*** Members To Look Out For *** The BLACK List ***

[CaSHMeRe]

Alright guys ...

Just got off the phone with Parker ... We went ahead and moved all of his review threads in to his own subforum. Thus, there should be no more commotion.

[parked]

If 'knowing' him is the extent of your relationship, or even 'friendship', then I apologize. However, Parked's statement "I'm affiliated with one forum member this is his name "ROB26" and choice of the word 'affiliated' led me to believe that there is some type of business arrangement, even if it is limited to employment. If that isn't the case, he should have made it more clear. If it is the case, then I owe no apology and stick by my original post.

hes not on the payroll

thanks parked

[Kate]

To the best of your knowledge Cash are there any traders or vested interests postings about products on the review board now (meaning since the rule change to keep traders from posting there)?

[Terraphon]

I'd like to chime in on this, as a fairly prolific reviewer myself.

If I were to ever start selling / distributing products or working for anyone that did I would IMMEDIATELY remove all of my reviews (regardless of who / what they were for) and issue a public statement explaining why I had done so.

Parked admits that he shares office space with Janty and that he and Jeff have built a gret relationship over the last several months. Parked has also done reviews of Janty products within the last couple of weeks...and others within the last several months that he's been building this relationship with Jeff.

That's a conflict of interest for the board. ALL of his reviews of Janty products need to be removed.

He's also reviewed the "lady-pipe"; a product he sells. This needs to be removed.

He's also done comparative demos and head to heads between Janty products and others (like the Evo and the pee-wee). Those are subjective and biased and need to be removed.

He has reviewed products from other companies as well...The integrity of those reviews is in question due to the extreme likelihood of subjectivity. Those should be removed.

Notice how I didn't say "moved", I said "removed". They should be removed form the board because they can be misinterpreted. New / uneducated users could see his reviews in his forum and not understand where they're from.

People who don't understand the situation could easily see reviews he's done of all of the various products he's had his hands on and be unjustly biased for or against them based on information which has no integrity and has been published by a person that has no integrity.

And on to the issue of integrity.

The fact that Mr. Parker would continue to post reviews for products after having built a business relationship with Janty and that Janty would allow him to do so shows an extreme lack of integrity on both their parts.

Pathetic, if you ask me...

[rsngfrce]

Let me make you understand this

I can't change my name to supplier that has to be done by a mod or SJ

I paid to be a supplier 2 days before you posted this.

My forum was up etc.....

I had no idea that little thing had to be changed under my name but
once again I didn't control that. It has since been changed a couple of days ago i believe.

So please don't hold me to that it was out of my control

Thanks

Parked

Actually, I wasn't accusing you of that, as I said in my other thread http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/for...ification.html, I had noticed a NUMBER of people who had recently become suppliers and were not yet idendified as suppliers, you were just one of them. I wasn't even sure myself, as can be seen in my messages there, if you were REQUIRED to have 'supplier' beside your name, but other people seemed to be saying that your reviews were ok because you were identified as a supplier, which you were not. I contacted Smokey Joe and he fixed it. Regular users of the forum will know you are a supplier, so no problem, but I was concerned about the casual users...

man , everyones seems to be affiliated with someone or other on this forum lately.

for what it's worth , i see no harm in leaving parked's reviews up . people here are adults and will see that parked is a supplier now, people don't need their hands to be held and told " look sonny , don't believe that , he's a supplier".lol. c'mon . give our members some credit.
If a review is by a supplier or a affiliated reviewer you gotta take what you see with a pinch of salt

I am somewhat concerned that to a casual user, which is what we have to think about, it would not be so obvious what implications a review from a supplier could have... if they even pay any attention to the fact that 'supplier' is now listed next to his name. And video reviews I think carry much more weight with people than follow up posts by others which may never be read.

I don't necessarily think Parked's reviews should be removed, but they should be somehow very obviously marked as a review from someone who is now a supplier... not really sure how.

Also, I don't believe Parked intended to become a supplier when he started doing reviews, but something I was getting at in my other thread but did not mention is that a smart new supplier would come here as a non-supplier, post glowing reviews of items they KNOW they are GOING TO BE selling, wait a little while and suddenly become a supplier selling items with glowing reviews, having gotten around the supplier can't post review threads rule.

Something I'm not personally comfortable with is that on his subforum review videos, Parked identifies himself as 'Parked of e-cigarette forum' rather than 'Parked of dietsmokes.com'... I know he will say 'this is who he is', and there is truth to this, but I think it could be misinterpreted by a less knowledgeable user as some official unbiased affiliation... or maybe it's just me?

I will also say that I wish debates like this wouldn't take place in a sticky thread, they should be kept cleaner in my opinion, that is why I asked the question in my other thread to begin with http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/for...ification.html. Also, when Kate posts a link to the *** The BLACK List *** thread in Parked's subforum regarding this situation, it could be interpreted incorrectly by someone who doesn't take the time to investigate... maybe I just don't give people enough credit.

[K-Sound Krew]

Gotta step up for Parked
He did some reviews and now he’s selling stuff, big deal
So what if he was making plans to sell stuff, 90% of us have had the idea popping into our head to become suppliers and exploit this technology before it get’s big, am I wrong?
But no one can predict the future, Parked’s financing could fall through, his order could get seized; the point was what his plans were in the past and what his intentions now for the future, are completely different things
If anything his earlier reviews helped him pick what devices he would stand behind in the future as a supplier
And bottom line I’m in my 30’s and cynical as all hell, I take raves and criticism both equally with a grain of salt, I’m a big boy ultimately I make my own decisions but the more info I have the more educated those decisions are.

Y tu igetcha?
You and people like leaford need to stand back, you may not be selling the stuff but you do get freebies and incentives; you can adamantly deny that this doesn’t sway your reviews, I don’t care either way.
The point is if you want to delete Parked’s reviews you should delete any other reviews from people who get freebies

[Walrus]

When all is said and done, I like Parked's store, have ordered from him, and will again. Anything I've said here is in the interest of full disclosure, and not in any way an attack. His reviews have not particularly swayed me into or away from any particular purchase. I appreciate them solely from the point of being able to see a device in action, and video gives a better impression of what they look like than a still photo.

Thanks again, Parked.

[ApOsTle51]

Y tu igetcha?
You and people like leaford need to stand back, you may not be selling the stuff but you do get freebies and incentives; you can adamantly deny that this doesn’t sway your reviews, I don’t care either way.
The point is if you want to delete Parked’s reviews you should delete any other reviews from people who get freebies

I've been saying that for a looong time. All these reviewers that offer discount codes are affiliated with those suppliers that the codes belong.

Thank you K-sound for realising the same. Some people just don't see that though which is a shame.

you obviously dont know how discount codes work then.



codes are tracked back to the individual reviewers so that suppliers can keep track of where the referrals are coming from. this then helps reviewers get more products to review.

[Kate]

K, it's not technology that's being exploited, it's members of the community.

[Walrus]

I've been saying that for a looong time. All these reviewers that offer discount codes are affiliated with those suppliers that the codes belong.

Thank you K-sound for realising the same. Some people just don't see that though which is a shame.

I find it hard to issue a blanket statement like that. I look for discount codes on-line all the time. If I found one, I'd share it. If I get a discount code from a shop because of repeat business, I'll share it. Were they given to me because of special consideration? No. Am I sharing them because I profit from it? No. I'd share them because it would save you guys money, and I'm a nice guy that way.

I guess if I share a code for something, I'll put a disclaimer that I'm just trying to be nice.