How nVidia blacklists review sites: example Hardware Secrets

[Rebel44]

Kyle from HardOCP also didnt recieve 465.



Question: will you review 465?

I am sure we will, but NVIDIA has never mentioned this card to us. I think it is going to SUCK overall at the $279 price point. The GTX 460 will follow the 465 and is a LOT more likely to fill that sub-470 space.

 

[Creig]

Sorry you feel this way. I would hope that everyone deserves debate instead of personal attacks.

Too bad he didn't feel the same way. "Personal attacks" were his modus operandi, hence the reason he's been permabanned from many major forums (AnandTech, Sharky Extreme, Rage3D, HardForums, Hexus, and God only knows how many other sites). Heck, I think he was even temporarily banned from NvNews.

 

[0roo0roo]

i'd feel more sorry for the site if it weren't so douchy about spreading its reviews over a dozen pages or more for bs reasons. Its just not worth the hassle to read any of the stuff on there.

 

[SirPauly]

Too bad he didn't feel the same way. "Personal attacks" were his modus operandi, hence the reason he's been permabanned from many major forums (AnandTech, Sharky Extreme, Rage3D, HardForums, Hexus, and God only knows how many other sites). Heck, I think he was even temporarily banned from NvNews.

Imho,

Tend to think it was more lightning rod points and stirring the pot too much then him offering personal Shots. His lack of diplomacy made him a target for personal shots and some posters took this lack of diplomacy as personal attacks. In other words, he created such drama, it disrupted forums.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with being pro-nVidia or pro-amd -- both companies have their advantages that may appeal to certain individuals. The discourse at times is fun and can be informative but what gets in the way is drama and personal attacks and disrupts the flow of forums.

Sadly, Rollo, just wouldn't bend.

 

[akugami]

Imho,

Tend to think it was more lightning rod points and stirring the pot too much then him offering personal Shots. His lack of diplomacy made him a target for personal shots and some posters took this lack of diplomacy as personal attacks. In other words, he created such drama, it disrupted forums.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with being pro-nVidia or pro-amd -- both companies have their advantages that may appeal to certain individuals. The discourse at times is fun and can be informative but what gets in the way is drama and personal attacks and disrupts the flow of forums.

Sadly, Rollo, just wouldn't bend.

Rollo wasn't just offering opinions. We all know his opinions were biased today but that wasn't known early on. Rollo derailed threads that offered the slightest criticism (valid or not) of nVidia for the sole purpose of not having any intelligent discussion that would put nVidia in a bad light.

It wasn't because of a lack of diplomacy that people hated him. It was the outright BS he was pulling. He baited anyone who was objective and had valid criticisms of nVidia and got a few of them banned. While he was doing this, he toed the lines of the then more lenient forum rules. But he did just enough to piss people off and eventually they would snap due to the lack of moderation and say something that got them banned.

He was a little more circumspect once his affiliations were known but don't try to paint the early Rollo in any positive light.The guy knew what he was doing. He was and still is a paid shill for nVidia and did everything within his power to destroy any objective discussions.

 

[Creig]

Imho,

Tend to think it was more lightning rod points and stirring the pot too much then him offering personal Shots. His lack of diplomacy made him a target for personal shots and some posters took this lack of diplomacy as personal attacks. In other words, he created such drama, it disrupted forums.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with being pro-nVidia or pro-amd -- both companies have their advantages that may appeal to certain individuals. The discourse at times is fun and can be informative but what gets in the way is drama and personal attacks and disrupts the flow of forums.

Sadly, Rollo, just wouldn't bend.

Oh, I agree with you that being pro-nVidia or pro-AMD isn't necessarily a bad thing. But trying to excuse Rollo's extreme anti-social behavior as a "lack of diplomacy" is ridiculous. You don't get perma-banned from at least five major website forums for a simple "lack of diplomacy". He took utter delight in insulting people, their families and anything else he could dream up. A practice that I, and many others, found repugnant. Especially from a grown (and supposedly) educated man.

No, call him what he was/is.

An ass.

 

[SirPauly]

Lack of diplomacy or not being open minded to a different point-of-view may cause some disruption -- and when some disagree -- this may create personal attacks at times and may disrupt the flow of forums. And when one lacks diplomacy or closed minded to the extreme --- really disrupts forums. Doesn't sound ridiculous to me.

Edit:

Sorry, this is getting way off topic.

 

[SirPauly]

Rollo wasn't just offering opinions. We all know his opinions were biased today but that wasn't known early on. Rollo derailed threads that offered the slightest criticism (valid or not) of nVidia for the sole purpose of not having any intelligent discussion that would put nVidia in a bad light.

He was always like that -- as early as 1999. It was always nVidia to him.

It wasn't because of a lack of diplomacy that people hated him. It was the outright BS he was pulling. He baited anyone who was objective and had valid criticisms of nVidia and got a few of them banned. While he was doing this, he toed the lines of the then more lenient forum rules. But he did just enough to piss people off and eventually they would snap due to the lack of moderation and say something that got them banned.

Semantic but we agree. It was his lack of diplomacy and close minded nature to the extreme that effected forums from my years and years of knowing him as far back as 1999 with 100's if not 1000's of discussions. Told him if he didn't stop, he would be banned all over the place including Rage3d. I don't hate anyone and such a strong word.

He was a little more circumspect once his affiliations were known but don't try to paint the early Rollo in any positive light.The guy knew what he was doing. He was and still is a paid shill for nVidia and did everything within his power to destroy any objective discussions.

I had no problem with him and used his own wording against him in debate instead of attacking him personally when I gamed on 3dfx and ATI hardware. Actually Rollo had a wonderful sense of humor through his strong bias, so, there is some positive light and he loved PC gaming.

Why would anyone think I was trying to paint him in only a positive light but more-so an objective one without the need to personal attack and offer shots? He deserved his bans and had a long leash and many warnings.

 

[nemesismk2]

Sorry you feel this way. I would hope that everyone deserves debate instead of personal attacks.

I agree with what you are saying because I think personal attacks have no place on anandtech.

 

[akugami]

@SirPauly

I think we'll just have to disagree. And it's not semantics. Lack of diplomacy is being blunt and no-nonsense. Rollo used lies in his arguments. He used personal insults. That's not being blunt. That's being a troll at the very least. He was always condescending in his replies as well. You always got the feeling he was giving you a pat on the head for being hopelessly stupid and not knowing any better.

Will not comment further on Rollo.

 

[apoppin]

What is this i hear about getting "angry phone calls" ?

i would say "concerned"; their PR guy wanted clarification on BFG10K's Part 1 XP GTX 470 review. Then they just kinda dropped the ball and forgot about us and Part 2 went up without their input as they had hoped. So i would say they are disappointed but i would not say ABT is "cut off".

We certainly got a GTX 465 to review under NDA and NVIDIA sent our editor helpful information (after he had already completed it and went on a mini-vacation). Each of us editors holds quite a different opinion from each other. For example, i disagree with BFG10K about the GTX 480 noise yet we agree that the GTX4xx needs work on their drivers and especially for older games.

Even though i temporarily banned Rollo from our forum, he is back posting in P&N. He is still "live" and in action and he "reports" (distorted information) to NVIDIA what we (and you guys) say on our respective forums. i am just hoping he is the most extreme part of NVIDIA PR and one that they will find less and less use for.

 

[Seero]

Here's the problem. This reviewer has now gained credibility with a certain set of potential customers since they are clearly "unbiased." You can see that's the impression of many, many posters in this thread. At the same time that reviewer feels slighted and wronged, which is evidenced by their strong anti-nv tone. They are biased -- and that bias has been increased due to bruised ego.

Not a good combination to strive for -- a suddenly toxic community member with an audience and strengthened credibility is right there with a hole in the head on the priority list. That is, if you want positive, feel good PR about your product.

If, on the other hand, you subscribe to the "no such thing as bad publicity" mindset then this is pure gold.

One can only be "unbiased" when they see and listen to facts, and correct their mistakes. Ones that stop listening and claim that they are right belongs to the "bias" group. A truely "unbias" review is the one who does not contain self opinions, which isn't the case with the problematic article from HS. Just because I was "unbias" before doesn't make everything I say "unbias". In the HS case, they will have to learn the hard way.

I dunno... I just can't see AMD/ATI or Intel behaving like this. The thing with OCZ is like...no, OCZ acted like most companies would: professionally. Their product got a bad review and had problems so they asked themselves "why" and improved it. There's definately something weird about Nvidia, lol. I could see Apple doing it though, lol.

Anandtech's review cause a change in technology, HS review did what? Anandtech's review on GTX 465 isn't look sugar coated, and they didn't get banned. Why?

I agree that sites should review everything pertaining to the card but sometimes they don't. In ATI's case I'm sure not every review benchmarked Eyefinity or Stream on the 58XX launch...but have they "blacklisted" sites for not doing it? I hope not because like someone else said they would be "shooting themselves in the foot". NVidia did not receive a BAD review about PhysX and CUDA from HS...they just didn't mention it...which is different from receiving negative publicity about PhysX/CUDA. By blacklisting they have removed one avenue for their products to get exposure and so have shot themselves in the foot.

Reviews are suppose to be informative, not filled with self opinions. Now viewers can choose to simply not watching those reviews right? No you can't, because the words echoes throughout the internet. Therefore, the only way to stop bad reviews are to stop feeding them with exclusive informations. They don't disappear, as they can still do their reviews, but the damage is controlled. I don't get exclusive review rights simply because I don't know how to do proper reviews, and I don't have a problem with that. HS can do proper reviews, problem is they don't correct themselves when they make mistakes, and therefore are removed from the selected review group.

Lets look at an Example in a secondary school:

Herry and Nadia were students, age of 6. Nadia liked to draw, and the teacher gave all students papers to drew upon and a selected group of students were to grade and comment each other's drawings. One day, Herry points his finger at Nadia and said "this is bad, really bad." Nadia cried, and teacher came to aid and said, "Herry, this is not nice, you can point out where Nadia can improve, not simply say bad. In fact, the flowers and houses were drawn beautifully. You have hurt Nadia's feelings." Herry replied, "Teacher, those flowers and houses are unimportant. I won't take back my words as I didn't say anything wrong." Teacher than removed Herry from the grading group to prevent future troubles. Herry went home and tell his parents "teacher blacklisted me because I don't do what she told me to." And the parents were very upset believed that the teacher is bad.

 

[extra]

Yeah, Rollo was nuts. Though to be honest...and I hate to say this *whistles innocently* he was SUPER easy to bait,. He was like the crazy far right/far left person at a debate that just keeps saying the same thing over and over even though it may not have anything to do with what's being discussed. The funny (and sad, honestly) thing is that he drove people away from purchasinmg nVidia products.

Sometimes I think he was not an nVidia shill, but a REALLY well placed and smart ATI or Intel person. He single handedly made many people hate nVidia. I mean, I doubt it, there's no way, but you never know. It'd certainly be extremely smart social engineering!

 

[extra]

Herry and Nadia were students, age of 6. Nadia liked to draw, and the teacher gave all students papers to drew upon and a selected group of students were to grade and comment each other's drawings. One day, Herry points his finger at Nadia and said "this is bad, really bad." Nadia cried, and teacher came to aid and said, "Herry, this is not nice, you can point out where Nadia can improve, not simply say bad. In fact, the flowers and houses were drawn beautifully. You have hurt Nadia's feelings." Herry replied, "Teacher, those flowers and houses are unimportant. I won't take back my words as I didn't say anything wrong." Teacher than removed Herry from the grading group to prevent future troubles. Herry went home and tell his parents "teacher blacklisted me because I don't do what she told me to." And the parents were very upset believed that the teacher is bad.

Are you saying the GTX465 is a poorly drawn flower?

 

[apoppin]

Yeah, Rollo was nuts. Though to be honest...and I hate to say this *whistles innocently* he was SUPER easy to bait,. He was like the crazy far right/far left person at a debate that just keeps saying the same thing over and over even though it may not have anything to do with what's being discussed. The funny (and sad, honestly) thing is that he drove people away from purchasinmg nVidia products.

Sometimes I think he was not an nVidia shill, but a REALLY well placed and smart ATI or Intel person. He single handedly made many people hate nVidia. I mean, I doubt it, there's no way, but you never know. It'd certainly be extremely smart social engineering!

No. They are not that smart to plan ahead ten years. Rollo is Focus Group since the AEG days and he still reports to NVIDIA. Unfortunately NVIDIA seems oblivious to the damage he causes to their reputation.

 

[WelshBloke]

Lets look at an Example in a secondary school:

Herry and Nadia were students, age of 6. Nadia liked to draw, and the teacher gave all students papers to drew upon and a selected group of students were to grade and comment each other's drawings. One day, Herry points his finger at Nadia and said "this is bad, really bad." Nadia cried, and teacher came to aid and said, "Herry, this is not nice, you can point out where Nadia can improve, not simply say bad. In fact, the flowers and houses were drawn beautifully. You have hurt Nadia's feelings." Herry replied, "Teacher, those flowers and houses are unimportant. I won't take back my words as I didn't say anything wrong." Teacher than removed Herry from the grading group to prevent future troubles. Herry went home and tell his parents "teacher blacklisted me because I don't do what she told me to." And the parents were very upset believed that the teacher is bad.

If you're suggesting that Nvidia are acting like a 6 year old schoolgirl then I'd have to agree, otherwise I'm not sure what you are shooting for with that example :hmm:

 

[evolucion8]

Rollo times, those where the Forum War Two times where everybody had to be offensive against his posts. He's the little Napoleón Bonaparte that could.

 

[Outrage]

Reviews are suppose to be informative, not filled with self opinions. Now viewers can choose to simply not watching those reviews right? No you can't, because the words echoes throughout the internet.

Didn't nvidia get pissed beacuse of something the reviewer didn't write? rather hard for something that dont exist to be spread around.

A good review is a review written short and about the stuff me as a reader want to read. I guess that most of the irrelevant pr stuff that ati and nvidia wants the reviewer to post is posted only to get some more pages in the review and earn some ad money.

 

[thilanliyan]

Didn't nvidia get pissed beacuse of something the reviewer didn't write? rather hard for something that dont exist to be spread around.

@Seero

What Outrage posted was exactly my point. They didn't get any negative publicity for PhysX...they got no publicity for it...which are two different things. If HS had written something bad about PhysX I can see how that would damage nV after being spread around but that is not the case here.

 

[Seero]

@Seero

What Outrage posted was exactly my point. They didn't get any negative publicity for PhysX...they got no publicity for it...which are two different things. If HS had written something bad about PhysX I can see how that would damage nV after being spread around but that is not the case here.

It appears that we are not on the same page. I am not talking about publicity of the missing part of the review, I am simply questioning the review itself. The damage control isn't towards Nvidia, but MSI. MSI needs to spend a lot of resources to make all those features to work, else they can't sell their card. The same goes to ATI chips. Think of it that way, will you buy a video card that uses ATI 5870 without Dx11, stream, and eyefinity? Those features are not plug and play. In fact, they need to be in place from design to testing so plug and play is possible to customers. It is unfair to these companies if these features got skipped by reviews when the reviewers are getting passes to tech demos and these products for free. What is the point of sending products out to media if reviewers will simply look at the box and write their reviews based upon guesses?

Say if I am a reviewer,and to me eyefinity and directX11 are useless, I still have to write reviews on such feature even if I don't like that, that is called professionalism. It isn't about what I like, as I can't become the standard no matter how big my reader base is. Now ditching these features in my reviews are easy, I simply don't write about it, but then do I deserve to have invitation to the most advance technological demos and hardwares delivered directly as soon as they are out, free of charge?

If your answer is yes, other vendors free their stuffs to everything, then why not try to apply for them and see if you have a chance of getting those stuffs?

 

[Attic]

It sounds like a twisted road you're going down Seero. The reviewers should have the freedom to review the cards as they see fit, the maker of the reviewed product should be the last person to be dictating the review bullet points as you appear to suggest.


nVidia should create a card they think will do well, and they can go about doing this however they please with whatever bullet points they want to put on the box and advertise on the web. When they release the card to review sites, it's up to the review sites to decide what is relevant to their reader base, I think that's a very important freedom for the review sites to hold. If nVidia starts cherry picking the review sites for whom to release early their hardware based on the criteria that the review sites do as nVidia pleases, then your going to have nasty issues with the integrity of those reviews.

This loosly parrallels what was going on with hedgefunds and CDO's, where hedgefunds were implicitly structuring the CDO's while not being held accountable for it. If nVidia is only going to put cards to review sites that they deem are following an nVidia targeted structure, then consumers should be aware of it and decide how to view those review sites.

I don't think it makes sense for review sites to have to adhere to nVidia's agenda if we are arguing for what's best for the readers and consumers.

 

[ZimZum]

Sometimes I think he was not an nVidia shill, but a REALLY well placed and smart ATI or Intel person. He single handedly made many people hate nVidia. I mean, I doubt it, there's no way, but you never know. It'd certainly be extremely smart social engineering!

Keysplayer actually made this point about Wreckage once.

 

[NoQuarter]

It sounds like a twisted road you're going down Seero. The reviewers should have the freedom to review the cards as they see fit, the maker of the reviewed product should be the last person to be dictating the review bullet points as you appear to suggest.


nVidia should create a card they think will do well, and they can go about doing this however they please with whatever bullet points they want to put on the box and advertise on the web. When they release the card to review sites, it's up to the review sites to decide what is relevant to their reader base, I think that's a very important freedom for the review sites to hold. If nVidia starts cherry picking the review sites for whom to release early their hardware based on the criteria that the review sites do as nVidia pleases, then your going to have nasty issues with the integrity of those reviews.

This loosly parrallels what was going on with hedgefunds and CDO's, where hedgefunds were implicitly structuring the CDO's while not being held accountable for it. If nVidia is only going to put cards to review sites that they deem are following an nVidia targeted structure, then consumers should be aware of it and decide how to view those review sites.

I don't think it makes sense for review sites to have to adhere to nVidia's agenda if we are arguing for what's best for the readers and consumers.

They just need nVidia approved review sites with a special logo..

 

[Outrage]

It appears that we are not on the same page. I am not talking about publicity of the missing part of the review, I am simply questioning the review itself. The damage control isn't towards Nvidia, but MSI. MSI needs to spend a lot of resources to make all those features to work, else they can't sell their card.

MSI was trying to sell a card for 50% more money then the reference card.... If you where shopping for a GTX260 card at that time that review was posted, I'm sure that review would have been good enough for you to make the right decision.

If they would have pasted there GeForce GTX 200 Series Architecture article first in the review, would it have been a good review in your eye's ?
http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/GeForce-GTX-200-Series-Architecture/569/1

 

[ronnn]

Kyle from HardOCP also didnt recieve 465.

This is getting strange now. Mind their pr are very strange, but effective. I call it the rollo effect.