Wondertwin:8393022 said:
I fully agree with the assertion that the "search" option shouldn't be underutilized, and that ECF is a great resource for information. However as far as I know it's not a vendor watchdog. One person has a bad experience and 3 more pop to vigorously defend said vendor. You can be burned by either side of the he said/she and it wouldn't be due to lack of research rather than a personal experience. Relatively new and rapidly evolving technology involved here combined with the glut of knock offs requires a steep learning curve for the newbie. It's one thing to learn you like Kangers more than Vivi Novas, quite another to have formed an opinion based on what you were deceived into thinking was the real deal.
The element of personal responsibility exists, but vendor ethics very much applies. Especially in the world of self governance and little to no product regulation.
I don't think anyone would or should disagree with this, the problem is, we as consumers have the ultimate responsibility in this equation, vendors do share in responsibility, but the ultimate responsibility is ours.
A drug dealer can't sell drugs without someone to sell them to. Vendors can't sell junk without someone to sell it to. And while there will be 3 or 4 people come along to defend any vendor, if someone is using that metric to judge a vendor, they've already been fopped, they just don't know it yet. The best way to judge a vendor is to take note of how he/she deals with their customers.
Walmart will bend over backwards to get your money, there are plenty of vendors who will do the same, those vendors, whether your concerns/gripes are warranted or not, will do what they can to make you happy.
This is very easy to see on this forum. There are certain vendors who never end up in the negative feedback section, wonder why that is? Meanwhile there are some that almost always have at least one thread going and usually more than one. These are the kinds of things that are very easy to take note of.