Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Software Businesses Transportation

Uber Will Start Deactivating Riders With Low Ratings (techcrunch.com) 136

Posted by BeauHD from the respect-is-a-two-way-street dept.
An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Uber is now requiring the same good behavior from riders that it has long expected from its drivers. Uber riders have always had ratings, but they were never really at risk of deactivation -- until now. Starting today, riders in the U.S. and Canada are now at risk of deactivation if their rating falls significantly below a city's average. For drivers, they face a risk of deactivation if they fall below 4.6, according to leaked documents from 2015. Though, average ratings are city-specific. Uber, however, is not disclosing the average rider rating, but says "any rider at risk of losing access will receive several notifications and opportunities to improve his or her rating," an Uber spokesperson told TechCrunch. For example, Uber will offer tips to riders around encouraging polite behavior and keeping the car clean. "Ultimately, we expect this to impact only a very small number of riders," the spokesperson said. "Respect is a two-way street, and so is accountability," Uber Head of Safety Brand and Initiatives Kate Parker wrote in a blog post. "Drivers have long been required to meet a minimum rating threshold which can vary city to city. While we expect only a small number of riders to ultimately be impacted by ratings-based deactivations, it's the right thing to do."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Uber Will Start Deactivating Riders With Low Ratings More

Uber Will Start Deactivating Riders With Low Ratings

Comments Filter:

  • in other words (Score:3, Insightful)

    by renegade600 ( 204461 ) on Wednesday May 29, 2019 @06:05PM (#58674884)

    if you don't tip, you don't ride

    • Re:in other words (Score:5, Informative)

      by WankerWeasel ( 875277 ) on Wednesday May 29, 2019 @07:01PM (#58675296)
      Uber drivers do not see their tip amounts until AFTER they have rated you. This prevents them from rating based on tip (or lack of).

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward
        How about Uber passengers who love cheap taxi rates, which are unsustainable in the long run, tip their drivers cash, and not just a buck or two. A hundred dollar cab ride in my area is the norm, Uber charges 23 for the same distance. Uber claims to be just a 'tech app', not a real business that needs to cover taxi company costs (office, personnel, local town yearly taxi permits, insurance, gas prices increasing.... I could go on.) Uber's bleeding money in order to destroy every cab business in the world wh

        • Uber charges 23 for the same distance

          That is quite a lot of money, even considering vehicle overhead - the IRS gives you 58 cents a mile. How long of a distance was that drive?

          It's not hard to imagine that especially with surge pricing uber is making money in a lot of places. Just because they are not showing a profit yet does not mean much as they expand.

          It seems to me like you should be way more incensed at a $100 cab fare, an amount with which I could probably drive 500 miles on and make a profit... d

          • Re:That is not bleeding money (Score:5, Informative)

            by tsqr ( 808554 ) on Wednesday May 29, 2019 @09:15PM (#58676134)

            It seems to me like you should be way more incensed at a $100 cab fare, an amount with which I could probably drive 500 miles on and make a profit

            At 35 mpg, 500 miles will burn over 14 gallons of gasoline. If you're unlucky enough to live in California, that's $64 just for fuel. 500 miles will probably take you at least 8 hours, so you get a whopping $4.50 an hour, not accounting for maintenance and insurance. You might call that a profit; I doubt that most people would.

            If you drive an EV and manage to charge your batteries for free, you save on fuel but the trip takes even longer. Even if you don't have to stop to recharge, the most you can make is $9 an hour.

        • Taxi drivers are plain and simple organized crime.

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by Anonymous Coward

            Iduno about that. I watched a TV show about it called "Taxi" and they seemed really funny and nice.

      • Well that all depends on how vindictive everything gets though I'd imagine. We could wind up with standoffs "ok show me your screen let me see you rate me, ok here's my screen watch as I rate you".
        • Simply report them for it. Uber doesn't mess around and will fire them for asking such. They fire people that ask people to leave them a good score already.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      And when most of the riders who are "de-activated" are non-white there will be a huge controversy and screeching about "racism".

      • Re: in other words (Score:3, Insightful)

        by dzamie ( 2101912 )
        Well, if there's a decent chance that drivers base ratings on race rather than conduct, that's a valid concern. If you flag a black guy who leaves a plastic water bottle in the cupholder, but give a pass to a white guy, that's still racism.

        • Re: in other words (Score:1)

          by Anonymous Coward

          Racism has a new definition now. Canâ(TM)t be racist against whites. Racism is now a statistical demographic crime, not an intentional act of bigotry. Try to keep up, gramps. The Marxists are going to keep changing the definition until, when youâ(TM)re 80, youâ(TM)ll sound just as much like a southern slave owner to the brainwashed kids as your grandparents did to you. Not because youâ(TM)ve changed, but because the words meanings have changed. And they will call this the freeest country

  • 4.5/5: F (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sexconker ( 1179573 ) on Wednesday May 29, 2019 @06:06PM (#58674890)

    So, in Uber's world:

    5.0 = A+
    4.9 = A
    4.8 = B
    4.7 = C
    4.6 = D
    4.5 = F

    Why even have a 5 star rating system if you're only going to use 10% of it?

    • Re: 4.5/5: F (Score:3, Insightful)

      by DNS-and-BIND ( 461968 )
      I don't know who invented the "only five star is acceptable" rating system but I'd like to strangle all of them. What's the point of having five ratings if the only passing grade is perfect? This isn't the Strategic Air Command.
      • In a system where people rate each other, it's not worth giving a lousy rating to someone.

      • This is why, for user ratings, I think a simple thumbs up / thumbs down is more practical. There seems to be less room for ambiguity there.

      • What's the point of having five ratings if the only passing grade is perfect?

        A perfect score is 5.0. The passing grade (for drivers) is 4.6, so that isn't "perfect". It means that 10% of your riders thought you sucked, or 20% thought you were mediocre, or 40% thought you could have done better.

        That is far from "perfect".

        When I use Lyft, if the driver shows up on time, doesn't stink, either engages in interesting conversation or keeps quiet, and gets me to my destination without undue delays, then I give a 5.

        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          by Anonymous Coward

          Wrong.

          3 means meets expectations. It is normal (on a bell curve) that majority of rides will meet expectation and that's it.
          4 is exceed expectations
          5 is significantly exceed expectations

          If your riders are all giving you a 5 you are either underselling your service or your riders are significantly under expecting. it is perfectly fine to get only 3's as long as there are no 1s and 2s
             

        • Everybody can always do better. Well, usually at least. 4 out of 5 stars being âbadâ(TM) is just a sign of our culture of extreme insincerity. Very few things are truly perfect, but weâ(TM)re expected to rate 5â(TM)s across the board or itâ(TM)s seen as a failure. Makes the rating system pointless and waters down the truly great.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        I don't know if they invented it but eBay was probably one of the first to introduce it. They brought in 5 star ratings for delivery speed, communication, packaging and some other stuff I forget now. Anything less than 4.5 stars and your merchant account was toast.

        Sellers undertook a massive campaign to educate users, because many users naturally assumed that an average service was worth 3-4 stars. Little cards in packages explained that 5 = positive feedback, 4 = negative feedback and please contact us fir

      • I don't know who invented the "only five star is acceptable" rating system but I'd like to strangle all of them. What's the point of having five ratings if the only passing grade is perfect? This isn't the Strategic Air Command.

        Yep, I stopped giving ratings when it was made clear that anything other than 5 stars was a failure. For me, 3 stars is acceptable, 4 stars is good, and 5 is above and beyond expectations. "Only 5 star is acceptable" is meaningless, and I refuse to play that game. Nowadays I only give ratings when I truly feel someone has earned that 5.

      • I don't know who invented the "only five star is acceptable" rating system but I'd like to strangle all of them. What's the point of having five ratings if the only passing grade is perfect? This isn't the Strategic Air Command.

        From our own review system rational as given to us by a contractor that only does such things, it is because 95% of everybody top boxes. Given 1-5 or 1-10, they only choose the lowest or highest ratings if they bother to fill it out. That is simply how the common person thinks and acts. The middle range and averages in them don't really signify a good review and people who judge in that scale aren't enough to worry about considering their vote.

    • Why even have a 5 star rating system if you're only going to use 10% of it?

      Uber is trying to expanse their Soylent Green business model.

      More folks . . . more yum yum . . .

      Bad passengers = good food!

    • You will notice that older websites like ./ and imdb use 5 or 10 point scales, while newer ones more often use "thumbs-up / thumbs-down" or aggregates of that (e.g. rotten tomatoes). People interpret points in different ways, for example some will always assign either the lowest or highest possible so their vote has a stronger influence on the average or is just more likely to be noticed.

      Anyways It's really the raters who define the curve. You can bet what Uber is doing is looking for the bottom "x" per

    • It's like grad school, then.

    • Everywhere seems to do this. Go buy a car; the dealership's sales rep and manager will be in an absolute panic that you give them anything less than "10: Outstanding!" on the survey from the manufacturer because anything under 10 is an abysmal failure.

      • Yeah. Car sales people will clearly explain to me that when I fill out their survey anything less than a 10 is considered a failing grade by the dealership. Is that true? Maybe. But it's possible they also want to pad their score.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      This is coming from a company that blacklisted regulators for years; Any data coming from them is best assumed totally bogus.

      This will become a parametric blackbox algorithm they'll abuse to make more money at the expense of riders and drivers and the markets in general; They have to do it that way, otherwise they're going to fit into the tests of being an employer, which they'd be bankrupted by overnight if that one went down.

    • If 4 really is a failing grade, then they need to make it clear to passengers what the numbers mean. Otherwise they might think 5 = perfect, 4 = some trivial issue, 3 = OK, but not great etc

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by qubezz ( 520511 )
      That's eBay. Ridiculous standards means you have to kiss ass or take it in the ass, or have your fees raised or worse.

  • Uber drivers passenger ranking guidelines (Score:5, Funny)

    by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Wednesday May 29, 2019 @06:10PM (#58674922)

    "Didn't tip me enough, even though I shared all my insights about current politics" - 1 star

    "Didn't share his bong" - 1 star

    "Cute girl wouldn't go out with me" - 1 star

  • Wont last (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 29, 2019 @06:12PM (#58674942)

    As soon as the numbers come out showing minorities disproportionately dropped there'll be hell to pay.

    • As soon as the numbers come out showing minorities disproportionately dropped there'll be hell to pay.

      Bad news for Uber: It might turn out to be dollars they have to pay.

  • Black Mirror (Score:3)

    by mobby_6kl ( 668092 ) on Wednesday May 29, 2019 @06:29PM (#58675070)

    I started watching the show for the first time a few weeks ago and there was an episode where you had one overall score determined by your every interaction and everything from credit applications to, yes, taxis, relied on it. Fall too much below normal and you'll be bumped off flights, ignored by cab drivers, and given the shittiest rentals.

    That, obviously, wasn't a good thing.

    I very rarely use Uber, pretty much only when travelling in unfamiliar countries so I might've had like a dozen rides at the point, but a while ago I was at like 4.2 which I thought was funny. Like what could I possibly have done to get an actually bad rating.

    On the other hand, if someone pukes on the carpets, shits on the seat or attacks the drivers, they should definitely be deactivated.

    • The episode is Nosedive [wikipedia.org] and that was my first thought as well. It is frankly scary how close to reality Black Mirror comes at times.
      • Well, that's how credit ratings already work, and have for years. The more cheaply and freely information flows, the lower the floor for using that information.
        • Yes, but for credit ratings, it is not individuals but companies who "rate you and they have to supply factual details of events and they do not actually perform the rating itself. This means that it is not just whimsical - and possibly prejudiced - opinion like "I don't like the look of this person". You can also insert information to explain events and even challenge information in court and have things removed etc. I doubt Uber's rating system will have any such controls and even it if does it is still f
          • That is true, regulation always pursues business practice and will never catch up. Eventually I could easily imagine schemes like this being required to "correct for" sensitive criteria e.g. race and gender so that every category of interest has a comparable fraction of people falling below the water line.
    • That's pretty much how China's current social credit system works actually works. It'll be used to determine not only if you can take transit or not but even what jobs you can apply for and if you can take flights to leave the country, and much more. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
  • Driver's who have done this gig for more than a few months (i.e. not many) know to just pass on passengers with low ratings. I won't pick up anything below a 4.7 myself and that seems to be more or less the cut-off for other drivers as well. Not everyone with a low rating is awful however **most** low-rated passengers are. Furthermore you take a huge ratings hit with low rated passengers as they tend to downrate vastly more as well - so it's just not worth it anyplace where there are a reasonable number

    • This gets totally screwed up if you use Uber when traveling internationally. In India the median rating is closer to 3 (not artificially inflated like in the US) so my passenger score is lower than average for my US hometown.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by Guppy ( 12314 )

        This gets totally screwed up if you use Uber when traveling internationally. In India the median rating is closer to 3 (not artificially inflated like in the US) so my passenger score is lower than average for my US hometown.

        So well-meaning Indian passengers may rate their driver 4 stars, and think they're praising the driver.
        And after enough 3 and 4 star reviews, drivers may try to avoid picking up Indian passengers, expecting they'll receive poor ratings.

        • This would actually explain both the lower scores I see from Indian passengers and the lower ratings I tend to get from them. And, just as you have proposed, I now tend to cancel on many rides where the riders have Indian names.

          • And this is why I won't ever use uber. In my country taxi is considered public transportation, they are not allowed to discriminate. And the driver has no business of knowing my name.

            My country is Germany, by the way. Not India.

    • What is the lowest rating you have ever given a rider?
      If you have been a rider, what is the lowest rating you have given a driver?

  • Ubers biggest problem to me (Score:3)

    by Gonoff ( 88518 ) on Thursday May 30, 2019 @06:40AM (#58678022)

    If I don't mark them all as being faultless and far better than average, I endanger their livelihood.

    I suspect that this is related to the US "descriptive inflation. If I watch a TV programme and like it, I may say it was "not bad" or even "good". People from the USA would say that it was "wonderful" or "amazing" or whatever superlatives they prefer. This is not because I am an unemotional Brit. If there was something on TV that was far better than the norm, I would say so.

    The acceptable mark should be 4 with 5 reserved for the drivers who do more than the norm. A 4 should tell me that this diver is 100% able to collect me and my baggage, sagely take me to precisely where I want to go in good time and has a well looked after vehicle. An average of 4.6 should indicate they regularly help passengers into & out of wheelchairs, do J turns to avoid potential assassins and supply free food during the journey etc.

    To understand this flawed marking scheme, you need to subtract 1 from their average. To mark drivers in a way that this scheme will react to them correctly, you need to add 1.

    But how do I then score one who truly is better than average?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by hawk ( 1151 )

      It actually needs to go a step further.

      The weight of ranking should be based, to some extent, on the average rating from each ranker.

      So a 5 from someone who gives 5 99% of the time means a lot less than from someone who averages 3, and awarded this a 5.

      hawk

  • This is a rather remarkable example of grade inflation.

    The average should be 2.5 stars. but, apparently everyone who uses Uber is quite a bit above average.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by hawk ( 1151 )

      The average should only be 2.5 if 0 is a choice--for 1 to 5, it's 3.

      hawk

  • There definitely needs to be a process where problem riders can be flagged and kicked off of the system. I'm just not sure a ratings score is the right approach? I think ratings are great when the goal is to make sure someone conducts themselves reasonably well over a period of time. So for drivers, sure? They're going to interact with many dozens or hundreds of customers, and you want to make sure the rating just provides an average of how they've done. If 50 people are happy with their Uber driver and 2 have issues, those 2 shouldn't be able to drag his rating down so low, nobody ever wants to use him again.

    With passengers though, you're more concerned about banning them immediately if they do something dangerous or damaging to the driver's vehicle.

  • First of all, it seems to me a lot of drivers and customers would just simply agree to give each other five stars since both have a mutual interest now.

    Anyhow, I would never be comfortable using a service that rates me. As a customer I'm always right, so if they're thinking I may not be then I won't use them. It's too invasive for a company to rate customers.

Slashdot Top Deals

The biggest difference between time and space is that you can't reuse time. -- Merrick Furst

Close