Rant: Websites scared to speak truth?
 

So today I was reading some members guidelines for another forum I participate in. In it was a weird paragraph:

WTF?

So just stating facts about a product you use, can cause some lame ****er business to threaten to sue? (or as a friend said... only people who threaten to sue are the small dogs that just bark. the big dogs just take you to court without notice) . So what does this mean? If it affects users on a forum is HAS to impact review sites. So does this mean you cant review shit unless its good? Hmmmm that explains a current trend I have seen on the web with NO reviews of a product that all out sucked. Before there have been some sprinkled in at about a 1000:1 ratio of reviews good:bad.

Are cooling hardware in general getting that good? No turds out there? Is the industry just that flawless that there is no dirt under a rug some where?

I call bullshit on any review site that considers for an INSTANT the "hmm I cant review this because if I do say the truth, I could be sued."

In an example of how ****ing insane this country is:
At the SCCA runoffs (amature series close for SCCA racing competition), one tard crashed on the fist lap because he was a total ****ing dolt, he took another guy out with him. Well in the forums for this, everyone called the kid who did it a ****ing dumb shit, and a retard (which he was). Well... the kids dad whos nic appropriately is "racinglawyer" and is as bad of a driver as his son... threatens to sue the entire ****ing forum. Now he was one of those lil dogs who just bark this time, but in the past hes won DAMAGES for people making fun of his sons BAD driving. I mean holy shit people....

With heat like that for what you say online, I can see why some people are dead scared to say anything bad about anything. But to that end... I am not. I have no self preservation code in my head.

**** mfg's who make bad products yet only send out review items to get good reivews and not true honest results, **** lawyers who prosecute people speaking their mind, **** those who are too scared to speak the truth, and **** any forum who puts a disclaimer telling its user base to watch its mouth.

I dunno this was just my lil rant/Editorial/ etc...

I think it boils down to one of two basic legal issues.

The matter of freedom of speech which is effectively an empty dream in the USA nowadays what with the DMCA and more recent legislative changes.

The second would be whether or not published web site content is protected under "Freedom Of Press" legislature. This is a gnarly issue, and for sure it is coming to a head. Unfortunately in a world where "Freedom of Speech" gets trampled on by all and sundry, I do not hold out a lot of faith that people will continue to be able to express their view openly on the web for much longer without fear of legal reprisal.

Indeed. We had a similar discussion about OCAU. IMO objectivity is completely thrown out the window if reviewers have to post nothing but positive stuff. **** that! If the products sucks then the product sucks. This is one of the reasons I am setting up my own test bench. If something sucks I will tell you it sucks and back it up with data. I am not afraid to test bad products although I don't expect to be given them. That is another thing, if the review site posts a bad review they may not get another review sample from that company. Being the site depends on reviews for the majority of it's traffic that would be bad. The trick is finding sources to buy retail versions of the product and not worry about the manufacture.

This is why I stay here at ProCooling.

If you don't care, you should start a "black list" of site that have provided a review with false information (i.e. those that were "bought off", as far as one can tell).

Then you can put up a grey list for reviews (linked) that are just done poorly (i.e. inaccurately).

THAT would be useful to the cooling community.

Hello Gentlemen,

Without getting into politics or vaules of the current society too much but, this is a trend I see moving on a fast pace. Seems that "Take responsibility for your actions" is now interpreted as " Who else can I blame to make myself look good because it was not my fault". This mentality will be the fall of our government, society, and any business model one tries to pursue.

Not to sound like I am an old man, well maybe to the younger crowd I am, I am 38. Anyway, my Father stopped this type of behavior before it even started within our family. God rest his soul, I can remember him looking at me and saying "Son, you made a mistake, first correct the problem, then learn what you did so as to not do it again" followed by "Be a man and take it".

Now what I do not understand is, history is one of the best aides in learning what to do as well as what not to do. Self-analysis is a great tool for making yourself or a business better. Wow, who or what is perfect? Not me but, I can want to improve myself . Seems like these business models would take all the intelligence from I say "Free" reviews as constructive as possible and use that to only help improve their product. It is like "Free" reseach and development. Who wins in the long run? The business! Guess their little feelings get hurt and constructive crtiticism is too much for them to handle. Poor Baby.

This is why I joined this site. I saw many posts by the senior memebers that took time,skill,patience, and tactfully supported their facts. Even when a member would question them, they took the time to return with the facts. If their data needed correction, they said so and moved on. Not get their lynch mob and come after a member that was maybe just trying to learn. If I may, I will use Cathar as an example. I resepct you.

Anyway enough rant here. Hopefully we will all grow up and face the seeds we sow.

Thank you
Monnie

Well, this is one of the exact reasons that I take a very light hand moderating the forum and I believe that Joe and pH have the same philosophy.

Sometimes, a caustic statement is the goshdarned truth. And if it isn't.... then I ignore it. When the SNR gets too low, we tend to just ban the noisemakers if locking a thread or two or deleting a few posts can't fix it.

It takes a thick skin to enjoy these forums. Just like real life.

Better to teach people why other reviews are half assed or paid off so they can judge for themselfs?

Seems that a review site easily could handle this problem with a list of "products we've chosen not to review."

... and some "review sites" can't tell the difference between a good and a bad product as lack of capability to do so.

http://www.stephaniemiller.com/decla...revocation.htm
j/k, but only a little ;)

Or they simply don't care and just want hits...

They can take you to court and file suit but they can't win unless you are using excessive libel against the product and company when there isn't basis for it. So one, you must being doing doing it knowingly defaming the company or product when the opposite is obvious. It can also be to intentional harm the company or the products standing.

They are right about using data to make you point and stating one's opinion. All you have to do is say "my opinion of the X company and X product is sheer X amounf of crap. Retractions can also be used to avoid making an appearance in court.

If you do win or suit lacks merit you can ask for court fees to be covered. This makes this a waste of the product manufacturers time and money. Business lawyers are paid for major contract disputes and other business law stuff. Not
to sue some person who reviews some product.

Tell the PR person to get the laywer on the phone you so you talk and see who's playing for real or just all bark.

I know this is a little OT, but I am curious about this: Was the kid you refer to driving a neon? Was the person he hit in a CTS? I just remember an accident I saw a while ago on Speed that is very similar to what you describe.

... land of the frivolous lawsuits.
my personal favourites are,
the cat in the microwave and,
the guy who tried to rob some house and got trapped in the garage.

that too.
can't complaint that much, i give them hits
but I only look at the pretty pictures.

USA is definitely land of wars, hypocrites, and frivilous alright.

USA is land of the free but there are so many rules it is getting ridicilous. I got a ticket speeding in a parking lot going 10mph when speedlimit is 5mph and going around a speedbump. Cop said he got me on radar and claimed I made a dangerous turn. I was going about 7-10mph but I bet he was munching a burrito that requires him two hands to hold.

Like Cathar said, we have the right to freedom of speech but that shit is so limited over here. Cant threaten the president. Can't even hear a cuss word on the radio because people are so uptight, not even shit or ass. To all SKEET SKEET mofos is all i got to say

Lawyers exist because if they weren't around people in the US would be settling arguements with guns like the wild west days. LA freeways are definitely going back to that and I like it. Better watch how you drive or you going to get popped

Hey if they decide to sue you because they don;t like your review, counter sue them for the price of the review. I mean it costs money for the setup, the hosting, the pictures, the bandwidth, the people testing, the authors, i could go on and on. They sue you because they didn't liek youre review, coiunter sue and make shure it's for more.


Oh speaking of frivilous lawsuits: The Stella Awards

Case in point. Land of free speech - yeah right!

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/...563036552.html


U-S-A! U-S-A!

Remember that guy ////Wings\\\ ? lol. That was a lot of fun.

I like the blacklist/greylist idea. That would help the community a lot.
The reason I read MaximumPC is because they don't take sh!t from anyone. I've seen more negative reviews in their magazine than I have anywhere else. They would be a "greylist" reviewer. They try to be objective, it is just that their testing methodology (for anything thermally related) is flawed.

Idea: JD, Joe, or anyone else who has a test bench might consider contacting MaximumPC. How good would it be to have a "Procooling.com" section in there? I've got a couple of other ideas like this if anyone is interested.

In the end, manufacturers will get the reviews they want out of a handful of traffic/product sample desperate websites. Nothing we can do about that except black list them (though doing so could make the site liable). The trick is to find some media channel that has deep enough roots to weather any sort of legal storm a manufacturer could throw at them.

No the kid was in a miata and took out some older roadster.

Easy now Cathar political speech is protected but if the shirt was truly obscene then the airline was well within its rights to ask her to turn it inside out. I'm sure you would not want to get on a plane with your daughter and have her looking at some guy wearing a T-Shirt depicting a full color photo of Jena Jamison swallowing a turkey neck.

Uh, we were talking about politically motivated speech being censured. It was pretty obvious from the description in the article that it was merely a picture of the 3 head-shots of Bush, Cheney and Rice with "Meet the Fückers" written underneath.

Who said anything about X-Rated pornography? As if airport security wouldn't have pounced on said person with such a T-shirt long before she even got near the check-in counter, and rightfully so. X-Rated pornography is banned from open public display in most every nation on the planet. What has X-Rated visual pornography got to do with a politically motivated T-shirt?

But "****" would not be in a G-rated movie, so why have it out in the open?

I am positive they did not ask her to turn the shirt inside out over the politics, but rather, the profanity.

The point is not pornography, it is obscenity in general. I used that example because pornography is protected speech but we have said that there are appropriate places for that type of speech. Clearly public places and venues where children may be exposed to it are not deemed appropriate. I haven't seen the shirt but if it has fu?kers on it. That would certainly make it inappropriate for kids. Further, the aircraft are privet vessels owned by privet companies. Finally, aircraft commanders have the right to kick off any passenger who is disrupting the safe and efficient operation of the aircraft…there is very broad discretion in this matter.

Pfah, name me a single child capable of reading who hasn't already heard the F-word used many times before, and knows full-well that it's a "grown-up" word.

Children are far more adaptable than people give them credit for. By age 6 they pretty much know at least half the full range of profanities commonly used in society, and by age 3 they learned to know not to use such words in ear-shot of authority figures when they innocently repeated such words where their parents could hear them. Our daughter learned the F-word from merely being in society at age 3, and it was at that age that we explained to her that it was not a nice word for little people to repeat.

If we want to bring sex and children into the debate, then ponder why is sexual nudity treated with such "shock and horror" when children see it every single day when they take their own clothes off, yet images of extreme violence are far harder to shield children from, and in my experience as a father, it is far more difficult to explain to a young child about extreme violence, than it is to explain something as obvious to most children that people have bodies much like they do.

I know my children well enough that if I had to choose between exposing them to nudity, as opposed to images of the casualties of US-led wars in foreign countries, I'd feel a lot more comfortable with the nudity as children pretty much think little of it.

No doubt that kids pick up a complete vocabulary of profanity very early on in life. However, I believe in polite society and it is important to teach kids when certain behaviors are acceptable and when they are not. Dirty stories, profanity and lured comments about sexual conquests are fine around contemporaries in the appropriate setting. However, that is not appropriate around my parent’s grandparents or nieces and nephews.

I agree that sex in general/reproduction/nudity is fine and understanding how your body works is great. However, do you want to have to explain to a six year old some of the more deviant sexual behaviors? Again there is an appropriate age a maturity level for exposure to these things.

The same is true of violence. I think that graphic violence and violent death is in appropriate young kids. But like sex violence is part of our nature…got boys? “Why did you hit your sister/brother?”…”I don’t know” I mean come on, nothing is more dangerous to lower life forms than a few 13 year old boys with firecrackers.

As to the US-led war comments…first you have to explain that there are fanatical people of a particular religious faith that believe that your kids should be dead simply because they do not subscribe to there particular twisted view of that faith. Explain to them why it is that people believe it is noble to blow up themselves and innocent civilians. Once you make it over that hurdle it’s easy to explain, why we big mean Americans are picking on the poor Fanatical Islamists. lol you slay me Cathar, I know your grandparents did share a similar view about Imperial Japan.

Lothar, your discourse is filled with extravagant tangential hyperbole designed to express unintended meaning in other people's posts, but all it does it expose your own inadequate levels of language comprehension. Either that, or it's trolling for trolling sake. My personal inclination is that it's a mixture of both.

As to wars, the belief structure as illustrated in your post IS the problem. I'm sure most anyone outside of the USA will agree with me on that one. I won't even pretend to think that I could ever convince you otherwise.

You "win". Clap-clap.

i'd love to jump in on that.
but not going to : please, keep on topic ?

thanks.

have been reading of late on defamation and libel, websites have little to fear if not the source/writer
I think they mouth platitudes from concern for their advertising revenue, or is it considered venality ?

of course before they can speak the 'truth' it must be known to them - that may be the strech
to which must also be added the disinclination of some sites for controversy
lol

the 80% soln, why worry about the 20% who want accuracy ?
another order of mush comin' up

No just written past midnight after two sessions at the gym. I've never been accused of being in articulate but my writing does suffer after a certain hour. Normally I get the Colin Powell treatment…"He is so well spoken" Bill you should get a chuck out of that one.

Here is the bottom line. There is an appropriate time and place for certain behaviors and expressions. Further, there is an appropriate maturity level in which people should be exposed to certain behaviors and expressions. This basic principle of human socialization is a norm across all human societies.

As to my view on war...I believe that evil prevails when good men do nothing.

If the airline found it a problem they would have a policy at the scanners/ticket takers. You HONESTLY think that its 'better' to drop someone at a desination not intended in their travel? sounds much more likely that a steward or stewardess had a bitch about it to me, its not policy related, and it was obviously personal to some extent. I hope that the airline has decent lawyers - but then, id take a stab in the dark that the law would side (stupidly) with the airline. Hell, theres money involved for the govt.

As i said earlier in another thread, in NZ (and probably Aus) theres anti-bush sentiments on advertising billboards for pizza and cellphones here. Noone cares, people think its funny - that t-shirt sounds like it would be likely to be worn here; hell, the prime minister would likely laugh at it, along with everyone else. People here openly wonder what the **** is wrong with society that elects a ****ing moron like that - and its simple. We recently held elections in which the right (national) nearly won, and it was largely due to their policies which were seperatist, racist and basically promised lots of extra money via tax cuts (whilst playing down the cuts on healthcare, super-annuation, education - hell, everything).

Heading towards a US style country is exactly what NZ DOESN'T need. We have decent free healthcare, free education, and good super-annuation payments. The day that you die because you cannot afford health insurance for a simple operation is the day that your country has failed you. Why did they nearly get in? PURE GREED. People cannot stand paying for someone else, sharing the load - but god forbid if they ever get sick and cannot work under a govt that has totally ****ed their health pay outs.

Course, people like that tend to think only a year or two ahead... seems somewhat like the US really, are you people honestly surprised that you're the target of terrorist attacks, after ****ing with the middle-east for over 50 years? thats like going into someone elses house, telling them their wrong, beating them with crowbars and burning a few people for good measure, waiting around and deciding what is best for them, then wondering why the rest of the neighbourhood flys a plane into your house. GEE, I WONDER WHY. Its no 'mistake' that london, new york, and now apparently Melbourne and LA are being targeted by terrorism. You get that when you occupy a country that doesnt want you to be there. NZ wont be touched, as we specifically have nothing to do with the 'War on Terrorism'. "Oh, we need to keep them from doing something" - do it legally through the UN, perhaps? come to a cognitive conclusion, rather than have a monkey in a suit posing as president say 'we gotta stop the war... (10 minute pause) on terrorism. Yeah, thats it.'

For all your censorship, theres little sense in it. Culture that glorifies gangs/pimps openly, media that encourages bullshit to the extreme. A president that allows hundreds of thousands to die or lose their homes, primarily because a) idiots voted him in and b) hes a ****ing clod. I'd hazard a guess hes pretty racist too.

Just the other day my partner was shopping in a store similar to k-mart here, and theres a doll called 'bling bling barbie' - What. The. F*ck. Im sure the accessories will be a low rider with airbags and a pimp with a purple feather in his hat. I'd love to see that in surburian America, Mom coming home to her little girl in the sandpit by the white picket fence, 'look mommy, i pimped my hoes now they're blinging, yo!'. Its completely sad that someone actually designed and manufactured that, and allowed it to be sold.

And you talk about a political slight (which is really quite funny) being 'worse' than these things? THATS A HO DOLL SPECIFICALLY MADE TO BE SOLD TO LITTLE GIRLS?

Time and a place? yeah, ok - looks like their deciding the WRONG ****ING TIME AND PLACE.

"As to my view on war...I believe that evil prevails when good men do nothing."

And how many innocents have been killed in the middle east because of the US influence? im talking, including arming militants and terrorist groups to their own means, not just the US occupying the area... how many are destitute? how many lives has American 'good will' totally destroyed? course, you media will downplay that totally - you'll never see much of it. Reminds me of 'lies, damned lies and statistics'.

Oh, heres another of my pet peeves - the fact that America was asking for INTERNATIONAL AID when the trade centre was destroyed. Yeah, cause you need international aid for 4000 people dying, you need to appeal for something like, hrm, 6 months? Theres disasters in countries on a near monthly basis that take out more people than that, and you dont see 6 month appeals from other countries who have probably what, 5% of the income that America does.

Yeah, makes LOTS of sense to the rest of us. :rolleyes:

ps. yes, this is a rant - but its directly related to freedom of speech and American laws/policy, so its not really off topic.

I’ll be brief since Monday night football is about to start.

1) Socialists states are all failing yours will too. If it is any consolation unchecked capitalism doesn’t work either
2) Our support of Israel has caused most of the animosity towards the US.
a. WTC was attacked before we went into Iraq thus our actions are hardly a factor but being western is
3) The President is a lot of things racist he is not. You’re out of line. Being Black I get a little offended when people though that accusation around. It cheapens it when there is a real case.
4) Funny I don’t know who the Prime Minster of NZ is and I don’t care. Nether do the terrorist. Become a world power of any measure and Christchurch can make the list too.
5) Your partner…classic
6) I live in suburban America. The “suburban white kids” like the pimp and ho stuff more than “suburban black kids” but don’t take it too seriously its all very tongue and cheek
7) I think bling bling Barbie is funny
8) Don’t be racist not all black people are poor. More than half of us live above the middle class.
9) I was fought in Iraq and I have friends there right now…US Armed Forces are not the suicide bomber killing civilians. In fact we go out of our way to protect them.
10) You let the French sank a ship in your harbor…hang your head in shame :dome: