Trout

iTrader: (1)

I am not asking, I am just saying that I am curious why SNetters are not allowed to name and shame those who might sell underperforming car parts, or provide poor service or do not quite come up to scratch with plenty of evidence...

...and Scoobynet happy to allow this thread?

http://bbs.scoobynet.co.uk/showthread.php?t=500298

Nothing against the thread - but if we can name and shame SKY or RAC or NTL or Orange or all sorts of companies on here - then why not deal with ones that are of very direct relevance to the Subaru community.

Something to think about.

alloy

I have to agree with you, we should be able to express our feedback and opinions on garages and tuners. As a community it is very relevant and a fellow SNetters experience might help others choose the best place for their pride and joy. We are allowed to give positive feedback in Delaers and 3rd Party Supplies yet we cant help each other avoid the rip offs and bad workmanship we have experienced to help save money wrongly spent!

N*UFO

This post will soon be deleted.... how dare you question the ethics of the masters?

Wurzel

iTrader: (1)

because they are the rules like it or lump it and there ain't nowt we can do about it!!!!!

alloy

We can revolt and brakaway to a new BBS that allows freedom of speech like the UK thankfully tolerates

WRX300MAN

Hi Rannoch!

I completely agree with you . . . . I just had a quick look at the SN Guidelines and it said the following

"What is "potentially libellous"?
Libel is a very complicated part of the law. The general concept is that anything that cannot be proved by hard fact which could be considered damaging to a company or individual may be libellous.

What may be considered to be potentially libellous, is something where the above applies and ScoobyNet itself does not have the hard facts to prove without doubt that what is being said is accurate.

Due to legal complications that ScoobyNet could be considered liable for libellous comments posted by users, we have to show a continued and consistent practice of due-diligence which protects us against potential legal action.

This means deleting / editing posts containing this kind of material and taking every action reasonably possible to stop it being posted in the first place. For this reason, ANY potentially libellous content may be deleted immediately without warning or explanation." . . .



Despite the certain element of double standard, we are clearly dealing with a grey area! I saw the thread you mentioned and looks like its got a mix of opinions, leaving the Scoobynetter to reach his own conclusions i guess (without getting too pedantic). . .It seems as though the burden of proof is on Snet, and the poster, so perhaps its just to avoid the heat . . . . . Different types of people out there . . If it was unregulated, people could feel free to post anything they like and kick accusations around as they feel . . . But as I said Rannoch, I ultimately agree with you and feel a greater relaxation would do no harm . . .

Aztec Performance Ltd

iTrader: (234)

Good topic. It is frustrating only being able to share our opinions when they are good, of a company/person dealing with our cars.

There is no point coming on here to research a company or recommendations when its all been censored and only the 'good' comments being allowed.

RE: Libel - agreed its double standards.

Trout

iTrader: (1)

I agree with the Snet guidelines - my curiousity lies with the application.

Liberal application with big corporates (who have big lawyers and big legal budgets) - extremely non-liberal application to small tuners and sole traders with no lawyers and definately no legal budget.

Not having a go at our great moderators - its just that it seems to put a puncture in the oft wheeled out argument of libel, burden of proof and responsibility.

If I took the other thread and swapped out RAC Trackstar for Scoobymania, ScoobySport, Forrest Performance, Powerstation, Scooby Clinic then I am pretty sure the thread would be locked or deleted (names picked randomly all you careful readers ).

As I say - something to think about

WRX300MAN

scooby_matt

I've thought this for a while now, but for fear of 'virtual stoning' i've never brought it up.......

....I know, lack of moral fibre on my part

ex-webby

Just to put the record straight...

The highlighted thread has now been removed since it does break the T&C's of this site (I can only assume it was missed by the moderators, so thanks for highlighting it).

Can I make it clear that we do not have double standards, and should members see anything that breaks the T&C's can I suggest they report the thread to the moderation team. Things can get missed as we are all only human.

Anybody that thinks "Freedom of Speech" is a real thing in the UK is very much mistaken. It may not be to everyones liking, but it's a fact that we have to deal with. Please remember we don't make the law, but we have to abide by it.

While things can be said on this BBS that some may think "Well it's true what x has said about y", it is myself and Simon (that should it happen) have to prove in a court of law that what has been said is true (this means time and expense). While some may think that companies are not interested in what people say about them, I can catagorically state they do and occasions can arise when this turns legal. Fortunately due to our acted policy and great moderation team, we have been able to come through any legal issues up to now..... I wish for that to continue.

Please remember, the decisions we make are for the protection of ScoobyNet.

I appreciate this is an emotive subject, but please be aware that when one's nuts are on the block, one has a slightly different outlook on the whole issue!

Regards,
Shaun.

mart360

TADA

such a shame, i can point you to many alternate car sites that have the ***** to stand up and tell it like it is.

i got clobbered because i told the truth about a recent visit to a local stealers.

its a bit pointless in some respects, while the webby shuts down factual posts, he/ they seem to forget that whistleblowing is now activley condoned by billy, and protection ffrom the consequences is now a legal requirement.

you do have to question the approach,, kickbacks possibly??


I think some of the others have covered other pertinant issues regarding this, in earlier posts..


Mart

Trout

iTrader: (1)

Shaun,

fair do's! My observation was that there seemed to be a lot of threads with comments on non-Scooby products and services that would not be tolerated if it was about Scooby products and services.

Thank you for clearing up what I misunderstood as a difference in approach.

Rannoch

Aztec Performance Ltd

iTrader: (234)

So when can expect threads asking for peoples opinions on a product or company to be locked/deleted from now?

For example, someone asking people about what their experiences were with a particular courier:

http://bbs.scoobynet.co.uk/showthread.php?t=500412

ex-webby

Mart,
Things are so much easier when it is not YOU that has to carry the can. The T&C's are here to protect ScoobyNet, nothing more, nothing less. If other websites wish to show "more *****", then that is their perogative. Perhaps the people that think they know what is best should set up their own website and see what happens when it gets as well known and as big as ScoobyNet and then find out the real responsibilities / implications that come with that in the real world.

Of course if anyone is willing to underwrite ScoobyNet should anything go legal, I would be more than willing to discuss the possibilities of a different approach.

Bob'5,
There is a clear difference between constructive praise and/or critisism. We are not and never have stated constructive critisism or discussion can not be made, what we do not allow is content that is potentially libel, slanderous or anything else that can cause a legal problem for ScoobyNet.

Regards,
Shaun.

mart360

Prehaps then Shaun you may want to actually visit some of the stealerships being criticised, why does commenting on the condition of the cars being sold, or the state of the premises, cause so much worry???

bear in mind some of your contributers are potentially going to be dropping in excess of 20K at some of these stealerships!!

I bet you wouldnt be a happy bunny if you dropped 20k only to find the dealer in question had a very poor record for product and performance or the customer service was p*ss poor

first impressions count, cars with flat tyres on the forecourt, parts desks where serving you is a secondary concern, empty showrooms, poor parking with poor acess, all give indicators either negative or positive!!

i bet you if we were refering to dodgy berts under the arches guv, you probably wouldnt give a rats!! yet dare we even think of mentioning that a scooby dealership is anything but perfect, and you are out chapter and verse,
with the "we,ll be sued", & no freedom of speech old chestnut

there comes a point where you like it or not, you have to ask the question could they actually be right?

Prehaps one or two instances are down to each persons perceptions, no two people ever see things exactly the same, however when multiple posters, start to say the same things, about the same place in question, how long do you go on trying to deny anything is amiss??

You could also argue that you, by your actions are being biased in your approach, if you are not permitting any naming and shaming, you should also on balance remove any threads praising or promoting good stealerships, as it clearly shows bias toward a particular end of the package.


Also why have the clause in your t&c,s relating to "the opinions expressed in this website are not the" etc?? either stand by what is posted with the caveat of the first statement or openly state "we censor posts despite what our t &c,s state.

To be honest the way the "webby" speak comes accross is almost as if SN is the official website of subaru, and they (you) have the last word. regardless of what we are told.

There was similar type concern in one of the official console magazines, the reader had written in with a genuine concern regarding a minor fault, nothing that couldnt be fixed with either a bit of common sense or a spare part from one of the independant repair companys, it was out of warranty. Poor reader should have known better, he got chapter and verse on the wrongs of any thought of non genuine repair, hell and damnation, for potentially even thinking about the action he proposed, and all other negatives, yet no one had the ***** to say, you could try doing this or goto xx or yy, they may be able to help. just the usual party line about what potentialy could happen.


sound familiar??

Mart

EVOLUTION

for what its worth, i can see both sides of this argument....

i have first had experienced probably, sorry and still experiencing the worst thing you can go through with a dealer. and whilts i would love to destroy there business overnight, i cant do so by making my feelings known to the public....

it would be like sitting outside the dealership with a banner, you may be totaly in the right, tellling the truth, but the police will have you removed. this is a bit lke the banner, SN will get so much ****, legal **** that the webbys will simply shut it down as they wont want the hassle.

its fustrating mate, i can see yur point, but take a look at it from another point of view.


how about a solution to the problem, can we have a dirct link to www.scoobykillers.com we can post or problems on ther lol, let someone else deal with it lol



john

Houghton

iTrader: (1)

I remember reading a couple of threads where in one, Bob Rawle and another, Scooby Clinic were being berated by unhappy customers. In both instances, and I'm sure there's been others, both companies responded with their version of events.

In both cases the outcome was an amicable agreement and it turned out that the complaints were mainly due to misunderstandings. The arguments ran their course and were concluded satisfactorily.

Disgruntled customers ought to be afforded the opportunity to air their grievance and share their experience. It's a two-way forum which allows an equal platform for both sides.

2p

Tidgy

i think people and companies expect critasism, it can be usefull at times if its constructive. the problem is if someone posts up they've had a problem with a specific company most of the time somone else tends to jump on the bandwagon and start saying this and saying that an the post degrades into a slagging match.
I truly believe there is no company in the world that never gets anything wrong, what makes a good company is making few mistakes and also sorting out any problems with minimum of fuss and bother.

legb4rsk

Just as a matter of interest I have read a some very negative comments from well known car magazines slating the service they have recieved from various dealers/garages over the years.
Are they subject to the same 'restrictions'
or is it a power thing. Do the big mags have access to legal teams & money to back them if the offended party gets shirty?

What about programmes like 'Watchdog'? I haven't heard of them being sued.

I would like to think that today that consumer power should be able to overcome any dodgey dealings in todays free & open market where we have much more choice especialy when large sums of money are involed as in car & house dealings. I still can't believe the shoddy service you sometimes get when your willing to spending 20k + of your hard earned on a car or worse still on a house where you can spend a fortune.

These people should be ,and I believe are, worried about these forums.As long as everyone has a right to reply then
all should be ok.

Trout

iTrader: (1)

The Whistleblower programme last night on Estate Agents and the journalists are being sued by Foxtons.

Houghton

iTrader: (1)

From what I saw of that programme, suing is the only choice for Foxtons, that or close down.

Perhaps we all need to carry hidden cameras, just in case

ex-webby

Mart,

Why on earth are you getting so deep with this?

You seem to be missing the point that whilst it may be a low chance that we could get sued, the fact is it can happen and previously has been attempted.

If a thread/post is made, that clearly becomes libel or slanderous it will be removed.

I personally cant see what the problem is?

If you want to say what YOU think YOU should be allowed to say, then start up your own website and say it.

Alternatively, agree to underwrite ScoobyNet should anything go legal and we can look at changing our policy. I for one am not going to put my head on the block just so people can say what they think they should be able to say if it is clearly libel or slanderous.

Whether you want to call these statements "old chestnuts", is up to you, but the possible outcome and responsibilitys will always remain..... until the law changes.

Regards,
Shaun.

Gary C

Remember the 6pot debacle !

Ooops, sorry, forgot I'm not meant to talk about it, forget it. I don't exist, sorry.

Jamo

iTrader: (23)

I agree with both sides of the argument on this, but when you see things like this (link below), you have to side with shaun and the moderation team .

http://bbs.scoobynet.co.uk/showthread.php?t=502011

Neilo

ask yourself this, would YOU want to get sued for something that you dont really have control over?

a BBS is a minefield, especially one this size....i praise the moderators for doing a very decent job, it can be frustrating when you really want to name and shame (as ive wanted too on several occasions) but at the end of the day you arent the ones that are going to be hit by it, SN are.....so fairs fair people, i guess the moral is to just think about what your typing......

my 2p.

scoobyboy1

iTrader: (16)

If you really want to know about a company, ask people to PM you with bad experiences. At least it keeps negative feedback off SNet, and doesnt make SNet liable for anything that shouldnt have been said.

Someone asked the otherday about a certain garage that I have had bad experiences with, So I pm'd the guy to let him know about my expericences with the garage, and if I would have wrote it on one of the threads, im sure it would have been deleated.



Oh and swearing cant be edited on a private message.