The rules very clearly state that if you are or work for an ecig company you are suppose to register as such. Not doing so is an immediate banning.
AVOID: Volcanocigs.com
- Thread starter JohnsCreekComputers
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
The rules very clearly state that if you are or work for an ecig company you are suppose to register as such. Not doing so is an immediate banning.
All I'll add is that the e-cig online community is fairly small and it wouldn't be outside the realm of possibilty that someone could be a member of the few forums.
Not to attack the op at all but due to the rather self promoting aspects in this small business it also isn't outside the realm of possibility for a business to talk trash about a competitor for their own self interest.
Personally I wouldn't avoid nor advise against buying from a certain company based on one poor experience. I give them at least 2 chances.
Not to attack the op at all but due to the rather self promoting aspects in this small business it also isn't outside the realm of possibility for a business to talk trash about a competitor for their own self interest.
Personally I wouldn't avoid nor advise against buying from a certain company based on one poor experience. I give them at least 2 chances.
You raise a good point.
A vendor should be able to publicly defend themselves, especially if the complaint is lacking vital information (such as dremeling a tank)
Bad form IMHO.
But what do I know
R.
(edit- see what do I know ...apparently she broke a rule)
If she is the a Rep for volcano then she was banned for not registering as a supplier.
It is in the rules you are supposed to read before posting. So really raising a stink will get you no where.
I think this is kind of a grey area as They aren't even listed on this forum as a supplier? I think the supplier had every right to respond to a detrimental comment about their product just as the buyer had every right to post his original comment. This is a small community and most members rely on these types of posts to determine their purchases. On the subject of a supplier not registering as such I think a ban was a bit harsh. I'm actually a bit concerned about that.
What I mean is, the eGo and Tornado are actually Joye products, just the Tornado is "co-branded". But the Riva is not a Joye (therefore eGo) product, it's a knock off product - Not saying it's worse or better, but it's not a Joye.
You raise a good point.
A vendor should be able to publicly defend themselves, especially if the complaint is lacking vital information (such as dremeling a tank)
Bad form IMHO.
But what do I know
R.
(edit- see what do I know ...apparently she broke a rule)
They can, but only as registered suppliers and only in certain parts of the forum.
Think this though, do you really want to be told what is or isnt a good ecig, supplier, or juice...and have no clue if it's a matter of money only?
when I say I like something...it's only b/c I like it. Not b/c my next paycheck comes from saying I like it.
And to the OP: Please dont take a drill to an ecig. I dont know of any supplier that would keep the warranty after that. Darlin.
Buy yourself a new T atty...and you should be alright.
Last edited:
It is not a grey area. If you work for a supplier you have to register as such, period.
Suppliers can defend themselves and we will move the thread to the area where they can defend themselves. However, no supplier or their associates are ever allowed to post in the new members area.
An unregistered supplier/associate can be reinstated it they register with us.
I am amazed at the conclusions people will jump to without knowing any facts or bother to read the rules they agreed to when the signed up here.
Last edited:
Ok, one more noob Q.
Does that mean if someone put a complaint just like the OP in this forum, that an actual vendor rep couldn't post a rebutle here but would have to post in another area .... That non one would see?
That sounds odd. ...
R.
(edit .... Nvm just read that the whole thread would be moved )
Could someone point out this "registered supplier" clause in this or at ECF Terms of Service and explain why the responses to the OP from the one person who knew the situation were deleted in addition to her being banned?
just to bring up what may be a moot point when she registered she was not an employee and has only recently came to be such perhaps informing her that she needs to change her registration rather than going straight to banning would be a better way to go about business
The usual route to go is that the complainant would PM the vendor before airing their complaint for all to see. If this step isn't followed the vendor will generally PM the complainant to resolve the issue. Usually there is no reason to post a vendor complaint unless the vendor has been PM'd first to alert them to the problem -- even then the complaint would be posted on the vendors forum or thread so then a dialogue can be had.
The problem with doing it in the new members forum is that suppliers are not allowed to advertise here, so in the new members forum they are defenseless - it's not a fair fight.
I could be wrong, but I think that's how it's supposed to go down.
There are 2 issues at play here. The OP of this thread does not have 5 posts, which means they can post nowhere but here until they reach 5 posts. Once that happens, we will move this entire thread to the "Reviews of suppliers" forum where the supplier or their properly registered associate can rebut or answer the review.
It is not strange at all so long as the suppliers and associates follow the rules.
Having the suppliers and associate register protects our members. So if a member "recommends" a particular vendor, they know up front that that member works for the supplier as opposed to not knowing. Think about it.
This is probably why the moderator added this in a previous reply "An unregistered supplier/associate can be reinstated it they register with us."
Ya my bad, I read your post about moving the thread only after I had posted that Q. I have edited my orig post.
Cheers,
R.
I jumped to no conclusions, I pointed out the facts as they have been set forth in this thread. I never said vendors should have carte blanche in posting, I merely said it seemed a bit harsh. I also knew that this thread was posted in new members area because I saw the OP's post number. My whole point that deletion and ban seemed a bit harsh and a bit more mediation might have been a better route to take.
Now as far as my personal experience as a customer of volcano, there product was great, customer service was good, and the delivery time was fantastic.
Now as far as my personal experience as a customer of volcano, there product was great, customer service was good, and the delivery time was fantastic.
So basic you are saying if someone has a huge beef with a vendor they can just make a huge stink in here and just never post more than 4 times with that account so the vendor cannot defend them selves? Seems like anyone could open a ton of accounts here with other emails and bash any and all companies they wanted and the company could never defend them selves.
- Status
Similar threads
