Opinion Piece on Social Policies

[blckgrffn]

An AMD policy on social media appeared, I myself can't determine when it was created and I'd like to give the author of the article here the benefit of the doubt that they investigated - so I'd assume the policy was an aftermath. If so, change is clearly in the works.

However, what I find interesting is that even after this policy appeared, the author continues to beat his drum and accuse members here without any evidence. He keeps reciting IDC's post, which only tells us we have employees of tech companies posting here.

My question is - are these people allowed to have privacy or must they disclose their affiliation - even if they aren't posting to promote their company? People are often a trade before they are employed. Someone posting here as an engineer loves talking about it, they get hired by x-company, do they now have to disclose that to continue discussing subjects on engineering?

If that is the question, I vote privacy.

Then, there is the sticky situation of the nvidia users group, which we all agreed should be disclosed. I have no problem with that - and if certain members hadn't been so incendiary, maybe we wouldn't even have gotten that far.

Let's say if you are being paid to be an evangelist (people are, obviously - and sometimes this is just free hardware, like the group above), we'd expect that this would be disclosed?

How would something like that be enforced?

We're human, and we a going to be biased by our own purchase history. I don't think that can be avoided.

 

[Jaydip]

Does that stop w/AMD though? Or should that be true of all forum members?

I think abandoning our privacy to post here might be a high bar.

Privacy should not allow u to mislead anyone.

 

[FalconHorse]

The whole thing is bullshit he's posted. ABT/editor there got cut off from AMD, went off the deep end, decided it was due to a conspiracy amongst posters here at AT.

Has zero proof, absolutely nothing but innuendo and paranoia. This is a real journalist ? What happened to the paragon of credible journalism; verification and confirmation from more than one source ? He doesn't even have a first source, let alone a second. Just a paranoid persecution complex. I think what he needs is medication, not another conspiracy post.

Let me know when he has some actual proof, something, anything at all more than just saying it's true. Sorry to be harsh, but it's no different than a schizophrenic who thinks demons are chasing him just because of a dysfunctional eerie feeling.

Not that I think it's beyond the realm of possibility for a company to use shills in forums, but, until I see evidence; the only viral marketing shill company on record around these forums is nvidia.

Might as well say Gskill is shilling here, Intel is shilling here, OCZ is shilling here, Seagate is shilling here, Microsoft is shilling here etc. There is as much 'evidence' provided (read none) those companies are, as there is that AMD is. The real question is why is he targeting AMD instead of any other random enterprise ?

Sounds like sour grapes and an axe to grind to me.

All that needs to be said, really. I never really heard of ABT before joining these forums, and after visiting it once or twice, I'll never give that nutcase my traffic again.

 

[railven]

Not that I think it's beyond the realm of possibility for a company to use shills in forums, but, until I see evidence; the only viral marketing shill company on record around these forums is nvidia.

Might as well say Gskill is shilling here, Intel is shilling here, OCZ is shilling here, Seagate is shilling here, Microsoft is shilling here etc. There is as much 'evidence' provided (read none) those companies are, as there is that AMD is. The real question is why is he targeting AMD instead of any other random enterprise ?

Sounds like sour grapes and an axe to grind to me.

I think this is what really got me interested in this subject. They singled out AMD, and face it the history for it is clearly against the editor's favor and does scream sour grapes, however I wanted to see if his sources would turn up something. They didn't.

And the drum continues to be beat which made me wonder - where is the crusade for other companies? I've visited other forums where some posters have very favorable things to say about x-product. Does that make them shills? Should I start demanding they disclose their affiliations? This just seems to focus on AMD because of ties cut, which oddly those ties were created by the editor getting involved with an AMD marketer - irony guys I told you to look it up.

It all boils down to: do we look at favorable comments of a product as an endorsement by an undisclosed marketer? Do we assume that guy who says nothing but good things is compensated per word? Where do we draw the lines?

It seems this is just an easy way to belittle someone's opinion - "oh he's an x-company shill, ignore him."

 

[blckgrffn]

Privacy should not allow u to mislead anyone.

It's a big, unfair and mean world out there, and some folks are exceptional absorbed in their own self interest. Be aware of this. Use your brain when you open your wallet and you should be OK.

Blind trust of an Internet Forum is ill-advised

 

[railven]

If that is the question, I vote privacy.

Then, there is the sticky situation of the nvidia users group, which we all agreed should be disclosed. I have no problem with that - and if certain members hadn't been so incendiary, maybe we wouldn't even have gotten that far.

Let's say if you are being paid to be an evangelist (people are, obviously - and sometimes this is just free hardware, like the group above), we'd expect that this would be disclosed?

How would something like that be enforced?

We're human, and we a going to be biased by our own purchase history. I don't think that can be avoided.

The difference between the nVIdia situation and this is - the nVidia group was exposed. Specific people were singled out. Here, we just have names being tossed around by a select few (and after digging myself, I see personal vendettas in some of the accusers which totally destroys credibility.)

Beside that point, had nVidia not been caught - who here thinks they'd have come clean? The author claimed to have a list, he's yet to produce it and only goes on circumstantial evidence that can swing either way and if worded properly can make conclusions not even original set.

 

[Jaydip]

So if NV was not caught u were OK with their policy?Unfortunately i can't disagree more.

 

[railven]

So if NV was not caught u were OK with their policy?Unfortunately i can't disagree more.

What policy? They made a policy when they got caught. And we can turn around and apply the same rational to AMD (since we aren't sure when their Social Media policy was enacted.)

And I know I'm speaking loosely here. I can see Apoppin screaming over at ABT (if he didn't scramble his PW he can reply here - just goes to show how confident he is this place is infested and against him.)

Anyways, how does your job enforce your social media policy? I can tell you how mine does - random audits. My Facebook discloses my employer and trust me I don't talk about them there. However, my Facebook also uses a more professional email than what I use here. If they find me here - kudos to their snoops

I wonder if AMD (or any company at that) do an audit. Also, if they screen computer usage? Or do they just go on an honesty system? "Hey, Joe, you post on forum techs?" "Nah dawg." "Coo coo." Case closed.

Enforce it? Cough up names and give them something to enforce. Instead of trying to accuse any pro-AMD poster as a shill.

 

[blckgrffn]

So if NV was not caught u were OK with their policy?Unfortunately i can't disagree more.

Nope, that is not what I am saying.

I am saying that if it had not been so blatant, it would likely have stayed under the radar, and we'd likely not be having this discussion right now.

We trust that companies like AMD and nvidia are going to operate in an ethical and transparent manner.

As these companies are run by human beings who benefit directly from the success of these companies, it is the sad truth (IMHO) that this trust is going to be misplaced from time to time.

To expect otherwise is naive. (again, IMHO)

I can only imagine what kind of assaults on our trust of others the social media era is going to bring.

 

[Jaydip]

Nope, that is not what I am saying.

I am saying that if it had not been so blatant, it would likely have stayed under the radar, and we'd likely not be having this discussion right now.

We trust that companies like AMD and nvidia are going to operate in an ethical and transparent manner.

As these companies are run by human beings who benefit directly from the success of these companies, it is the sad truth (IMHO) that this trust is going to be misplaced from time to time.

To expect otherwise is naive. (again, IMHO)

My post was not directed to u,but that's a solid answer.I don't like stupid marketiing from any company be it from my beloved NV :biggrin: or divorced AMD I like transparency and positive marketing effort that's it.I don't want to see every thread turn into a war zone between NV and AMD followers.

 

[Jaydip]

It's a big, unfair and mean world out there, and some folks are exceptional absorbed in their own self interest. Be aware of this. Use your brain when you open your wallet and you should be OK.

Blind trust of an Internet Forum is ill-advised

Good Post.I always use mine unless i am under the influence of Ale :biggrin:

 

[blckgrffn]

My post was not directed to u,but that's a solid answer.I don't like stupid marketiing from any company be it from my beloved NV :biggrin: or divorced AMD I like transparency and positive marketing effort that's it.I don't want to see every thread turn into a war zone between NV and AMD followers.

Amen.

And I'd like to say that I was too, surprised and felt a bit betrayed over the nvidia users group thing. But there was one user who made it hard to believe there wasn't something going on, and that took the edge off.

Frankly, I don't see that level of abuse going on here right now.

 

[railven]

Unfortunately, full transparency will be a pipe dream. I myself can imagine employees (who could influence buying habits) refrain from disclosing their identities regardless of policies. So they're breaking corporate policy - who doesn't. Now, get em fired by exposing them.

What I don't want to see is every single forum poster under some magnifying glass because they support a company. That's just bullcrap. The fanboys, most of us already learn to tune out.

This accusation that ATF harbors shills is just...Well, I'd hope more evidence was actually provided. All I can safely say based on what IDC has said in the past - there are employees from multiple corporations that are possibly breaking their corporate policies by posting here undisclosed.

Someone want to sniff em out - go for it.

 

[Jaydip]

What policy? They made a policy when they got caught. And we can turn around and apply the same rational to AMD (since we aren't sure when their Social Media policy was enacted.)

And I know I'm speaking loosely here. I can see Apoppin screaming over at ABT (if he didn't scramble his PW he can reply here - just goes to show how confident he is this place is infested and against him.)

Anyways, how does your job enforce your social media policy? I can tell you how mine does - random audits. My Facebook discloses my employer and trust me I don't talk about them there. However, my Facebook also uses a more professional email than what I use here. If they find me here - kudos to their snoops

I wonder if AMD (or any company at that) do an audit. Also, if they screen computer usage? Or do they just go on an honesty system? "Hey, Joe, you post on forum techs?" "Nah dawg." "Coo coo." Case closed.

Enforce it? Cough up names and give them something to enforce. Instead of trying to accuse any pro-AMD poster as a shill.

They were using stupid marketing guys to post here without affiliating themselves with NV.That is very unethical in my book.My job enforces me to hand even my Facebook account name to my employer
Audit is so frequent it is beyond funny.But thats fine as i already read and signed their policy before joining in.Its impossible that amd employees post here without active consent from amd otherwise their service can be immediately terminated.

 

[Stuka87]

I don't know what AMD's current policy is, but back in the day (Talking Radeon 9x00-x800 Series time frame when I did QA work for them) only certain people were allowed to disclose who they were publicly. I never saw this written anywhere, so I could be wrong. But myself and others were told not to disclose anything. This was mostly to control the information that goes out. So you don't have somebody saying something that may make AMD look bad, or information that simply should not have been let out.

But when it comes to posting on forums, things can get real slippery real fast. I don't have any issue with employees not announcing whom they work for. But at the same time I don't want to have to deal with stealth salesmen that push their products while pretending to be a normal joe.

nVidia has their NFG members, whom are supposed to have themselves labeled as such. I do not think AMD has anything along those lines (correct me if I am wrong though).

 

[railven]

They were using stupid marketing guys to post here without affiliating themselves with NV.That is very unethical in my book.My job enforces me to hand even my Facebook account name to my employer
Audit is so frequent it is beyond funny.But thats fine as i already read and signed their policy before joining in.Its impossible that amd employees post here without active consent from amd otherwise their service can be immediately terminated.

Same, why I've use a more "personal" email for certain accounts - which isn't connected to my Facebook. However, I'm not saying I go around lambasting my employer haha.

The accusation is that AMD is doing the same thing nVidia did, with that Edelman crew. The evidence is that Edelman did it with Walmart, so of course they are doing it with AMD. THat is circumstantial evidence. Provide something more concrete. If that is how things work, I can say ABT is affiliated with shills too, since they've worked with one in the past and openly admit it.

I don't know what AMD's current policy is, but back in the day (Talking Radeon 9x00-x800 Series time frame when I did QA work for them) only certain people were allowed to disclose who they were publicly. I never saw this written anywhere, so I could be wrong. But myself and others were told not to disclose anything. This was mostly to control the information that goes out. So you don't have somebody saying something that may make AMD look bad, or information that simply should not have been let out.

But when it comes to posting on forums, things can get real slippery real fast. I don't have any issue with employees not announcing whom they work for. But at the same time I don't want to have to deal with stealth salesmen that push their products while pretending to be a normal joe.

nVidia has their NFG members, whom are supposed to have themselves labeled as such. I do not think AMD has anything along those lines (correct me if I am wrong though).

I personally think most companies would have some kind of secret policy to that extent. I don't think any company wants all their employees disclosing their connections (think of how many of us would be pumping the cafeteria works for info) but I can understand them having representatives.

After responding to Jaydip - makes me wonder. If Edelman employee's are posting here, do they count as AMD employees and are they covered by the AMD Social Media policy?

 

[busydude]

If there are AMD shills getting kickbacks in here.. they are doing a hell of a good job than nVidia.

Also, Apoppin is taking that post from IDC out of context. IDC stated that there are AMD employees in this forum, and that is absolutely true.. just like there are many Intel employees in here, but they don't get labelled as such under their user names.

 

[railven]

If there are AMD shills getting kickbacks in here.. they are doing a hell of a good job than nVidia.

Also, Apoppin is taking that post from IDC out of context. IDC stated that there are AMD employees in this forum, and that is absolutely true.. just like there are many Intel employees in here, but they don't get labelled as such under their user names.

Well he states his affiliation, so he's transparent. I wonder if the policy requires you to state it - not repeat it, or at all to wear it as a badge?

John Poster 10 has 10,000 posts, post #32 in history of posting states he works for company-Y. Transparency achieved, so long as no one after wards has asked him. Right?

 

[busydude]

Well he states his affiliation, so he's transparent. I wonder if the policy requires you to state it - not repeat it, or at all to wear it as a badge?

John Poster 10 has 10,000 posts, post #32 in history of posting states he works for company-Y. Transparency achieved, so long as no one after wards has asked him. Right?

I have nothing against nVidia, but they had to change their policies after that fiasco which basically tarnished the companies reputation. Rollo was under nVidia's payroll but the truth came out after a lot of folks here called him out. I don't see that here when it comes to AMD, they are doing a damn good job of hiding in plain sight.

Now compare Keys with Rollo; Keys does a commendable job actually despite all the criticism he faces, I did criticize him too only because I knew he was a focus group member.. but just imagine how many here would suspect Keys to be a "focus group member". Had he did not disclosed it.. I suspect many would not have the slightest idea that he is working for nVidia.

What Apoppin is doing is not appreciable at all. He used to have a pretty darn good reputation in here, and once AMD cut him off.. he started slinging mud at this forum without an iota of evidence. It is truly sad to see him behave in this manner.

 

[Ferzerp]

I don't see that here when it comes to AMD, they are doing a damn good job of hiding in plain sight.

If you read the CPU board in the few months following BD's release, I don't think you would feel this way. There was a torrent of brand new registrants who would magically say how it was the greatest thing since sliced bread and that people just hated AMD or reviewers were lying etc.

Most of them immediately disappeared.

There was one "review" thread that was the only time I had suspected blatant marketing, but the methodologies were so flawed that it was laughable, so it may have just been someone advertizing their own blog (and they spammed every major forum with it too). I mean, it was really bad. It would rip off benchmark results from other sites, say, a specific video card review that showed a bunch of cpu's in a gpu bound situation (like various i7's and phenoms with a 6990 or something), then openly overclock a 6990 and pair it with an 8150 and claim "look how much faster the 8150 is than intel's crap processors!"

Luckily it died down, but for a while there, either AMD was the recipient of the biggest "let's white knight this corporation" campaign, amdzone was leaking, or something fishy was going on.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Speaking of bulldozer...

Originally Posted by JF-AMD
IPC & Single threaded performance will be higher. Anyone saying otherwise is uninformed, or has an agenda.
I am not saying that everything is fake, the Intel fanboys are touting the numbers that make it look bad.
Why is everyone obessing about benchmarks? I think people just like to argue.
Is somebody being paid by intel to continually post these statements? I have never lied
The crazy rumors end up with corporate customers. I have to debunk them. There is a selfish self-interest here.

People who work for a certain company need to be accountable for what they say, JFAMD went into exile after trolling countless forums with misinformation.

 

[lifeblood]

First, what is a shill?

I got a free 64mb flash drive from Intel at a trade show a long time ago. Does that mean if I say something good about Intel products I'm a shill? No, that's silly.

If I work for a marketing company contracted by AMD/NV and my paid job is to go go to forums and promote AMD/NV products then I am a shill.

If someone is a member of a focus group like NV's which is supposed to go to forums and answer questions and provide help, and I state my affiliation in my signature then I do not think they are shills.

If I work for AMD/NV but I do not get paid to go on forums, am I a shill if I post on graphics forums? Should I have to list my affiliation in my sig? I don't think so. A shill is compensated to post. Its part of marketing. I like PC graphics and my formal job has nothing to do with my personal interests. If I post its my opinion, not my employers.

So to me a shill is someone paid/compensated to promote a certain brand without revealing his affiliation.

A shill is not to be confused with a raging fanboy which is just as bad in my opinion. A raging fanboy is just somebody who irrationally favors one company over another without compensation, and can create just as much confusion and bad information as a shill.

So whats ABT's definition? I think their definition is far broader than mine. Probably all of the above would be considered shills by them.

 

[railven]

I have nothing against nVidia, but they had to change their policies after that fiasco which basically tarnished the companies reputation. Rollo was under nVidia's payroll but the truth came out after a lot of folks here called him out. I don't see that here when it comes to AMD, they are doing a damn good job of hiding in plain sight.

Now compare Keys with Rollo; Keys does a commendable job actually despite all the criticism he faces, I did criticize him too only because I knew he was a focus group member.. but just imagine how many here would suspect Keys to be a "focus group member". Had he did not disclosed it.. I suspect many would not have the slightest idea that he is working for nVidia.

What Apoppin is doing is not appreciable at all. He used to have a pretty darn good reputation in here, and once AMD cut him off.. he started slinging mud at this forum without an iota of evidence. It is truly sad to see him behave in this manner.

Rollo was definitely a character. Even experiecing him outside of ATF it seems his persona didn't change. After he left NFG he was basically doing the same thing of just slinging mud.

If you watch Apoppin's post over at ABT, hitting refresh magically adds (or removes) things from his posts. That's always struct me as odd since there is no disclosure. I've seen him edit a post 3 times adding and removing information (such as names.) How he handled things clearly burned a bridge.

Even now he continues to claim it was AMD Shills that got him blacklisted. Before the AMD policy was revealed he was accusing members and now with it he is calling for members to expose themselves. It's just ironic how things turned out in the end. I think he lost more credibility with his approach.

If you read the thread for the blog post, even his own posters weren't satisfied how he burried the "article" in the blog section with just a tiny link on the front page.

If you read the CPU board in the few months following BD's release, I don't think you would feel this way. There was a torrent of brand new registrants who would magically say how it was the greatest thing since sliced bread and that people just hated AMD or reviewers were lying etc.

Most of them immediately disappeared.

There was one "review" thread that was the only time I had suspected blatant marketing, but the methodologies were so flawed that it was laughable, so it may have just been someone advertizing their own blog (and they spammed every major forum with it too). I mean, it was really bad. It would rip off benchmark results from other sites, say, a specific video card review that showed a bunch of cpu's in a gpu bound situation (like various i7's and phenoms with a 6990 or something), then openly overclock a 6990 and pair it with an 8150 and claim "look how much faster the 8150 is than intel's crap processors!"

Luckily it died down, but for a while there, either AMD was the recipient of the biggest "let's white knight this corporation" campaign, amdzone was leaking, or something fishy was going on.

I remember those posts, and he was directing traffic to his blog. It was definitely some kind of marketing but was it by AMD? I don't know. Possibly. Posts like that one, after we've all pretty much saw what Bulldozer was, just laughed at them. It was spin control without a doubt.

Speaking of bulldozer...




People who work for a certain company need to be accountable for what they say, JFAMD went into exile after trolling countless forums with misinformation.

I agree with you, that companies should be accountable. I feel JFAMD got off easily. People probably now, like with Rollo, will look at openly associated members of a company with skepticism. But then again, I look at a lot of "speculative" posts with skeptism. The only thing I tak as truth are the reviews that correlate findings.


As for Keys, he clearly has a better grasp of being social. Rollo attacked people directly. I wish I could find the post by IDC about forgiving. Ironically JFAMD is no different then Rollo in which they twisted truths and attacked members. Yet, some people only see the wrong AMD has done yet forget the nVidia wrongs. This flip-flopping situations I made reference to before. You can't have it both ways.

 

[railven]

First, what is a shill?

I got a free 64mb flash drive from Intel at a trade show a long time ago. Does that mean if I say something good about Intel products I'm a shill? No, that's silly.

If I work for a marketing company contracted by AMD/NV and my paid job is to go go to forums and promote AMD/NV products then I am a shill.

If someone is a member of a focus group like NV's which is supposed to go to forums and answer questions and provide help, and I state my affiliation in my signature then I do not think they are shills.

If I work for AMD/NV but I do not get paid to go on forums, am I a shill if I post on graphics forums? Should I have to list my affiliation in my sig? I don't think so. A shill is compensated to post. Its part of marketing. I like PC graphics and my formal job has nothing to do with my personal interests. If I post its my opinion, not my employers.

So to me a shill is someone paid/compensated to promote a certain brand without revealing his affiliation.

A shill is not to be confused with a raging fanboy which is just as bad in my opinion. A raging fanboy is just somebody who irrationally favors one company over another without compensation, and can create just as much confusion and bad information as a shill.

So whats ABT's definition? I think their definition is far broader than mine. Probably all of the above would be considered shills by them.

Didn't even see this post. I agree a lot with your points. Mostly the part about personal interests versus professional work.

What you stated at the beginning is one of the things IDC covered in his posts abou the subject. We have members here who get free products from vendors (winning contests) and they aren't shills (even though they might show favor to said company if the product is excellent.)

The definition got so broad and twisted by ABT it got to the point where ABT was remarking how Pro-AMD posts would be looked at as stealth endorsement. I remarked on that if we jump into say the CPU sub section and everyone and their mother was pushing Intel products - guess they're all compensated too.

He continues to cry fowl, yet outside of some poor interpretation of IDC's post he's yet to provide any solid evidence.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

I think you guys should critique the message rather than using it to attack the messenger.