Discussion of VE forum RULES

[NateHanson]

The current rules for the Vendor Experiences Forum can be found here.

In the VE Forum Moderation poll thread, there have been some comments about the rules of the forum being too restrictive, or seeming to favor businesses' over members' interests. Since the Poll on Moderation is meant to reflect peoples opinions on the implementation of the rules, and not the rules themselves, I thought I'd start another thread here so people could comment on the rules, if they feel they're problematic.

Before commenting, please take a minute to review the rules (link above), so that you are not working on a misconception of what the rules are. Some of the comments in the previous thread reflected some misunderstandings of what the rules are, in my opinion.

Thanks, Nate

 

[JGard]

I said it in my post in that other thread. I think it's too easy for customers to get screwed by vendors. In the board I moderate (www.nasioc.com), we lay down a heavy hand on vendors, and so long as a customer's posting doesn't get too out of line and non-factual, we let them know.

In any hobby, vendors are able to screw us, the customers, the little people. We need to look out more for each other than for the vendors.

Just my personal opinion.

 

[Chuck Spyropulos]

LFSs

Yes, I agree 100%. Sometimes it seems to me that too much importance is placed on "saving the LFS's reputation". That is what happens when LFSs are sponsors; it creates a conflict of interest such that the BOD or Mods now have to protect the stores. I think this is a bad policy and potentially makes certain forums useless, such as the VE forum.

I said it in my post in that other thread. I think it's too easy for customers to get screwed by vendors. In the board I moderate (www.nasioc.com), we lay down a heavy hand on vendors, and so long as a customer's posting doesn't get too out of line and non-factual, we let them know.

In any hobby, vendors are able to screw us, the customers, the little people. We need to look out more for each other than for the vendors.

Just my personal opinion.

 

[One Eye]

Chuck, AGAIN....I will explain this to you again.

WE IN NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM HAVE SET THE RULES UP, OR MODERATE THE RULES, TO PROTECT THE VENDORS. WE DO NOT TOLERATE INFLAMITORY REMARKS FROM EITHER SIDE. THIS FORUM WILL BE USED TO SHARE INFORMATION. THIS FORUM WILL NOT BE USED FOR NAME CALLING, INSULTS, THREATS OR ANY OTHER INFLAMITORY REMARK.

The rules are really set up to avoid slander and inaccuracy.

If it didn't happen to you personaly then you really don't know the facts and would therefore have an innacurate view or comment.

Name calling and threats on a public forum are not only childish, but also slanderous.

 

[clamm]

I disagree. Negative comments about a LFS that is a sponsor can be put on the vendor expenience board as long as they meet the 1st hand experience clause and other rules set forth on the sticky that no one reads.

 

[~Flighty~]

I do not agree that posts are moderated in favor of the vendors or sponsors. We usually edit them to remove personal atacks. "That owner is an a**" wouldn't be ok, but personal experiences are left regardless of wether or not they are negative.

 

[redpaulhus]

I think the VE rules make sense.
Specifically - I think the rule about first-person experience only is extremely important.
The BRS is responsible for the content of this website. If a person said they heard that some guy at some store feeds kittens to the bumblebee grouper, that store could sue the BRS.
Likewise, if some storeowner said they heard I came in looking for kittens to feed my bumblebee grouper, I could sue the store AND the BRS.

and I'm not talking about "theory" here - I'm talking about realistic liability post petswarehouse.com :

http://petsforum.com/psw/


I haven't seen a bias either towards or against vendors in the rules - nor have I ever seen a vendor "screw" a hobbyist. Have I seen hobbyists make stupid purchasing decisions based on what they were told ? sure. In EVERY hobby I enjoy - cars, fishing, boating, PC's, dogs, cats, ferrets, and of course fish -- there's always a shyster selling snake-oil or fools gold, and there are fools lining up to buy.

I haven't seen anything in the rules against posting that I ordered a tank from Tanks-R-Us and they sent me a bag'o'glass (or never delivered, or it was scratched, etc).

Unlike RC, I don't see threads getting locked as soon as they concern a sponsor (check out the euro-reef threads in the RC VE forum, if you can find them - *poof* locked)

However -- people need to be responsible mature adults. Write as if you were writing a letter to your child's teacher, or to a judge. State the facts. State your opinion of the facts (if you like). Don't get personal.
Before clicking Post, reread what you wrote. Would you want your children to read that as an example of your maturity ? Would you want them using those words to refer to another human being ?
How would you feel if somebody used those words to describe you ?

my two cents

 

[JGard]

Red, if you get a chance, go to nasioc.com and check out the vendor forums there.

Personally I do not agree with you. The vendor issue is HUGE when it comes to ordering things online. For local stores I don't think getting "screwed" is very likely, but ordering online, you never know what you're really going to get.

As for storeowners or vendors SUEing BRS for something its members have posted, please show me examples of where that has happened in the past. As far as I know, BRS can claim that things written on this board to not reflect the thoughts and feelings of BRS, and they absolutely do NOT have to be held accountable for things people post here.

Just think of talk radio or something. If a caller calls and completely destroys some athlete's image, can that athlete sue the radio company? Nope! They sure cannot.

That is why I think BRS is taking it a little too far.

While I agree someone posting "My friend's sister's ex-boyfriend's Dad used to shop at X and he said that they said xxxxx" is completely useless, if somebody wants to go off a little about their experience or state what their future intentions are with said vendor due to past experiences, I think it is completely legit.

 

[Chuck Spyropulos]

Discussion

In general, I agree. But if this forum is to benefit BRS members, the consumers, then I believe that the rules should be looser, not tighter than the other forums and more lightly moderated. The problem with the first-person experience rule is that it is unenforceable: How can anybody verify a person's first-hand account unless they are there at the store with them?

If there were to be some mis-use of the forum by people repeating stories they hear, or whatever, I really do not believe that it would affect the total BRS membership's opinion of the store. The reason is that the negative post in question would probably be dwarfed by positive posts if the store exhibits good quality products, customer service, etc.. The many positive posts vs the few negative posts would serve as a "self-regulating" mechanism.

If the problem is a conflict of interest between the sponsorship program and the VE Forum then this is a much more different and serious problem that would need to be addressed by the BOD. For example, if negative posts can pose legal problems for the BRS, especially since many LFSs are sponsors and pay to be visible in the VE Forum, then my vote is to get rid of the Sponsorship program. LFSs would continue to thrive if they offer a better product than the next guy and mechanisms to do group buys, LFS visits, etc could still be implemented via other means. In this way, the VE forum would be a much more valuable asset to BRS members.

I think the VE rules make sense.
Specifically - I think the rule about first-person experience only is extremely important.
The BRS is responsible for the content of this website. If a person said they heard that some guy at some store feeds kittens to the bumblebee grouper, that store could sue the BRS.
Likewise, if some storeowner said they heard I came in looking for kittens to feed my bumblebee grouper, I could sue the store AND the BRS.

and I'm not talking about "theory" here - I'm talking about realistic liability post petswarehouse.com :

http://petsforum.com/psw/


I haven't seen a bias either towards or against vendors in the rules - nor have I ever seen a vendor "screw" a hobbyist. Have I seen hobbyists make stupid purchasing decisions based on what they were told ? sure. In EVERY hobby I enjoy - cars, fishing, boating, PC's, dogs, cats, ferrets, and of course fish -- there's always a shyster selling snake-oil or fools gold, and there are fools lining up to buy.

I haven't seen anything in the rules against posting that I ordered a tank from Tanks-R-Us and they sent me a bag'o'glass (or never delivered, or it was scratched, etc).

Unlike RC, I don't see threads getting locked as soon as they concern a sponsor (check out the euro-reef threads in the RC VE forum, if you can find them - *poof* locked)

However -- people need to be responsible mature adults. Write as if you were writing a letter to your child's teacher, or to a judge. State the facts. State your opinion of the facts (if you like). Don't get personal.
Before clicking Post, reread what you wrote. Would you want your children to read that as an example of your maturity ? Would you want them using those words to refer to another human being ?
How would you feel if somebody used those words to describe you ?

my two cents

 

[One Eye]

Sponsor do not pay to be visible in the VE forum. Again, read the rules, the VE forum is for discussion of all vendors, not just sponsors.
Sponsors pay for their banner ads and, if applicable, their forums.

 

[Chuck Spyropulos]

Agreed

I think you hit the nail on the head. It would be extremely difficult for stores to claim slander and win in court. The reason, as you state, is that all of our posts are opinions and are not necessarily shared by the BOD or other members. For an example of how this works, the E-Bay rating system comes to mind, full of negative ratings and negative comments. I have even bought things from E-Bay stores or members that got negative ratings and/or negative comments. The stores/members that have a 95% good rating do not prevent me from shopping on their sites.

I also agree with your opinion that: "BRS is taking it a little too far".

Red, if you get a chance, go to nasioc.com and check out the vendor forums there.

Personally I do not agree with you. The vendor issue is HUGE when it comes to ordering things online. For local stores I don't think getting "screwed" is very likely, but ordering online, you never know what you're really going to get.

As for storeowners or vendors SUEing BRS for something its members have posted, please show me examples of where that has happened in the past. As far as I know, BRS can claim that things written on this board to not reflect the thoughts and feelings of BRS, and they absolutely do NOT have to be held accountable for things people post here.

Just think of talk radio or something. If a caller calls and completely destroys some athlete's image, can that athlete sue the radio company? Nope! They sure cannot.

That is why I think BRS is taking it a little too far.

While I agree someone posting "My friend's sister's ex-boyfriend's Dad used to shop at X and he said that they said xxxxx" is completely useless, if somebody wants to go off a little about their experience or state what their future intentions are with said vendor due to past experiences, I think it is completely legit.

 

[redpaulhus]

Have you read about Robert Novak and Petswarehouse.com ?

I was moderating a number of sites at the time, and it was a huge thing - members AND the board getting sued - who has the pockets and/or time to fight back against something like that ?

In the case of Novak - a number of the defendants finally settled -- ie PAYED HIM (it was cheaper than the projected legal costs). Do you want to have to pay a vendor because somebody here slandered them ? Do you want the club to do so ?

However, one of the things we discussed at the time was that if you were posting your own experiences you were covered under slander/libel laws. If you were posting things you didn't personally experience you are NOT. If I say "I was there when the kittens were fed to the grouper" I cannot be sued. If I say "I heard they breed kittens to feed groupers" I am wide open for a lawsuit.

Saying things like "the cashier is xyz" -- thats straight out of high school... and one step short of road rage or being the hockey dad who beat up the ref or coach -- are we that close to being Springer Nation ?

All I'm saying is that certain behavior is unacceptable from mature adults, and I saw alot of that behavior in VE forum posts here (usually right before the mods edited out the garbage).

 

[JGard]

Point taken. I'm surprised a law suit from postings on a web site actually succeeded. Then again, look at our freakin justice system :lol:

I do agree that there's generally no need for name calling.

 

[~Flighty~]

Thanks for the posts, redpaulhus, You are making many of the points I was having a hard time putting into words.

What he said

 

[RichConley]

Point taken. I'm surprised a law suit from postings on a web site actually succeeded. Then again, look at our freakin justice system :lol:

I do agree that there's generally no need for name calling.

The law suit doesnt need to succeed, thats the point. Just the court proceedings can put people under. Thats a common practice in corporate america at this point: Sue someone not because you have a chance of winning, but sue them because they can't afford to defend themselves.

 

[Moe_K]

The personal stuff has been moved to The Lounge.
Please keep the personal arguments out of this thread.
Thanks.

 

[rharlow]

Just had to say, wow that was cool, I was on page 4, then bingo, I'm on page 1 again. The irelevant stuff FINALLY disappeared! Thanks mods!

Chip

 

[IffersTankSlave]

I am simply amazed at all of this. I would think (there I go again) that it would be common sense (insert joke here) that a VE thread would be ONLY a first-hand account and experience. If it was postive, "I had a good experience at XYZ". If it was negative, "I had a bad experience at XYZ". State facts to support either statement, avoid name calling and insults, and move on. Is all of this really that difficult? Seems like there are some people here who just want to create a negative atmosphere around the club.

 

[rharlow]

I've been meaning to ask this, although I'm not sure if this is the right thread to do it in, but I'll take a shot. It does deal with VE forums however.

I have had a disappointing and frustrating transaction with a vendor and a sponsor - let me explain briefly. Ordered from Sponsor instead of online (non-sponsor) because I wanted to give some business locally and price was competitive. Order was for over $400. Was in the process of setting up tank and needed some items in a certain amount of time. When I placed the order, I was told that a couple of items were on backorder and that if I wanted them to be shipped out seperately, I'd have to pay shipping twice, so I decided to hold off the 1 week I was told it would be. To make a long story short, after repeated emails back and forth, 1 month later, I finally got my order. The delay was because as one item came in, now another item was sold out and went on backoder. This rolling backorder was finally stopped by me cancelling part of my order. Time was critical and I couldn't wait any longer!!! So, after a month wait, I still didn't get all my order, but to top it off, when I rcvd my order I found out that an item I ordered was replaced with a totally inferior/similar product without my knowledge. Now, the individual I was dealing with I think felt sincerley bad and tried to make up for it. He seemed nice enough although this order seemed out of his control. Well, I needed to return the swapped item, but wanted to hand carry it to the individual. He asked if I wanted a refund of the cancelled order immediately or wait until I returned the swapped item (he said no rush). I said to go ahead and wait. So, after probably a month, I finally was able to return item. The sponsor said he'd get right on the refund and try to post it the next day. Well, after waiting a week with no contact, I pmd the sponsor and he said he was still working on it. Also, doing taxes this weekend, I noticed that my charge card was charged for the initial purchase on the day I placed the order and not on the date the items were shipped - talk about the carry trade! It seems the attitude is that the sale is made, credit card charged, now I can move on.

So, the bottom line is that I will never order from this sponsor again. Do I think he's a bad guy - NO, actually he seems like a nice guy. Just that his distibutor sucks and he should get another. Was this a one-time event - possibly. If I say something and it is a one time event, have I pissed people off that come running to his defense. Since this is a close group, with meetings and all, how am I now seen in other peoples eyes - should I care? If it was an online vendor, far, far away, I wouldn't care, but I don't like possibly burning down local bridges. Am I being a wuus and not speaking up, probably, but that's me (non-confrontational (unlike others))

So, how is an experience like this relayed to others within the VE forum? I don't think it can be, especially with a sponsor. So I will not post this experience on the VE forum, yet if someone was to ask my opinion on a specific store, I would tell that individual my story.

If that individual wanted to relay that story as a second hand story, and it was factual, and did not mention my name, then I would not be opposed to it and would think it would help others.

To wrap it up, the BODs and MODs have an impossible task with this forum. The BODs for trying to make up rules that will be fair and avoid major problems, and the MODs for being the enforcers. You're doing an admirable job with no pay! But do understand that I think there will always be issues that will never be totally resolved - it's the nature of this type of a forum.

Chip

 

[KAS]

I am simply amazed at all of this. I would think (there I go again) that it would be common sense (insert joke here) that a VE thread would be ONLY a first-hand account and experience. If it was postive, "I had a good experience at XYZ". If it was negative, "I had a bad experience at XYZ". State facts to support either statement, avoid name calling and insults, and move on. Is all of this really that difficult? Seems like there are some people here who just want to create a negative atmosphere around the club.

What he said. Well stated.