Seacare says... : Cdn Importer's Comment abt CYANIDE CAUGHT.

[dizzy]

Mark Weiss once told us AMDA members that every time someone came out and slammed him or his products, sales went up. It's that there's no such thing as bad publicity thing I reckon. I'm not sure I believe it though. :wink:

 

[MaryHM]

Len, I'm not getting "emotional". I'm getting frustrated. Isn't that allowed, or is there a policy against that somewhere?

Here is where I stated what my point was. I'm not sure how much more clearly and effectively I could have conveyed it to you.

Guys, the point here is not to bash ***. The point I was trying to make is that if you find something questionable on a private companies website, that you can discuss it without naming names. I really think the situation with SeaCare could have been handled that way, as could my recent thoughts on ***. I hold them no ill will, as I'm sure Advantage holds SeaCare no ill will. However, since we know there are tons of lurkers here- many of whom only skim the threads- it's important not to get business names involved unless the owner of that business is ok with it. This thread made SeaCare look like they were lying about statistics. It has also made *** look like they are lying about collection areas. I doubt either is the case. Again, the point is that business names shouldn't be mentioned. This was a rule that I didn't put into force, but that James put into force. Seems like a good rule. Why that rule has changed because the moderator has changed is beyond me.

Maybe you should follow your own "read what is written" rule. You know I love you Len, even though you think I'm an emotional troublemaker and I think you're a "can't we all just get along" hippie.

 

[MaryHM]

Mark Weiss once told us AMDA members that every time someone came out and slammed him or his products, sales went up. It's that there's no such thing as bad publicity thing I reckon. I'm not sure I believe it though.

LOL- If that's true, then MAC should be paying me for all the bad publicity I give them!!! Heck, according to that logic 76.8% of all marine ornamental businesses should be certified by now. Anyone want the documentation to back up that percentage?? Huh, Huh?!? :twisted:

 

[jamesw]

Hi Gang,

I think what I'm reading here is that someone wants us to clarify our policy. Should posters here avoid using company names.

So someone posted an example of how it can look bad if you use a company name when you question something that company did or said. The obvious response from the board seems to be: "That looks like an attack on that company." (This is my opinion from what I am reading here).

OK, I think it's fine to question our "policy" here and it's encouraged. However, I can think of better ways to go about doing it. A simple email or private message, or if you want it "in public" than a post here like "Can you please clarify..." either here or in the feedback forum would be the best way to get your question answered without raising a ruckus. The latter part of this thread is a good example of what I consider "raising a ruckus."

For the record, and this is my opinion only, we haven't voted on it or anything - I would recommend refraining from using company names in your posts. If you do feel the need to use company names, then please know that you've already agreed not to hold anyone else here responsible for what you say.

Cheers
James

PS, sorry I deleted my post in this thread - next time I'll just edit it.

 

[Anonymous]

Guys, the point here is not to bash Marine Depot. The point I was trying to make is that if you find something questionable on a private companies website, that you can discuss it without naming names. I really think the situation with SeaCare could have been handled that way, as could my recent thoughts on Marine Depot. I hold them no ill will, as I'm sure Advantage holds SeaCare no ill will. However, since we know there are tons of lurkers here- many of whom only skim the threads- it's important not to get business names involved unless the owner of that business is ok with it. This thread made SeaCare look like they were lying about statistics. It has also made Marine Depot look like they are lying about collection areas. I doubt either is the case. Again, the point is that business names shouldn't be mentioned. This was a rule that I didn't put into force, but that James put into force. Seems like a good rule. Why that rule has changed because the moderator has changed is beyond me.

Mary. I understood your point perfectly. However, understanding your point and agreeing are two totally separate things. It seems that you can't understand how I could understand you, but not agree with you. As for the naming names rules. I have stated several times that there was no rule other than to treat every one with the respect and courtesy that they would give in a face to face conversation. Ad's posts had the appropriate tone so I allowed them. End of discussion. I realize that I didn't do it the same way that you would have, and that we disagree on the subject, but it's really no more than that. Your opinion about what I should have done has been duly noted, taken into consideration, taken under advisement, properly categorized and filed. There is nothing further to add to the conversation. I understand everything you have said perfectly, and no further clarification, examples or what ifs are needed.

Now carry on.