Good question. Call me pedantic, but I think it's the fact that many members won't/don't know it's BS that's the problem with it, really. I instinctively agree. There are many good points both in the OP, and among the responses, too (including those coming to a different conclusion). Specifically, I agree with the comments made about Bob Morse and Bone, both of whom are clearly an asset to the forum, and we're lucky to have them. I also have plenty of respect for Baron over both his recent stance against "personal attacks" and the fact that in general he clearly prefers to err on the side of free speech. Anyway, it's clearly his problem, not ours ... I imagine that at some point he'll need to decide whether whatever the sponsor in question is paying is really worth all the trouble, given the members' collective reactions (and maybe the extra work/headaches incurred)? Or maybe the person concerned will think better of the whole thing and leave, at some point? Not really our problem, or our business, anyway, I suppose? But respect to Baron, including for tolerating this kind of discussion on the board (which I'm not certain I'd manage, in his position). And seasonal greetings to all.
What did I miss, whom are we talking about? Anyhow, there are 2 different time frames when it comes to thread deletion: 1. Regretting a silly thread after a few hours and having only a few responses thus the OP deleting it. No problem. 2. Having a long and most likely critical discussion, the sponsor not liking it and deleting the thread, because it is a threat to their service. Big problem. We have at least 5 very long (500+ posts) threads on TST, mostly critical bringing up lots of issues with their service. I wasn't even aware they could delete them.(well, the ones they started) But that clearly wouldn't serve possible customers to their service who might want to be aware of the possible problems and want to hear both sides of the story. But making it a moot issue, one can always make a separate thread talking about a particular sponsor, and the sponsor has no deleting power.
I totally agree. Slanderous posts by an individual on your threads....sure. Like you said, it could be a competitor or a disgruntled ex member; but I don't think we are talking about the same thing here. When you delete dozens of your own posts... that borderline weird. Just because they pay, its wrong for them to go back and delete their material that speaks volumes about their character. I definitely see your point but there exists a fine line here. Would the Better Business Bureau allow this? What about Angie's list (Home Advisor)? Would you hire an electrician if he acted like a 12 year old and that was obvious from his own self written content? Would you not like to see that content before he came to your home? You'd feel duped if it was deleted and you never got a chance to see it. Oh well, like Xela said, its not my headache. And as always kudos to Baron for always keeping free speech alive and well. I just don't like name callers or people who think they are better than someone else, especially when they attack with below the belt jabs worthy of a grade-school bully. I wouldn't use their system if they payed me. Don't need it anyway.
This. It's fine if a sponsor creates a thread, regrets creating it immediately and it's gone before there are any replies. However, what if they create a thread, there's discussion on the topic that can be valuable many years later, then he decides to delete it - that's ET saying to members "your posts are the property of sponsors and your contributions are worthless if they deem so". In the end, sponsors should be able to handle criticism, it's as simple as that. I've made some quite aggressive comments and others have made some about me, I don't see any problem with all of it being around. I see way too many people nowadays who are unable to handle disagreements, surprising many are already old men - the category I'd least expect to be "snowflakes". Personal attacks that are vulgar are a different story but that's not very common anyway.
Yep!! And if they can't, the value of the product is in doubt, or they need a course in salesmanship, or both in the case of you know who!!
correct. let a sponsor show his true face through name calling. it is good for the rest of us to see his true colors. keep a copy of those posts and post it from time to time "when appropriate" to remind ET members who we are dealing with. transparency brings about the best outcomes.
I disagree with this. There's two things I know (well, am pretty certain of at least) about two different sponsors that show both sides of this. 1. Lightspeed seems pretty good with happy customers. 2. The hold times at IB suck. I've also read people who were disgruntled with services that after reflection I believed were either mistaken or had outright malicious intent. I don't think it's unreasonable to leave it to the reader to figure this stuff out. It's like a Yelp review that gave 1 start because they didn't have diet coke (only pepsi).
I think most members of the forum know the vendor in question and agree with you. The others who buy the system...well the market always needs fresh meat .
I agree in principle but to kind of put things in context, Yelp is a massive business with a robust legal department. ET is a small business despite its wide reach and high google rankings. It may not be feasible for Baron to address all the legal headaches that come with 1 star rankings. However, I don't know the inner workings of ET.