This all boils down to process, and at Angie’s List, it works like this:

When a member posts a negative review, he or she has the option of getting help from an Angie’s List employee, who first asks a variation of “What would make you happy?” Maybe it’s a refund; maybe it’s another coat of paint. If the complained-about company then satisfies the consumer, that original review is deleted.“We believe that is only right,” said Cheryl Reed, a spokeswoman. “If the company has stepped up and the member is happy, that negative review shouldn’t be there.”

The member then gets a chance to post a new review, but now there are limits.

“The grade has to be at least a B, and while the consumer can reference the original transaction, it can’t be negative,” Ms. Reed said. “You can’t say, ‘I’m reviewing this company and they did a terrible job but I have to give them a B because they satisfied my complaint.’ ”

What is the rationale for this policy?

“We want everybody to have as much information as they can have,” she said.

Now, that sounds kind of odd to the Haggler. If Angie’s List were interested primarily in maximizing the information available to consumers, the original negative review would be part of the permanent record. If the company went on to satisfy the unhappy consumer, that would be in the record, too. And if, as was the case with Mr. Steg, the company’s attempt at mollification added to a list of grievances, that information would be posted as well.

The Haggler guesses that Angie’s List doesn’t operate with a complete-narrative ethos because it would scare off advertisers, which include Shamrock Overhead Door. (Shamrock did not return a call from the Haggler.) But for what it’s worth, Ms. Reed said Angie’s List would look at its process in light of Mr. Steg’s experience.

“I’m not saying we’ll change anything,” she said, “but we’re always taking feedback, and it often has an impact on operations.”