The key point here is that there are 3 pieces of circumstantial evidence that all cast doubt on OP's review.
Not trying to insult your intelligence, but just in case you or anyone else don't understand what circumstantial evidence is, here is the definition.
Circumstantial evidence is evidence that relies on an inference to connect it to a conclusion of fact. On its own, circumstantial evidence allows for more than one explanation. Different pieces of circumstantial evidence may be required, so that each corroborates the conclusions drawn from the others. Together, they may more strongly support one particular inference over another. An explanation involving circumstantial evidence becomes more likely once alternative explanations have been ruled out.
Example. Suppose there is a gun murder. If suspect A was found at the crime scene, that is circumstantial evidence because it makes him possibly the murderer, but we can't be sure of it, maybe its just coincidence. If suspect A was found to have a grudge against the murder victim, that too is circumstantial evidence, because simply having a grudge against someone doesn't prove they murdered that person. If suspect A purchased a gun a few days prior to the murder, that again is circumstantial evidence because buying a gun doesn't mean it was used for murder. You see, each piece of evidence itself isn't strong enough to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the guilt of suspect A. However if all 3 pieces of evidence are put together, then that would be a solid case.
In our case.
Circumstantial evidence #1.
New account opened the same day the review was written.
Circumstantial evidence #2.
None of the bros had the same complaints as OP. Most of the bros had good reviews of this MM. Even the 2 bros you mentioned to support OP's case didn't say anything close to what OP did. Nathan simply said that due to language barrier she didn't talk or please, also complained that there was no massage. Jho's testimony was closer to OP's, but the magnitude is much less. He complained of restrictive service and old age plus low face score. I trust Jho's review because it makes sense. OP's doesn't.
Circumstantial evidence #3.
OP claims that this is a repeat visit. As others have asked, why no review the first time? If this time was terrible, and the first time was "180 degrees" different, then we can deduce that the first time was spectacular. So why didn't he want to share a review for that?
In a way, I can understand OP's feelings. We've all had disappointing meals here and there. It is also possible that his second session didn't go as great as his first. Sometimes when a first meal is great, the follow up ends up disappointing because our expectations were set too high and plus the MM might not try as hard as she did the first time. For a lot of us who aren't born rich or make a lot of money, it hurts both the heart and the wallet to have a sub-par meal. I can understand that he isn't happy about it.
What I don't accept are those guys who keep the good stuff to themselves and only uses the forum for their own personal agenda. Despite what they say, they aren't writing a bad review to warn the bros. They are thinking to themselves, "I didn't get my money's worth, I'll get you back by writing you a bad review and drive your customers away". |
楼主: Flee
发表于 2016-12-18 22:08:56
