Ignoring the specifics:
It's a reasonable question.
We have restrictions on this forum, for example, on "commercially-linked" operators advertising their own venues or events.
If Rocky or SilverFox posted a review of a Utopia event, then most of us would probably view their comments through the "organiser" filter. That doesn't mean their reviews would be useless, just that we'd know they're looking at things from a certain perspective which might involve a conflict of interest; i.e. they're probably not going to say a lot of bad things about their own event.
They don't have to "disclose" anything, or declare interest - but then, maybe that's because everyone knows they organise the events.
So yes, I think most people do assign a "credibility factor" to reviews, some part of which is based on whether the poster has some sort of link to the event. I'm not sure if there's anything that could be done to make it transparent - a "declaration of interest" maybe? Or would that be too cumbersome?
With regards to the specific event:
I'll be honest here - when I read Minnie's review, I did indeed apply the "crew filter" to it. To me, the reviews of someone like Robd, who tells it like it is from a customer point of view, have more "credibility" than the views of Minnie in this case. Sorry, Minnie.
(On the other hand, Minnie's much nicer than RobD. )
Bookmarks