| forevercloud3000 said: How does one prove they are not being biased if the facts actually lean in favor of the reviewer? |
<!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} -->
Most reviewers have a bias, its human nature. What makes the difference in a "good reviewer" is they SHOULD have knowledge of the products they are reviewing. i.e: actually USING the product, and knowing the history of the product being reviewed. Based on the post in this thread, and the information provided it is pure conjecture, doesn’t make it a bad thread at all, just have to know where the OP is coming from.
The Interweb is about overreaction, this is what makes it great!
...Imagine how boring the interweb would be if everyone thought logically?
