Great article and good point. I never articulated this as good as the article but, I've always assumed that when I use Uber/Lyft and rate a driver, if I give too many drivers a low rating I'll be banned from the app. I'm not saying I will actually be banned, I have no idea. Rather, I'm saying I fear I will be banned.

I mean why not? Any customer that effectively makes the company look bad can be banned by the company.

I bring up Uber/Lyft in particular because 99/100 drivers break traffic laws. The speed (10-15 miles per hour above the speed limit), they tailgate which is both putting me in danger, putting other car in danger, and is illegal (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio...). They'll do things like stop a full car and half past the waiting point at an intersection (have pictures of this). In other words, there a line behind which a car is supposed to wait. Then there's a crosswalk. They've stopped the car so it's past the crosswalk while waiting for the light to change. They turn right on red when the sign says no right on red. Etc....

I'd give them all 1 star out of 5 except for the fear mentioned above. That my "social credit" with the company would have them drop me as a customer.

▲

nemomarx 9 days ago | parent | next [-]

All of this sounds like normal driving behavior to me? I see it every time I commute to work. I think if you want a driver who doesn't do this you'd need a real commercially registered driver with specific training.

▲

BeetleB 9 days ago | parent | next [-]

Being normal doesn't mean "not bad". If I'm rating a driver, then I'm rating him. It's irrelevant how other drivers behave.

▲

justinrubek 9 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It is, but it shouldn't be. We don't pay all of the other drivers on the road, but we do pay for the uber we're in. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect someone performing a commercial driving act to need to do so safely and correctly.

	▲	nemomarx 9 days ago \| parent [-]
		I think it was a mistake too, but we let Uber use random people without a CDL do this job, so I can hardly say it's surprising they drive like the average? Taxis admittedly aren't that much more careful but a professional chauffeur probably fits the bill, and charges accordingly.

▲

socalgal2 9 days ago | parent | prev [-]

why even have traffic laws then?

▲

carlosjobim 9 days ago | parent | prev [-]

There's no logical sense for Uber to ban or punish you for giving drivers low scores. The only reason would be if drivers gave you a low score.

▲

socalgal2 9 days ago | parent [-]

Asking a random LLM to give reasons they might do this. Again, I'm not saying they do this. I'm saying my fear that they might isn't unfounded

* To Prevent Unfair and Unfounded Ratings: Uber could argue that some riders misuse the rating system. They might give a driver a low rating for reasons outside of the driver's control, such as traffic, a bad mood, or a simple misunderstanding. This policy would be presented as a way to protect drivers from being unfairly penalized, which could affect their livelihood.

* To Combat "Rating Terrorism" or Coercion: A rider might threaten a driver with a low rating to get a free ride, demand an unscheduled stop, or force them to violate a rule. By banning riders who frequently give low scores, Uber would be taking a stance against this kind of behavior, ensuring that the rating system is used as a genuine feedback mechanism, not a tool for coercion.

* To Discourage "Troll" Behavior: Some users might be incentivized to give consistently low ratings just to cause trouble or get attention, a practice often referred to as "trolling." This policy would be framed as a way to filter out users who are not participating in the community in good faith and are instead just trying to cause problems.

* To Maintain Driver Confidence in the Platform: Drivers rely on their ratings to maintain their account status. If they feel that riders are unfairly giving them low scores without consequence, they may become disillusioned with the platform and switch to a competitor. Banning riders who give consistently low ratings would be a way to show drivers that Uber has their back.

* To Improve Service by Identifying and Removing "Unreasonable" Riders: Uber could frame this as a data-driven approach. They might claim that their internal data shows a small percentage of riders who give low ratings to virtually every driver, regardless of the quality of the service. By removing these outliers, they would be improving the overall efficiency and health of the marketplace for the vast majority of drivers and riders. The goal would be to cultivate a community of "reasonable" users who understand and use the ratings system as it was intended.

To continue, for me, my experience is I would rate low probably 7 of 8 drivers for the reasons I gave above. They all break traffic laws and drive recklessly. I kind of wish the app would let me set a driver preference. I'd chose

(*) drive at the speed limit. Don't break any laws. Drive cautiously.

others might choose

(*) get there as fast as possible - (implying ignoring speed limits, weaving through traffic, cutting people off, ignoring turn lanes, etc...)

At least that way the driver would know up front what the user expects. Me, I'd give them 5 stars for not risking my life. Others would give them 5 stars for going as fast as possible.

As it is, I don't rate them low. I just don't rate at all because of the fear of being banned.

▲

socalgal2 8 days ago | parent [-]

I see the word "LLM" made people stupid. No one actually used engaged their brain once they saw the word "LLM"

	▲	carlosjobim 8 days ago \| parent [-]
		I'm not interested in having a discussion with a machine.