Based on users preferences... For a trading forum website.. that would seem pretty basic. With basic criterias like: - spread; - spread consistency; - dodgy problems frequency (weird margin hikes, trades cut out for no reason etc); -technology, etc.
We had broker ratings for 10 years on this site until last year. It created more problems than it did anything else. Not a month went by that I didn't get a letter from some attorney representing a brokerage firm that was threatening me because a negative / untruthful review was submitted about his client.
every broker has its strengths and weaknesses. choose a broker that suits your style of trading, not by brand name or reviews.
Some brokers will even scam you, so it's truly a shame Baron could not run a legitimate service without the hassle of their legal department.
The problem is mainly with anonymous users posting the reviews. In other words, the company being reviewed has no idea if the review is from a legit customer, from a troll, or from a competitor. When I roll out the next ratings system, it will require more authentication from the user posting the review, and it will provide a means for the company being reviewed to post a rebuttal. It's the only way to move forward with that type of service.
Since when does a disclaimer on any website that the opinions expressed by users on such site are not necessarily shared by the website operator not rule out any potential legal action against the owner? Even an injunction to force you to reveal the identity of users on your site would only be issued in the most grave and extreme circumstances (for example if a user repeatedly published verifiable insider information and there is evidence he or anyone acted on it). Sounds more like some of your sponsors were not too happy with the TRUE opinion of the majority of reviewers.
sorry but that is a bogus reason. Here is why: Every service, every company, online or brick & mortar is dealing with the same issue without any legal consequences. Nobody knows whether "customer testimonials" are truthful or paid for. Anyone can publish anything about commercial vendors on the whole StackExchange's numerous websites and they have traffic that might easily be 100 times or more the one of your site. The advantage and point of gathering public reviews is that after some time the truth reveals itself via the law-of-large-numbers, when there are so many reviews that even some bogus ones will be relatively underweighted.
It's not about me getting sued. Its about having to constantly serve as a liaison between attorneys and anonymous users about disputed reviews. In other words, I would get letters all the time from attorneys requesting not only that the rating be removed but also asking for "Any and all personally identifiable information about user123 including, but not limited to, email addresses, IP addresses, phone numbers, physical addresses and geo location data." It takes time and money handling requests like that all the time, and all due to a service that I make no money on whatsoever. Even as I'm typing this, I can't believe I dealt with all that for as long as I did.
you have no obligation to furnish such requests. Any legal professional should be able to assure you so.
Ok, let me help you think this through. What do you think happens when you ignore or reject requests from $500/hour attorneys who are paid to get results for their clients?