Your platform has a serious design flaw. You are punishing Pros who are simply following your prompts to solicit reviews from past clients. My account was frozen after being accused of soliciting fraudulent reveiws. Furthermore when I attempted to challenge the freeze, no one was able to tell me why I was locked out to begin with.
Has anyone else dealt with this issue?
Every day when I log in to Thumbtack, I am prompted to reacho out to previous clients for reviews by notifications that say: "Get reviews from past customers. It's ok if they are not on Thumbtack." When I did that, I entered the emails of the past clients and they both submitted a review.
Both of them were flagged as fraudulent and my account was frozen for two weeks. When I reached out via email, chat, and phone, no one was allowed to even tell me why these reviews were deemed fraudulent or violated the terms of service. They just repeated the same form letters to inform me my account was frozen.
To begin, I wouldn't have even reached out for reviews from the clients in question if I wasn't prompted every single day to do so.
I was told that since the people submitting the review were not initiated or communicated through thumbtack that they were seen as fraudulent! These are legitimate past clients with favorable reviews for which I can provide invoices and delivered work. Its one thing to take them down, but why lock out a Pro trying to give you money? Not to mention, first accusing him of fraud without recourse, then not allowing him to speak with a person with the authority to discuss the nature of the algorithm's mistake.
To your designers:
If asking clients who did not use the thumbtack platform is not allowed, why did your interface allow me to enter their email address? If you were interested in only engaging past users of your platform, why not cross reference it with your existing user database? I'm guessing that you didn't stop them from creating user accounts, did you? I'm also guessing that you're now advertising to them right now using the email addresses that I provided to you. Not to mention, if you noticed that they had not interacted on your platform, why let them go live in the first place when you could easily have prevented it and disabled the option in the first place if they were a new user, or had no record of interaction? Think of it the other way around? Should someone on your platform who has not even interacted with me be able to write a negative review?
I am frustrated and upset that an otherwise great product has not invested in pathways to resolve issues created by their reliance on automation.