How Reviews & Ratings Work

1. Review Eligibility & Authentic Experience

Only authenticated users who completed a paid booking on Practitionist (OPC) Private Limited may publish a public review or submit session quality feedback. Unbooked visitors, cancelled appointments, and unpaid sessions cannot post public reviews, and collaborators or host team members cannot review their own sessions.

2. BIS IS 19000:2022 Principles

• Integrity & Equal Treatment: Positive and negative reviews undergo identical verification and publication rules. A low star rating is never suppressed, delayed, or treated differently from a high rating.
• No Arbitrary Editing: Practitionist (OPC) Private Limited never edits star scores or rewrites review prose submitted by an attendee.
• Author Withdrawal: Reviewers may edit or withdraw their own published review from their dashboard.

3. Two-Track Rating Aggregation

Ratings are aggregated separately across two experience tracks so one format never distorts the other:

• 1:1 Consultations & Subscriptions (ONE_TO_ONE): Reflects individual advisory and mentoring bookings.
• Group Programs (GROUP): Reflects interactive cohorts and live webinars.

Every displayed average score is always accompanied by the number of verified ratings included in that track.

4. Moderation Grounds & Human Review Only

Reviewed experts and active host-organization administrators may flag a review under one of five policy grounds:

• Coercion, extortion, or retaliatory pressure: Reviews tied to demands for outside-policy concessions, refund threats, or harassment prioritized at the top of our queue.
• Spam or unverified claim: Promotional links, fabricated factual claims contradicted by platform session records, or duplicate spam.
• Harassment or abusive language: Hate speech, threats, personal attacks, or disclosure of private personal data.
• Irrelevant or off-topic: Content unrelated to the booked engagement or platform experience.
• Other policy concern: Any other breach of community safety guidelines.

Human Review Guarantee (DSA Art. 16 & 17): Every moderation report and appeal is evaluated solely by a trained human moderator. No automated decision-making or AI filtering removes, demotes, or suppresses public reviews.

5. “Not Counted in Rating” Exclusions & Redress

When session records show an anomaly (such as an unresolved platform outage or verified retaliatory timing) that warrants excluding a score from aggregate averages without erasing good-faith text, a human moderator may mark a review Not counted in rating. Both parties receive a written statement of reasons naming the specific policy ground, confirming that no automated means were used, and providing a report reference code (RPT-XXXXXXXX).

If you disagree with any moderation decision, you have three redress options: (1) submit an internal appeal for free human reconsideration within 6 months via Support or our Grievance Redressal page quoting your RPT-XXXXXXXX reference number; (2) refer eligible disputes to a certified out-of-court dispute settlement body where applicable (including EU DSA Art. 21 bodies); or (3) seek judicial redress before the competent courts.