[pigbucket]

A beautiful typo. You mean "vulnerable" for "venerable" right? Is that because you think they really are doing what the article implies? Is there evidence more substantial than that offered by the Tribune? The article for me is just shoddy journalism. Can it be that hard to really test the hypothesis that businesses that turn down the ad salesperson get screwed by Yelp? I don't want to defend Yelp since I don't like the site, but I think its pretty scummy of the Tribune also to willingly promulgate, at least by rhetorical implication, the idea that Justin G is some kind of shill for non-Brader dog trainers.

(Very much tangential at this point, so I'll put my theory that Justin G, far from being a shill, is actually a superhero in parentheses. Consider: He's very secretive. He reviews businesses without leaving behind a trace of his true identity. He doesn't respond to queries from the Tribune. And look at his profile: He wears a cape. A cape! Also, his reviews are annoyingly sincere. And as for his name, clearly Justin G is justing the world one review at a time. Yes, verbing weirds language, but if you can justly right the world, why not rightly just it too?)

http://www.yelp.com/user_details?userid=z25c9TyWY1TdVEGxkj34...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversion_(linguistics)#Humor

[archangel_one]

I've heard talk of dodgy behaviour from Yelp before. See eg. this article: http://www.eastbayexpress.com/ebx/yelp-and-the-business-of-e... (via here: http://www.jwz.org/blog/2009/02/yelp-shakedown/)