Review rules needed

[Kate]

I don't know why this is being taken so personally, nobody has been attacked in this thread as far as I can see. Scott chose to get defensive and take things personally by the looks of it but you can hardly say other people are deliberately having a go at him.

I'm not interested in personalities here, what I'd like is to see is an idea of what reviewers think is fair, ethical behaviour and how they and the rest of the community can be protected from potential scammers in the future.

 

[lordmage]

that is just on thing that could be done how ever i would request to rename it to affliate of suppliers leaford is an example where he is afflatited with more then one

 

[frogbmth]

Good point, that makes sense

 

[ritalee76]

As soon as I get LOADS of free stuff and get paid bank to tell people how awesome it is (assuming it is awesome), I will be the first to let everyone know LOL

So far, the only thing I've received for the express purpose of doing a review is the liquid from liquidxpress.com and his stuff is top-notch...

So far, not a single penny from Totally Wicked or PureSmoker and not a dang thing for free but I love their liquids and have NO problem telling the world.

From electronicstix.com, I got a few freebies thrown in with an existing order and it was kick-.... but haven't done a review on it...

So far, I have not been tainted by success.... Still waiting for it though

 

[Terraphon]

Scott : You asked for names of people that get kickbacks and skew their reviews.

1) You know it's happened just as well as I do...just as well as many others do.

2) Unfortunately we have no empirical proof.

3) It wold be unfortunate to "name names" without that proof since this would then degenerate in to a huge fuster cluck of accusation and finger pointing.

It's obvious that nobody has blatantly shilled during a review...They'd get caught for sure...Think, for example, what would have happened if you'd been doing your review of the Gamucci Micro and went off on how much vapor it produced or if you claimed that the ginseng flavor from TW was the best thing since nipples. What if I said that EST's watermelon tasted like sh.t and that an Evo atomizer only lasts 2 weeks, on average? We would have gotten outed for doing skewed reviews since none of those things are true (even close to it) and the situation would be obvious.

Yeah, I have no proof but I know what I know. I've gotten a lot of PM's and a lot of emails and a lot of comments from many people about how certain people do their reviews and I have no doubt in my mind that the money some reviewers receive from the suppliers / manufacturers causes them to post biased reviews in order to supplement their income (or as their ONLY income, as the case may be).

I'll promise you this, though...The very moment, NAY! The very SECOND I have incontrovertible proof about anyone, I'll post it.

 

[Kate]

... So far, I have not been tainted by success.... Still waiting for it though

Ha, I hope success hits you soon Rita and I'm sure you'll tell us all about it

 

[igetcha]

kate,

i went through 2 months of almost constant abuse of accusations that i worked for intellicig because i gave the evo a good review. i could barely post a single word on a thread without someone having a dig. i even recieved nasty hate mail messages from a few forum members over it as well.
i then left the forum for a while because i got sick of it. when i came back, things improved for a while and it had died down. but then reviewer ethics were thrown at me in several threads over the use of discount codes and getting freebies. this then prompted me to change my format, add written disclaimers and add verbal disclaimers. i also posted a very long thread to explain all this and to make people aware.
once again, it died down and i thought that would be the last of it. but now someone who does not have anyting to do with how the forum should be run is posting the same thing about ethics and discount codes.

i take it personally because of what i said above and also because i have NEVER seen a thread yet where people have quizzed Leaford or Dusty over the use of discount codes.........someone correct me if im wrong. however, i HAVE been quizzed over it..........full stop.

what i dont get kate is why you have not answered my last question where you said that i say "buyer beware"??

i also dont get why i wrote to you personally several weeks ago to ask your thoughts on how reviewers should conduct themselves in order to be as open and honest as possible. i recall you replying to say that it was not anything you could advise me on.........so why do you want to be involved now???

 

[frogbmth]

but now someone who does not have anyting to do with how the forum should be run is posting the same thing about ethics and discount codes.

I simply dont understand what your issue is with this thread. This thread is not about questioning ethics and discount codes. Please go back and read the first post again. This thread is about making some rules or a code of practice for posting reviews so that it is clear what interests the reviewer has in any business.

If you are doing this already, what is your issue with suggesting that others do the same?

 

[Kate]

how about all reviewers must swear an oath and be strapped to a lie detector throughout the recording..........any reviewer who fails to do so must then be publically flogged before being burnt at the stake. his / her ashes must then be surgically implanted up a baboons rectum.

or we could make it very simple by just making one rule that says:-

if you dont feel you trust the opinion or motive of the reviewer.....please dont watch.



either way, someone get SJ in here to post some rules and get this bollox over with. its his call and only he can decide.

"or we could make it very simple by just making one rule that says:-

if you dont feel you trust the opinion or motive of the reviewer.....please dont watch."

To me this means 'buyer beware'.


This thread isn't about you Scott. You may feel hard done by but that's irrelevant. Nobody attacked you here, you jumped off at the deep end without any help.

I'm not obliged to give you advice on demand, nor to avoid discussions I find interesting.

 

[igetcha]

Scott : You asked for names of people that get kickbacks and skew their reviews.

1) You know it's happened just as well as I do...just as well as many others do.

2) Unfortunately we have no empirical proof.

3) It wold be unfortunate to "name names" without that proof since this would then degenerate in to a huge fuster cluck of accusation and finger pointing.

It's obvious that nobody has blatantly shilled during a review...They'd get caught for sure...Think, for example, what would have happened if you'd been doing your review of the Gamucci Micro and went off on how much vapor it produced or if you claimed that the ginseng flavor from TW was the best thing since nipples. What if I said that EST's watermelon tasted like sh.t and that an Evo atomizer only lasts 2 weeks, on average? We would have gotten outed for doing skewed reviews since none of those things are true (even close to it) and the situation would be obvious.

Yeah, I have no proof but I know what I know. I've gotten a lot of PM's and a lot of emails and a lot of comments from many people about how certain people do their reviews and I have no doubt in my mind that the money some reviewers receive from the suppliers / manufacturers causes them to post biased reviews in order to supplement their income (or as their ONLY income, as the case may be).

I'll promise you this, though...The very moment, NAY! The very SECOND I have incontrovertible proof about anyone, I'll post it.

hi mate,

i dont honestly watch that many reviews myself unless im doing research or actually want to purchase something. the only guy i have ever been a bit suspicious of was......well, you know!

i really am oblivious to the other ones who may be a bit suspect. i fully appreciate that you dont want to name names etc but would you be happy to send me a PM with one you genuinely have doubts about? i give you my word that it will go no further than between you and i.

im just very curious!


and yes, if i had said the gamucci micro was the best thing since "nipples" then that would have been a blatant lie! lol
but that is kinda my point........how many reviews has there been on a well known crap product where the reviewer said it was fantastic?

 

[igetcha]

"or we could make it very simple by just making one rule that says:-

if you dont feel you trust the opinion or motive of the reviewer.....please dont watch."

To me this means 'buyer beware'.


This thread isn't about you Scott. You may feel hard done by but that's irrelevant. Nobody attacked you here, you jumped off at the deep end without any help.

I'm not obliged to give you advice on demand, nor to avoid discussions I find interesting.

my mistake kate. i wrote to you because i thought we was friendly and because i respected your strong opinions and knew that ethics was something you felt passionately about.
i didnt realise that i "demanded" advice from you. i apologise, and i wont seek your help and advise in the future.


and i still dont get what you mean by this "buyer beware" thing that you assumed i meant.

beware the reviewer? or beware the product in the review?

i simply meant that if someone has reservations about a certain reviewer, then dont watch the review.

 

[Kate]

Scott, I helped you as best I could and you come here and throw it back in my face that it wasn't good enough. If I knew what I was talking about most of the time I wouldn't ask so many questions. If I had given you advice I don't doubt you'd be throwing that in my face too.

Please avoid me and I'll do the same with you.

 

[igetcha]

Scott, I helped you as best I could and you come here and throw it back in my face that it wasn't good enough. If I knew what I was talking about most of the time I wouldn't ask so many questions. If I had given you advice I don't doubt you'd be throwing that in my face too.

Please avoid me and I'll do the same with you.

oh my god!


how can i throw something in your face when you simply said you could not help. i was just stating facts. you harp on about community this and community that and bang on about ethics left, right and centre when your on one of your moral crusades. yet when i ask in private for help and advice on how to improve things for the forum you didnt have anything to say. it seems you only like the attention of your knowledge when its in the public eye.

i backed you up throughout all the Parkedgate affair both publically and in private and you use a pathetic excuse like that to terminate comunication and what i thought was "friendship".


if thats what its worth in your eye, then fine.......be like that.

 

[Kate]

Take your .....ing outside Scott, I'll listen to your crap there if you want.

 

[igetcha]

Please avoid me and I'll do the same with you.

you made the decision......lets stick to that please.

 

[Nuck]

Somebody...somewhere...is grumpy on the internet.

 

[ApOsTle51]

review section for purchased items

Review section for items recieved free for the purpose of review

sticky to explain the affiliate coupon code program

Job jobbed

we all happy

 

[Malicedoll]

if i recieve an item for free for the purpose of a review then i make that clear at the beginning of the review:-

example

YouTube - REVIEW OF THE ECOPURE "FRESH" E-LIQUID FROM INTELLICIG.COM



if i recieve an item for free and i have a discount code attatched to it then i have a "please read" notice at the start of the review to state that i benefit from the use of any discount as well as the viewer benefitting, plus text to state i recieved it for free PLUS a verbal statement to state i recieved it for free:-

example

YouTube - REVIEW OF THE PILOT ELECTRONIC CIGARETTE

if its an item that i purchased but have a discount code for then it recieves the same "please read" warning but no verbal warning.

if its a item i purchased and have no discount code then i say bugger all!


i dont think that i could be any more clearer than that.


kate, thank you for making me aware,

cheers,

scott

i really enjoy your reviews and i watch every one of them.. even if i am not in the market for an e-cigar.. lol.. i find them very informative, well put togther and honest. Thanks for helping me make informative choices!

 

[igetcha]

review section for purchased items

Review section for items recieved free for the purpose of review

sticky to explain the affiliate coupon code program

Job jobbed

we all happy

not being awkward mate, but what if i purchased an item but still have a code for that supplier?

for example i reviewed the golden shimmer e-cigar which i purchased but i also used the discount code in the vid.
im certain that if i put that in the purchased section it would still cause problems.

the other problem would be that there are already 3 sub forums. if you then had a section for purchased and freebies for each sub forum then its going to get very cluttered and confusing imo!
i know the "model specific" sub forum isnt probably classed as a review sub forum but i think some guys do add reviews there too.

 

[igetcha]

i really enjoy your reviews and i watch every one of them.. even if i am not in the market for an e-cigar.. lol.. i find them very informative, well put togther and honest. Thanks for helping me make informative choices!

thank you mate, i appreciate your kind words