This thread over in the Ars Agora is an interesting read.
Flaming and threats of legal action abound!
Warning - that thread is getting a tad long.
Flaming and threats of legal action abound!
Warning - that thread is getting a tad long.
User bashes Reseller Ratings publicly, RR people respond.
- Thread starter SunnyD
- Start date
Adul
Elite Member
Evadman
Administrator Emeritus<br>Elite Member
- Feb 18, 2001
- 30,990
- 5
- 81
Scott Wainner has major issues if he wants to try to sue someone over that. I read that entire thread, and the other stuff on RR. It is just plain horrible how they handled the issue. A user complains that their review got removed, and that RR is on the take. (I would think the same thing, as any reasonable person would)
Scott Wainner needs to look up 'Tact' in the dictonary. H goes on to complain that the thread on Ars should be removed because people will only read the first post in the thread. Well, too fricking bad. If RR would have their Rules and Regulatons and Other Crap in a redaly available location, this probably would not have happened. He is blaiming the user for his companies shoddy design.
Keep in mind I still trust RR, but Scott really f'ed up on this one.
<edit>
Made it more readable for the paragraph nazi's here.
I guess you are only allowed to call non-respected and/or New companies to task. Guess what Scott, WorldCom and Enron were trusted at some point. So RR removes the post on their site, and threatens with legal action. Not only that, but it sure looks founded to me. He made post, post disapeared. What an idiot. Scott Wainner needs to hire an HR person before he gets his ass sued off; in most instances, the consumer wins, even if it is the consumer's fault.
Scott Wainner needs to look up 'Tact' in the dictonary. H goes on to complain that the thread on Ars should be removed because people will only read the first post in the thread. Well, too fricking bad. If RR would have their Rules and Regulatons and Other Crap in a redaly available location, this probably would not have happened. He is blaiming the user for his companies shoddy design.
Keep in mind I still trust RR, but Scott really f'ed up on this one.
<edit>
Made it more readable for the paragraph nazi's here.
Problem with this is that you can make false statements if you didn't know they were false. Libel/Slander is pretty freaking hard to prove especially when talking about opinions. I mean honestly, is Scott going to pay an attorney to get a subpoena to get this guy's address? I seriously bet you his ISP would have it quased anyway, and a civil suit isn't exactly too high on their to do list either. He's making empty threats because he is an ass. No one gives a damn that he runs a website and thinks he is God.
it is a tough situation tho.
RR is reputation. without that reputation RR is NOTHING. that's the ONLY service they provide is their reputation. so by this accusation, if RR loses credibility they lose some of the ONLY product they have, their reputation. i can understand why scott would be a bit over sensitive.
still, EBP does have a point.
scott should probably learn to deal with these situations more tactfully.
RR is reputation. without that reputation RR is NOTHING. that's the ONLY service they provide is their reputation. so by this accusation, if RR loses credibility they lose some of the ONLY product they have, their reputation. i can understand why scott would be a bit over sensitive.
still, EBP does have a point.
scott should probably learn to deal with these situations more tactfully.
If RR has credibility then some obviously upset guy on Ars isn't going to be able to destroy that. Sounds like the owner is a bit insecure.
iamwiz82
Lifer
- Jan 10, 2001
- 30,772
- 13
- 81
I like Scott, having been around since the days of sysopt.com. I do not see him doing anything wrong in that thread other than getting rightfully defensive. There IS a 48 hour waiting period and that is pretty obvious if you look at any review.
They have to make money some how, and unless we all start pitching in to pay for the service, we will have to deal with a bit of slanting. It sucks, but I am cheap.
They have to make money some how, and unless we all start pitching in to pay for the service, we will have to deal with a bit of slanting. It sucks, but I am cheap.
Originally posted by: iamwiz82
I like Scott, having been around since the days of sysopt.com. I do not see him doing anything wrong in that thread other than getting rightfully defensive. There IS a 48 hour waiting period and that is pretty obvious if you look at any review.
They have to make money some how, and unless we all start pitching in to pay for the service, we will have to deal with a bit of slanting. It sucks, but I am cheap.
The 48 hour thing wasn't the issue with this guy's review. His review got posted to the public. Then it was removed. Then it was back up. Then it was removed.
Can't blame that on the 48 hour delay.
This isn't the first time I've heard those accusations, and quite frankly, Wainner's attitude doesn't make me any more apt to believe him.
At the end of the day, there is an important lesson here:
There is a damn good reason Consumer Reports does not get any of its funding from advertsing.
BTW, that thread wasn't nearly as exciting or long as it was made out to be in the original post
At the end of the day, there is an important lesson here:
There is a damn good reason Consumer Reports does not get any of its funding from advertsing.
BTW, that thread wasn't nearly as exciting or long as it was made out to be in the original post
iamwiz82
Lifer
- Jan 10, 2001
- 30,772
- 13
- 81
Originally posted by: Codewiz
Originally posted by: iamwiz82
I like Scott, having been around since the days of sysopt.com. I do not see him doing anything wrong in that thread other than getting rightfully defensive. There IS a 48 hour waiting period and that is pretty obvious if you look at any review.
They have to make money some how, and unless we all start pitching in to pay for the service, we will have to deal with a bit of slanting. It sucks, but I am cheap.
The 48 hour thing wasn't the issue with this guy's review. His review got posted to the public. Then it was removed. Then it was back up. Then it was removed.
Can't blame that on the 48 hour delay.
Did you read the thread he pointed to as evidence? It seems like people are jumping the gun here.
http://www.resellerratings.com/forum/t78936.html
That really sounds like RR is taking money to keep negitive reviews off the site. I think to keep the site honest RR should mark each review that is wrongly flag so that users knew a company is having reviews checked and they should keep a count on how many reviews where deleted at the reseller request.
Why is that moderator on Ars being such a little bitch? Sounds like he's heavily biased toward Reseller Ratings.
The Stigenator
Lifer
- Oct 9, 1999
- 15,216
- 3
- 81
bah.. i just do my shopping with known sites..
long read.. but like i will be giving monarch any of my money.. i have heard complaints about htem before.. so there is an absolute no-no
long read.. but like i will be giving monarch any of my money.. i have heard complaints about htem before.. so there is an absolute no-no
I had a negative rating at RR about Newegg "disappear." Emailed them and they added it back. I wouldn't be surprised at all if they were on the take.
Scott Wainner sounds like an asshole. I like how he throws around 'lawsuit!!! wahhh lawsuit!!!' as if that is going to scare everyone so much.
I would say that I will never use RR again, but I never did in the first place.
I would say that I will never use RR again, but I never did in the first place.
rh71
No Lifer
- Aug 28, 2001
- 52,844
- 1,049
- 126
I've been aware of Scott Wainner since his sysopt.com days also. He has always been a very good business person - even at a very young age. I think he handled this the way he had to - especially since RR is based on credibility like mentioned before. I'm not saying he should be pulling reviews, but his public response to the whole ordeal is in the right.
Forums like that make me realize how good the mods are here. There is very little if any of the chest thumping "I'm a mod!!" kind of posting. I prefer when mods STFU and just quietly lock and ban
I just read that entire thread. whew!
I have been a member or ARS (Agora) for a while, and cannot speak highly enough of the mods there. They are always available, approachable and fair. They handled this situation wonderfully.
I am also a member of RR and have heard the rumors of ballot stuffing and review tampering before. I was never sure whether or not they were true, and still dont know. But I do respect Scott taking time to answer personally. It is not very often that you get someone that high up in a company to answer. Usually it is a PR person.
Interesting reading in any case.
I have been a member or ARS (Agora) for a while, and cannot speak highly enough of the mods there. They are always available, approachable and fair. They handled this situation wonderfully.
I am also a member of RR and have heard the rumors of ballot stuffing and review tampering before. I was never sure whether or not they were true, and still dont know. But I do respect Scott taking time to answer personally. It is not very often that you get someone that high up in a company to answer. Usually it is a PR person.
Interesting reading in any case.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter