Jump to content


Photo

Utterly Frustrated With "utterly Frustrated"


  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#1 JimLucas

JimLucas

    Ineluctable Opinionmaker

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10128 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Denmark

Posted 12 February 2005 - 06:24 AM

It's annoying enough to see that insulting subject line keep popping up in my "New Posts", doubly annoying when I have to suffer that subject line on a post which is really off topic. (E.g., "Don't they have TiVo in the UK?") But the two C.net Topics/threads whose topics are complaints about a certain maker are now at the top of the list when I do a Google search on Maker M's name. (And that's a major reason why I'm carefully not naming him here.) The "Questions Needing Answered..." Topic was closed by KC as being "unproductive", but it's still there, and it still shows up in the Google search, broadcast to all the world and emphasized by being at the top of the list.

Folks, we may feel we have a friendly, private group here, but in fact we have the Google "camera" following us wherever we go, even into our equivalent of the bedroom and bathroom, and broadcasting everything to a wider public than any TV show ever had, and available at the click of a button for years to come.

Even those posts defending M are, by their very existence, prolonging and bringing added attention to the "Utterly..." Topic here on C.net, yet any new viewers are still going to see the complaint first, and possibly never scroll down to the defense.

That's why I'm posting this here in this subForum. It's about the Forum, because it's about how we use the Forum. And that's a general point. But now some specifics:

The originator of those two Topics (I'll call him/her "Y", and use the male pronoun) made complaints and accusations against a specific individual, not only maligning M by name, but putting the denunciation and the name into the subject lines. For maximum negative impact? Asked for details, Y has not been forthcoming. Who is he, really? What is the special nature of the instrument he ordered? What specific "promises" did M make? Were they really promises, or merely "current estimates"? Y says he paid a deposit to M. Has he asked that it be returned? (I might even guess that M has offered to return it, but that is entirely a guess, based on what I would be inclined to do.)

I'm tempted to respond to Y with a long list of "questions needing answered"... by him. But his email is "Private", and he hasn't been "active" here since Feb. 1, two days after his first post. I believe that means that he hasn't even logged in. Did he simply take our advice that C.net was not the proper place for pusuing his campaign?

Whatever the reason, the fact is that his posts and threads are still alive, and through the agency of C.net and Google are a potential information-virus with the capability of widespread propagation. True or false, he provides no evidence for his complaints, and so they could become a legal basis for a charge of slander or libel (please let's not argue which). And one poster has recently added a rumor which is both obviously fabricated -- since no-one but M could possibly have the information to validate it, -- and contrary to facts reported by others.

So aside from cautioning all about the effects -- possible and even actual (it does show up in Google) -- of their posting behavior, I would recommend 1) that the "Utterly Frustrated..." Topic be closed, and 2) that both it and its "Questions Needing Answered..." companion Topic be deleted from C.net. And if this Topic also disappeared, I wouldn't complain.

I'll remind everyone that I am a staunch supporter of "Paul owns C.net, so he has a right to do whatever he wants with it." So the above is my opinion and my recommendation, and nothing more. If he makes no changes (or even deletes this Topic and not the others), I will not complain. Still, I hope he considers my argument, and any comments (public or private) by others regarding the issues I've raised.

#2 JimLucas

JimLucas

    Ineluctable Opinionmaker

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10128 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Denmark

Posted 12 February 2005 - 06:42 AM

I should say that I do think there was some interesting and useful discussion in the "Utterly..." Topic, and I think that if people wanted to discuss general issues of the business of concertina construction and repair, without making personal attacks, that would be appropriate.

In fact, I think I'll start such a discussion.

#3 Mark Evans

Mark Evans

    Heavyweight Boxer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1674 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Milford, MA.

Posted 12 February 2005 - 09:59 AM

Quite a wake up call Jim. I mentioned my wife's name in the forum, and low and behold the next time I google her (that didn't sound quite right), there is it at #5! Thank goodness I had mentioned to her my use of her name in Alan's discussion on being a professional...she could have been offended and suprised.

This must have caused the builders in question a great deal of pain. It's not fun, but I would like to say that several of the C. Net family....made me very proud in their staunch defense against a particularly unhinged rant. Were I to need someone to watch my back in a pub punch-up vertual or otherwise, they'd fit the bill methinks. For good or otherwise it's out there and their swift response brings a little balance to what otherwise could be very damaging.

I know, because there are two reviews of a performance I was involved in over ten years ago floating around on the net. One good, one very ugly and hurtful to me personaly.

P.S. It occurs ta me you'd be a tough customer in a altercation as well ;) .

Edited by Mark Evans, 12 February 2005 - 10:56 AM.


#4 JimLucas

JimLucas

    Ineluctable Opinionmaker

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10128 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Denmark

Posted 12 February 2005 - 10:22 AM

It occurs ta me you'd be a tough customer in a altercation as well ;) .

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, one of my anecdotes -- which I won't expand on here -- is about the time I used my tin whistle to successfully fight off three muggers. :ph34r:

#5 Mark Evans

Mark Evans

    Heavyweight Boxer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1674 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Milford, MA.

Posted 12 February 2005 - 11:30 AM

Question: Was it a low or high D whistle?

I purchased a low D whistle that is made of pvc pipe (don't laugh, it is drop dead beautiful black and a stunning tone). One of the makers selling points was that it would be very useful in a punch-up. :blink:

Now I have a mental picture of you going at them, whistle in hand, like Dartanian!

#6 JimLucas

JimLucas

    Ineluctable Opinionmaker

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10128 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Denmark

Posted 12 February 2005 - 11:51 AM

WARNING: Thread Drift :) (Hmm. Why can't I make the smiley red, too? :()

Question:  Was it a low or high D whistle?


Not low D. Standard Generation D whistle.

I purchased a low D whistle that is made of pvc pipe (don't laugh, it is drop dead beautiful black and a stunning tone).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sounds like the one otsaku showed me last night.
Very nice. And somehow an easier stretch for the fingers.

#7 Henk van Aalten

Henk van Aalten

    Heavyweight Boxer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1082 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Netherlands

Posted 12 February 2005 - 01:24 PM

Folks, we may feel we have a friendly, private group here, but in fact we have the Google "camera" following us wherever we go, even into our equivalent of the bedroom and bathroom, and broadcasting everything to a wider public than any TV show ever had, and available at the click of a button for years to come.

So aside from cautioning all about the effects -- possible and even actual (it does show up in Google) -- of their posting behavior, I would recommend 1) that the "Utterly Frustrated..." Topic be closed, and 2) that both it and its "Questions Needing Answered..." companion Topic be deleted from C.net.  And if this Topic also disappeared, I wouldn't complain.

I'll remind everyone that I am a staunch supporter of "Paul owns C.net, so he has a right to do whatever he wants with it."  So the above is my opinion and my recommendation, and nothing more.  If he makes no changes (or even deletes this Topic and not the others), I will not complain.  Still, I hope he considers my argument, and any comments (public or private) by others regarding the issues I've raised.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Jim,
Thanks for bringing this up. I fully support your request to remove this topic.
As soon as the first mail of Y appeared, I did not like it at all. In my opinion a newcomer with a first mail like this does not fit in this C.Net community. So I reported the mail directly and asked Paul to remove it.
Paul replied and gave some reasons (at that time) to continue.

Jim, I think that your arguments add some extra weight for Paul to reconsider the situation.

#8 Peter Brook

Peter Brook

    Chatty concertinist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 428 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sheffield, South Yorkshire - currently exiled to Cranbrook, Kent (England)

Posted 12 February 2005 - 02:37 PM

I also think it should be removed. I have been amazed at the "wallet waving" going on and think that some of the statements have been quite crass.

Jim makes very valid points about google - big brother is watching, and that is perhaps why the first post was anonymous.

What about defamation of character? Potential loss of customer trust? etc.

Best think would be to close it down and remove it and then 24 hours no one outside this community would be any the wiser.

#9 Alan Day

Alan Day

    Ineluctable Opinionmaker

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3099 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Horley Surrey England

Posted 12 February 2005 - 02:39 PM

It is a shame that drift from the original subject for me and a lot of other people has got really interesting.It would have been better in hindsight to have moved the subject of Concertina Manufaturers economics to a different position and let the original drift out of site.
With that in mind my response to Franks posting is that I recently posted a discussion regarding the current price of concertinas and suggested that are they underpriced and Franks` calculation are showing that.I think now is the time to buy, the market seems to be moving upward and also there seems to be a large number of people buying concertinas at the moment.One day their German/Chinese cheap concertina will be exchanged for more costly models and makers will be even busier than they are now to keep up with demand.
I will finish by saying that I do not accept orders for goods that I cannot supply in the required delivery time.The more I hear about orders outstanding for ten years plus it is no wonder some customers are getting dissatisfied.
Al

#10 JimLucas

JimLucas

    Ineluctable Opinionmaker

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10128 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Denmark

Posted 12 February 2005 - 03:37 PM

I will finish by saying that I do not accept orders for goods that I cannot supply in the required delivery time.The more I hear about orders outstanding for ten years plus it is no wonder some customers are getting dissatisfied.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That seems to make the assumption, which in my experience is false, that M takes "orders" in the normal sense of the term. I am on his list. It was my understanding when I submitted my name, that M would keep a record of my request, and would contact me about converting it into an "order" when he was ready to begin work on it... if that happens before he dies. He made no promise or even estimate of when that might be, though he did indicate that it would likely be longer if I was requesting something special, which I was.

If you want to discuss the pros and cons of that way of doing business, I invite you to the Makers & Markets Topic I've started in the Instrument Construction & Repair subForum.

#11 Alan Day

Alan Day

    Ineluctable Opinionmaker

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3099 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Horley Surrey England

Posted 12 February 2005 - 06:24 PM

Jim I will just finish my point here before joining you in Makers and Markets section which I missed earlier,my apologies for not seeing it.
I mentioned no specific name when refering to makers in my last posting Jim,I was actually thinking about another maker when I wrote it,but I can understand your assumption as this subject was originally about a specific maker, however do you think an open ended agreement is a proper business deal,I do not. It is just the sort of thing that eventually leads to frustration and argument.
Al

Edited by Alan Day, 12 February 2005 - 06:47 PM.


#12 Nanette Hooker

Nanette Hooker

    Chatty concertinist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 184 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Townsville, Queensland, Australia

Posted 12 February 2005 - 06:56 PM

Folks, I would recommend 1) that the "Utterly Frustrated..." Topic be closed, and 2) that both it and its "Questions Needing Answered..." companion Topic be deleted from C.net.  And if this Topic also disappeared, I wouldn't complain.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Jim,
Thanks for bringing this up. I fully support your request to remove this topic.
As soon as the first mail of Y appeared, I did not like it at all. In my opinion a newcomer with a first mail like this does not fit in this C.Net community. So I reported the mail directly and asked Paul to remove it.
Paul replied and gave some reasons (at that time) to continue.
Jim, I think that your arguments add some extra weight for Paul to reconsider the situation.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree with Jim and Henk, I think these topics should be removed from the forums

#13 Stephen Mills

Stephen Mills

    Chatty concertinist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 303 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Houston, TX USA

Posted 12 February 2005 - 11:28 PM

While I have squirmed uncomfortably through some recent threads, I will go on record with apparently the minority opinion, that these posts should not be deleted. The basic reason is that I think that it is a step in over-restriction of the compass of possible c.net postings. This is the only forum which I monitor or on which I participate, and a major reason is the courtesy and respect generally displayed. Nevertheless, I think that this arises primarily from the nature of our core group and it is a mistake to try to legislate this standard. There have been cases where Ken and Paul have stepped in, of which I have approved, but I think these are best treated as exceptions.

What are the good reasons for deletion? Jim’s major argument, filtered through me, is that the google eye is watching. Well, yes it is, but doesn’t that go with the territory? I suspect the “M”,s, to accept the specific terminology of this thread, do not often “google” on “M+concertina”. Is the “M”’s reputation significantly harmed? It’s tempting to say that anyone so ignorant of the concertina world to take place value on such a posting over the overall reputation of the M’s in the concertina community would deserve what they get, and the better for the rest of you on their waiting list, anyway. More significant, for me, is that C&R M, would be sufficiently dismayed by news of this little tempest and in fact cut back their concertina-making activities. I do think this is over-analysis; I suspect from OB’s own comments that they have already sized up his specific situation. They must regularly deal with a great many antsy customers. If they choose to move the “squeaky wheels” up or down their list, that’s their prerogative, IMO; more power to them. Obviously, they have not adapted the “W*lm**t, or any other customer-efficient strategy, nor should they. Personally, I think they should be regarded in roughly the same vein as artists. You may commission a certain type of artwork from a particular artist, agree upon a price and some hopeful date of commission, but, unless you’re the pope, you don’t say, “Wasn’t that ceiling supposed to be finished 36 months ago?” Possibly, if the M’s are aware of this thread, they might alter their policies in a manner more suitable for themselves and their customers? Even without assuming any basis to OB’s claims, wouldn’t this be a good thing for all parties?

As Jim noted, even uncomfortable threads, such as this one, elicit responses interesting in their own rights. This group of threads has already brought out one of our rarer posters, whose comments are, to me, like jewels, and thus has earned its place.

What are the standards for inclusion in c.net? Non-offensiveness? I think most would agree that would be a disaster. I think we gladly accept our own Jim as he is, with occasional prickly comments that have sometimes offended (admittedly, at a much lower level). Where’s the cutoff? My personal preference is to set it higher than proposed. We don’t want to descend to the level of many, perhaps most other forums, but between the innate nature of our community, at present, and the efforts of our forum administrators, I would rather we let things take their own course until there’s an obvious and genuine deterioration of civililty. General slagging (I love learning these Britishisms) must of course be off-base.

edited for clarity

Edited by Stephen Mills, 12 February 2005 - 11:30 PM.


#14 Samantha

Samantha

    Heavyweight Boxer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 725 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:South West Scotland

Posted 13 February 2005 - 03:54 AM

I find it interesting that two c.net users (one in this thread and one in the other utterly frustrated thread) have taken the care to refer to, but not name, a large US retailer through the use of asterisks.
How about a middle way? In the other UF thread, could the name of the maker be similarly transformed? Then there would be no censorship and the discussions could continue.
Samantha

#15 JimLucas

JimLucas

    Ineluctable Opinionmaker

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10128 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Denmark

Posted 13 February 2005 - 05:19 AM

I find it interesting that two c.net users (one in this thread and one in the other utterly frustrated thread) have taken the care to refer to, but not name, a large US retailer through the use of asterisks.
How about a middle way? In the other UF thread, could the name of the maker be similarly transformed? Then there would be no censorship and the discussions could continue.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You mean, edit all the existing posts and their subject lines, to eliminate the name reference? An interesting thought, and one I think would be quite appropriate, but...
... I suspect that for Paul or Ken to do that would be the equivalent of making a "special" concertina, i.e., extra work when they already don't have enough time.
... There are ethical and possibly legal issues involved in editing someone else's posts, for which I would expect strong opinions on both sides. For Oddball to make a legal complaint, though, he would have to reveal his true identity.

#16 JimLucas

JimLucas

    Ineluctable Opinionmaker

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10128 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Denmark

Posted 13 February 2005 - 05:21 AM

edited for clarity

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Who's Clarity? Typos sister? :unsure:

#17 JimLucas

JimLucas

    Ineluctable Opinionmaker

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10128 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Denmark

Posted 13 February 2005 - 06:07 AM

I find it interesting that two c.net users (one in this thread and one in the other utterly frustrated thread) have taken the care to refer to, but not name, a large US retailer through the use of asterisks.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It occurs to me to wonder whether they did that for fear of retaliation over what might be considered a negative view of said retailer, or whether it's so that C.net won't be presented to everyone googling said retailer's name, or for some other reason I haven't thought of. :unsure:

#18 Stephen Chambers

Stephen Chambers

    Ineluctable Opinionmaker

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4402 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 February 2005 - 07:54 AM

Who's Clarity?  Typos sister? :unsure:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Isn't she Faith and Hope's ? :blink:




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users