Normal courteous rule-following rider, no problems, passenger and driver happy
5 Stars - Normal courteous rule-following rider, no problems, passenger and driver happy
1 Star - Jerk.. tries to bring open beer containers, too many riders, abusive, you had to say no to something


After Uber averages the above ratings this is what happens to those riders who rated you.

4.0 – The normal courteous rule-following rider gets 1 star removed from his 5 rating (1 star theft)
4.0 – The normal courteous rule-following rider gets 1 star removed from his 5 rating (1 star theft)
4.0 – The normal courteous rule-following rider gets 1 star removed from his 5 rating (1 star theft)
4.0 – The rude rule-breaker still effectively gives you a 4 which is Uber-unacceptable (stole 3 stars from good riders)


Q: So what exactly happened here?
A: The rude passenger effectively stole 1 star from each of the courteous rule-following passengers.

Q: How did that happen?
A: With the 5 star system the 5 star is considered an up thumb, while 4 stars is considered a down thumb (think Facebook, YouTube). (4.5 being the medium rating for determining up or down) Any rating below 4 stars cuts into the other rider's 5 star ratings, which effectively gives the rude rule-breaking rider up to 7 votes (if they rate 1 star) to every 5 star vote for the courteous rule-following passengers, since he effectively nullified or deleted the three 5 star UP votes (as if they didn't exist) and turned them into DOWN votes (4 stars). making it the same as 4 down votes for the day, or 4 unhappy passengers.

So, to review. The rude rule-breaking riders effectively have 7 votes on the Uber system compared to all courteous rule-following passengers who only have 1 vote. The effect for the day? You get 4 down votes which is caused by the rude passenger stealing 1 star from each of the good riders.

Another example. You go to the polls to vote for President of the United States. According to recent election results a Democrat has about a 50/50 chance with a Republican contender of being elected. If we however use the Uber voting system, we would give Democrats 7 votes for every one vote a Republican makes. Giving the Democrats a 4 to 0 landslide victory on election day.

Before
Democrat 1 vote
Republican 3 vote

After Vote-Ubering
Democrat 4 Votes
Republican 0 votes (3 Republican votes were nullified then 3 new votes were given to the Democrats)

Q: What is the solution?
A: Change the system so everyone has the same vote…one vote! This is already in place on various websites. YouTube videos, Facebook and many more. Even the Uber chat help support system uses the up/down thumb system!

Giving the worst-of-the-worst passengers 7 times more votes than the passengers who are courteous and follow the rules only has the effect of sending Uber on a fast path race to the bottom where rude passengers rule the day and drivers can only keep good ratings by breaking laws and risking their personal safety. I can’t see how Uber management can possibly think this is a great idea for long term survival of the company.


This should be a sticky. Well done.
 

sellkatsell44

Well-Known Member
I low rate all the pax unless they tip
How can you tell the difference between a horrible passenger (like one who would spit in your face or bring open containers into your car?) and one that doesn't do that shiet?

Also, if you had a passenger who was munching on guacamole and eats like they're missing a front tooth--but tips you good, would you give them a 5?

Just wondering
 

Fuzzyelvis

Well-Known Member
How can you tell the difference between a horrible passenger (like one who would spit in your face or bring open containers into your car?) and one that doesn't do that shiet?

Also, if you had a passenger who was munching on guacamole and eats like they're missing a front tooth--but tips you good, would you give them a 5?

Just wondering
Pretty sure really crappy pax will eventually see their ratings drop. I think if one has a habit of spitting on drivers they'll accumulate 1 star ratings pretty quickly.

As far as guacamole in my car? That pax wouldn't tip me as I would have told them up front no eating in my car (and there's a sign) so they'd be getting kicked out prematurely anyway.
 

X-X_Driver

Member
The rating system is the biggest red flag that the CEO is an enormous ass hat.
If I may chime in again. It all IS a big red flag. I would tend to say that while your description is rather appropriate :smiles:, a more definitive way to view this is that he is most likely a clinical psychopath. That does not mean that he's a criminal but the quick definition is that psychopaths have no empathy and they literally can't feel most emotions - only mimic them. In the diagnostic cluster, many/most are originally seen as highly charming, overly confident, and quite intelligent. While they can talk about feelings, they can't experience normal emotions and form rational thoughts and sound business plans as a result. Problem is they can charm employees, investors, board members for a Long time - often until things cave in - at which point the psychopath walks away with no remorse.

Excerpt from a psychology article -

"Psychopaths, on the other hand, are unable to form emotional attachments or feel real empathy with others, although they often have disarming or even charming personalities. Psychopaths are very manipulative and can easily gain people’s trust. They learn to mimic emotions, despite their inability to actually feel them, and will appear normal to unsuspecting people. Psychopaths are often well educated and hold steady jobs. Some are so good at manipulation and mimicry that they have families and other long-term relationships without those around them ever suspecting their true nature.


When committing crimes, psychopaths carefully plan out every detail in advance and often have contingency plans in place. Unlike their sociopathic counterparts, psychopathic criminals are cool, calm, and meticulous. Their crimes, whether violent or non-violent, will be highly organized and generally offer few clues for authorities to pursue. Intelligent psychopaths make excellent white-collar criminals and "con artists" due to their calm and charismatic natures. " -
Scott A. Bonn, Ph.D. https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wicked-deeds/201401/how-tell-sociopath-psychopath

Think seriously about this. Does it remind you of anyone you know or know of? How many companies would value their workers so little to set up this enormously unbalanced rating system coupled with the inability to actually discuss things rationally with live people or to DEFEND against allegations that are coupled with a low rating to keep work and cash flowing? How many companies would offer you money to bring in other people to do your job (read that - replace you) and expect you to fall for it and be happy being suckered? How many companies would play with your legal status as employee vs. independent contractor every few days at their whim - if they cared or had any feelings of appreciation for said people.

The one possible simple explanation (which I think is overly simplistic) is that with the slow economy, they are hoping there will be a steady stream of new "recruits" and just don't care. It's also quite possible that the true goal of Uber is to promote and develop the driverless car and drivers now are just a stepping stone or a "necessary evil" that really aren't in the long-term business plans of those at the top. We're just here out of necessity to help make the public more dependent on and accepting of Uber over time.

And I don't believe for a minute that the upper management isn't aware of the problems that we're all discussing. They created them and are sitting back watching to see how it all plays out. How many CEO's who "care" would have jumped in by now with some sort of attempt to rectify or balance many of these issues? To keep the overall business model in play for the investors they MUST keep clients (riders) happy. Otherwise, funding goes away. Drivers, on the other hand, are considered to be expendable and a psychopath would not care in the least how the drivers are hurt - physically, emotionally/psychologically, or financially. (see above :>).

Just my two cents on the rest of this large picture. I'm proud to be able to help people and will do so as long as not deactivated but the blinders I had on when I started, have come off. I don't know the "fix" for this. It's going to take a very concerted effort from ALL drivers (latest lawsuit proceedings are a good start) or some serious interruption in new venture capital acquisition - which I predict would initially cause even more backlash (example - new contract being forced on everyone). There is visible cause and effect here which all fits if you sit back and look at the big picture.

OK - long-winded analysis over...

For those reading - if you celebrate this time of year - a most Happy time to you. Serious good thoughts, wishes and energy to all as well. Stay strong.

And as a very street-wise lawyer once said to me - "Know from where the attack will come - have your counter in place".

Best to all... :smiles:
 

cleansafepolite

Well-Known Member
How can you tell the difference between a horrible passenger (like one who would spit in your face or bring open containers into your car?) and one that doesn't do that shiet?

Also, if you had a passenger who was munching on guacamole and eats like they're missing a front tooth--but tips you good, would you give them a 5?

Just wondering
spitting is concidered assault and you have the right to defend yourself.. if your a wee lass or a frail man might i suggest a solid aluninum flashlight which holds no less than 4 d cell batteries. get a black one so its harder to guess the ark of your swing at night. For bonus points use the bright light in a rapid left right motion across the eyes before striking. keep it under your seat or next to your seat with adhesive velcro which will stick to your carpet and prevent it from rolling sliding under you break peddle.
 
Top