Vendor "bashing", as such, is unwarranted, terrible and uncalled-for - but I suppose it's all a matter of degree. Where do you draw the line between "attack" and "complaint"? This is a DISCUSSION forum - a place where people come to discuss their hobby and its supporting products. It can't all be "nice" I don't think - as much as everyone would just love it to be. I have to say that discussion revolves around a pivotal argument - which has both an affirmative and negative side to it. In not being "allowed" to air a negative thought, are we constricting the very nature of a forum? I believe so. There needs to be a way to say what you need to but in a moderated fashion, for which we have just such people to keep it fair. Guys - you can't run a forum and only ever see positive opinions on vendors because I think you are removing the very reason why people use these forums - to empower their decision making processes. Keep it fair, yes - but please don't stifle it. If you want to run a forum you have to expect disagreement and dissent from time to time. Keep it under control and you'll be doing everyone who comes here a great service. Again - it's all a matter of degree, and that degree must be dynamically monitored per post - again, that's why there are helpers called moderators.
I understand the plausible threat of legality, but if a complaint against a vendor (who earn their very living by me and you spending our hard-earned with them) is legitimate and can be supported without making false claims then it should be able to be heard. This forum should, in my opinion attempt to protect its users from unscrupulous vendors if they prove to be that. If the complaint is not justifed then it must be either withdrawn or apologised for. It's a difficult thing to manage, but I sincerely think that you have to provide this service if this forum is to be of use to the target audience. You can't have the good without the occasional bad. If I can't come here to hear an opinion on the performance of a product or the people selling that product, then all it becomes is a less effective place to visit.
Quote:
discussion
c.1340, from O.Fr. discussion, from L.L. discussionem "examination, discussion," in classical L., "a shaking," from discussus, pp. of discutere "strike asunder, break up," from dis- "apart" + quatere "to shake." Originally "examination, investigation, judicial trial;" meaning of "talk over, debate" first recorded 1448. Sense evolution in L. appears to have been from "smash apart" to "scatter, disperse," then in post-classical times (via the mental process involved) to "investigate, examine," then to "debate."
|
Here I go - rocking the boat again.
The very real need for advertising revenue here could sometimes negate the impartiality aspect I suspect. It's a very hard balancing act, but one you've chosen to partake in.
On the flip side - I am yet to think of a complaint about ANY vendor usually mentioned here on the forum that I've dealt with. They've all been exceptionally good in comparison to some I've dealt with in other industry circles.