Three good was good, but they were out of many options, and the service was bad. The owner then responds, telling them to kill themselves. I’d say the one star is for the food. Otherwise, they’d get a zero.
Comment on So bad it was actually entertaining
selokichtli@lemmy.ml 4 weeks ago
If the food was great, shouldn’t that fact alone give at least one star more? Why are people do fixated with 1 and 5 stars? Don’t they realize there are three other possibilities to rank? I’m upset.
Letstakealook@lemm.ee 4 weeks ago
Entertainmeonly@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 weeks ago
I would like to point out that a one star is technically 0. A five star review on Google is a rating of zero to 4. As a one star is automatically a given, one can assess an accurate rating by subtracting one from all ratings and understanding it’s a four star system in disguise.
Google says this restaurant is a 4.2 rating? That’s a 3.2 out of 4 possible stars. The ratio is corrected.
Abird1620@sh.itjust.works 4 weeks ago
You should give his review a 1 star to show your displeasure!
selokichtli@lemmy.ml 4 weeks ago
Well deserved 1-star rank if you ask me!
a_wild_mimic_appears@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 weeks ago
It’s stars all the way down
Crashumbc@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
It always has been…
Crashumbc@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
I actually don’t pay much attention to 1 or 5 star reviews. It filters out a lot of useless reviews.
If I do look at one stars, I’m usually just looking for trends of people having specific issues. Or if the overall rank is being dragged down by stupidity. For example I saw like five people leave one star reviews in one weekend because the restaurant was closed due to a water main break…
RecluseRamble@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 weeks ago
I do the exact same thing. It also filters out all the bought fake 5 star reviews that will just get harder to detect.