|
|
|
Comment |
Sorted by
Date Written |
Re: New & Improved Sordid Comment (Reply to this comment)
by anderclayton
"Granted, with a lot of the stuff posted on Epinions, even with the penny a hit pay rates the writers are being overcompensated."
Actually oddly enough, even the worst articles (talking about those with real content like "I like the film" and not the cheater ones that are just bs things that express nothing) have value! I am getting paid for consumer information from a place called Pinecone and have attended functions where my opinions are worth something besides... People pay cash for peoples opinions (and generally these opinions aren't well-written)!
Granted, it doesn't exactly look like Epinions is using the information in this manner but there seems to be little doubt that they are using our information to get statistical data on the products (87% recommended, etc) and so the articles aren't 'not worth it', they are just like someone buying a jug of milk and setting on their car only to watch it slide off and spray the milk all over the place. A dollar is pretty low for this sorta stuff when there are many people that pay people a bit more than that to perform the chores that the information could be used for (and most bad articles only earn 20 cents or so at max).
Basically with the no IS thing, Epinions is now attempting to pay people nothing for their consumer information (as they said, it is supposed to be a 'consumer information site') which is very much worth something, no matter how well written it is.
Ander
|
Nov 03 '01
8:34 pm PST
|
|
I agree with much of what you said (Reply to this comment)
by Saxguy
But Nirav is a bad manager at best (hiring a bunch of people and making huge early payouts based on a flawed business plan) and perhaps a profiteer.
The write-off occurred because Nirav is more than a bit cavalier with his talent, us the writers. That write-off was useful in getting his attention and in getting e-d function restored.
Me, I'll stick around long enough to sell a few cds to my friends here and that's pretty much it. Most of my music reviews get no income share or low and very temporary amounts and that is my primary interest in writing.
I plan to delete all my non-music (or music-ed) reviews that no longer generate income share and plug my cds in the remaining ones.
|
Oct 31 '01
9:39 pm PST
|
|
Hi there! (Reply to this comment)
by pepsipipe
Bravo for speaking up! I wanted to give you a MH but I had already given it to someone else and that wouldn't be right taking it away from the other person.
Thank you very much for speaking up in your review. Even though I haven't written in a while, I love to read and rate and so glad the good writers are staying.
~Julie
|
Oct 31 '01
9:37 pm PST
|
|
Re: Thanks (Reply to this comment)
by 4-1-1
No, Thank You.
I am sticking around for a while, too. Much for the same reasons you mentioned.
Will be interesting to see how the site changes in the coming weeks.
That picture on your profile page... did you use that one about a year ago as well? I remember seeing it somewhere. Oh. Wait. Actually, now I remember -- somebody is selling dog turds as part of an anti-gift business. Oh yeah. That's quite an interesting business to be in these days, what with the mail problems in the U.S.
Cheers,
Tom / 4-1-1
|
Oct 31 '01
2:18 am PST
|
|
Thanks (Reply to this comment)
by gerper
Tom: Thanks for your perspective on this.
I contributed to the EBD w/o, but it wasn't about pennies, it was about the edit/delete function. I make about 10 bucks a month here, maybe. So I don't do it for the money. I try to write helpful reviews about products that I used and OWN.
As for me, I have always said I will stick around until there is no more Epinions. Polishing the Titanic? Maybe, maybe not. Epinions has helped me make some very good buying decisions, and I have learned a lot and met a lot of great people. Sure, this isn't a 12 step program, but it is nice when there is a sense of community.
I plan on just moving on and continue r/r'ing reviews as I always have. Along with posting some also. The point has been made, and the issue has been resolved. Hopefully, there will be others that will stick around here with me!
gerper
|
Oct 31 '01
12:50 am PST
|
|
Re: New & Improved Sordid Comment (Reply to this comment)
by 4-1-1
S-1: "However, I don’t think most have the audacity to believe it’s 'our' site in an ownership sense."
4-1-1: Agreed. I wrote: Some people think.... "Some" is fewer than "most."
----------
S-1: "I get to take the Frisbee with me when I leave the bus."
4-1-1: I agree with that statement, too. But I didn't see anybody leave the bus. If I was the bus driver, I would have handed back the Frisbee if the owner asked for it.
----------
S-1: "...the fact of the matter is, Tom, that there are plenty of professional-quality writing here."
4-1-1: I agree. I wrote "...some are attaching 'value' to their contributions...."
Again, the word "some" does not imply "all." I know that there are several outstanding writers here. I sometimes choose my words carefully.
----------
S-1: "But another aspect of libertarianism is a strong respect for property rights."
4-1-1: I agree. That's why I did not like the vandalism perpetrated on the site. To the best of my knowledge, reviews that members had published were not altered or modified by Epinions. Epinions merely changed the design of its site and the site's functionality. So then, the argument is quickly reduced to the "Edit/Delete" feature at Epinions, which feature is offered for the members' convenience (not ownership). No member "owns" the software or infrastructure that underlies the Epinions website. Members who wanted control of their content could have asked to have it removed. Even if they had to resort to making a legal demand, it could have been done.
----------
I think that there is only a small difference between our points of view. My complaint was not with the ends, but the means. In particular: with those members who defamed innocent and upstanding members of the epinions community. That was not what the W/O was supposed to be about, and some few members allowed their emotions to rage beyond the pale of reason.
Anyway, there is nothing really important to argue about now, and there is no reason to drag this discussion forward into the next day for debate. I am satisfied that things are better.
--
Nice chat with Nirav Tolia and company, what? First one I ever joined. Can't say I participated, since all I could do was wait two or three minutes before a line of thought appeared on my screen. Almost fell asleep; almost fell off my chair.
Well, in the words of Woodrow Wilson: "If you want to make enemies, try to change something."
And in the words of the wise A. Nonymous: "The person who has no opinion will seldom be wrong."
Ciao,
Tom / 4-1-1
|
Oct 30 '01
10:07 pm PST
|
|
Re: New & Improved Sordid Comment (Reply to this comment)
by 4-1-1
Best taken.
Thanks for refining your points. Chat's just now starting at Epinions, so I'll make my exit at this point.
My best in return,
Tom / 4-1-1
|
Oct 30 '01
6:16 pm PST
|
|
New & Improved Sordid Comment (Reply to this comment)
by Sordid-1
Tom,
I originally had a bit harsher comment, but deleted it after I saw the nice contrast between the “pleasant, reasonable Tom” we are seeing in the comments and the “hateful, mean-spirited Tom” we saw in the editorial. I am just going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you NEEDED to write this piece and its purpose was to provide yourself with some sort of catharsis because, honestly, the only effect I can see it having aside from that is magnifying the dissent, further split the community into factions, and fuel what could be one humdinger of a flame war. I really hope that wasn’t your intention.
I could just go on and on and on and on, I often do, but I would like to focus on your response to Andrew, because our differences there may highlight a bit what my motivations were behind this action that was clearly poorly-received by many (including you.)
You state, “True, true. Some people think that the contributors to the site... OWN the site. That's a slightly skewed perception. That's like bus riders saying that they own the bus because they ride it everyday.”
I treat the site like my own personal playground. I basically write what I want and if it fits into the general framework of a product review, hey, everyone’s happy. However, I don’t think most have the audacity to believe it’s “our” site in an ownership sense. This is a business and they should run their business to maximize their profits while STAYING INSIDE THE LAW. What is ours, though, Tom, is the content. Oh, it’s a sticky, legal mess. But I have been assured by lawyers familiar with the situation that there is no permanence by effectively renting Epinions the electronic rights to my pieces. I’ve also been assured that the TOS is flimsy and not a binding legal document, but who cares anyway, right? So even if you don’t agree that you own your creations, knowing that I DO wholeheartedly believe that should make you understand that (at least in my mind) I owe the piece of Epinions.com that I have created. So for your analogy, no I don’t own the bus, but if I bring a Frisbee on the bus to play catch with the other riders (I often do that, by the way), I still own the Frisbee. I get to take the Frisbee with me when I leave the bus.
You state, “What is almost funny is that some are attaching "value" to their contributions and calling it "intellectual property." They are always free, I argue, to delete their content if they are not happy with Epinions' TOS.”
When you set pen to paper, you have an automatic copyright. It is intellectual property, it is yours to do with as you please. It can not be taken from you without permission. Now there is the matter of monetary value. Granted, with a lot of the stuff posted on Epinions, even with the penny a hit pay rates the writers are being overcompensated. But you should not make a blanket judgment and say that it is laughable for anyone to think their contributions have value, because the fact of the matter is, Tom, that there are plenty of professional-quality writing here. Some of it has no value, but some of it could be marketed. Laughing off the potential value of the writing here is denigrating to some of the quality writers here. It is a slap in the face to Grouch and Mangiotto and mshawpyle and any of a number of individuals who do produce work of that caliber. Perhaps everyone involved in this protest did not have the same motivations as me (okay, I know that’s true), but Epinions stole something from me. And you. And everyone here. You can give yours away for free if you want. I just want to share mine. If I find something better to do with it, I will take that option, it’s mine. Unless it gets stolen. My beef was about ownership, and I feel my complaints were justified.
As a libertarian, I know you strongly support the right of a business to operate as it pleases with no or minimal restriction. I can understand that. But another aspect of libertarianism is a strong respect for property rights. This should extend to intellectual property, too. My assumption is that either you do not believe any of the writing here has tangible value, or you believe that Epinions.com is the true owner of the content. If either of those scenarios were true, than are motives were questionable. I believe neither of them were true.
Also, your proposed solution, to ”delete the content if…not happy” was physically impossible at the time. That was a part of what we were fighting for, the right to delete our property.
You state, ”Epinions, by now, has made it clear that reviews that people have written are really not that valuable. Indeed, they are no longer worth 1˘ per member rating. And that's what the free market is saying, too. (emphasis is Tom’s)”
No, I think by improperly seizing the content, they were proving that it DOES have value. Obviously, the free market does believe that most of the material here has no value, else why would it be here? But even if it is only 0.001% of the material that is suitable for publishing, that 0.001% needs to be protected from pilferage. I’ve been published. I’m not saying that I’ve deleted an Epinion and published it elsewhere, but it is certainly possible.
You state, ”Oh well... I'm glad it's over. Now, I'll write about beer, cigars and wines again.”
Let’s hope that it is over. I don’t much want to see all the squabbling continue, but must believe that this article was just throwing fuel on the fire.
And I’m sorry you caught my previous posting before I deleted it, as I explained in e-mail, once I saw that you were taking a rational, civilized tone in the comments, I wanted to alter the tone of what I had to say, as well. I believe we have each other’s mutual respect and I don’t see that changing, even if we might be questioning each other’s motives and method.
Best,
Sordid-1
|
Oct 30 '01
5:31 pm PST
|
|
Amen, bro'!! (Reply to this comment)
by mkp51
Amen!!
mkp51
|
Oct 30 '01
5:25 pm PST
|
|
Re: Was it good for you? (Reply to this comment)
by 4-1-1
Oh... Hi Ken. Thanks for dropping by.
Well... let's see. I think everything is going fine now. Still, there are some that believe I am attacking all EBD participants. Must be their conscience clouding their vision, I cannot explain their reaction. I speak to a very specific, narrow audience and some think I am making a general broadcast.
I think your post was the first I read during the conduct of the EBD campaign and if memory serves me correctly, I rated it Very Helpful. Yes... I am pretty sure I did.
I was enjoying the EBD contributions until some of them came in that went beyond the pale of decency. I don't mind satire, parody, things that are lewd, lascivious or even obscene. But when personal attacks were being made against respected members without provocation, it did nothing to advance the cause of the EBD. There are a couple of articles in particular that just turned the tide for me. And to those writers, and to those who actually agreed with them, I stand up to say: "If you have so much hate and contempt for others at this site, then leave."
As to everyone agreeing with me... I've never experienced that phenomenon. As a Libertarian, I usually find myself in the minority on a lot of positions. Also, I find that I can sometimes be very outspoken and that my views tend to polarize people. I usually ignore those who disagree with me -- especially when they cannot support their argument -- so that's fine.
I love the way your write comments, Ken. You are adept at turning a phrase and can challenge a person with language that can chastise and compliment them at the same time. That's a unique trick.
I am, indeed, normally a happy person. I'm pretty happy today. Going to grab a cigar now and a glass of wine and will surely find myself thinking how happy I am about a lot of things in life that are good.
I don't think I called out anybody by name in my general comment. We all have our own opinions. You and I surely will not find ourselves in agreement on everything. I happen to like Epinions, and would have hoped for a more diplomatic approach. The EBD W/O had a noble aim, but an unfortunate title. But you did a great job in rallying the membership. That was pretty awesome.
Thanks for stopping by and commenting. Communication is not a bad thing. It sometimes avoids fights and hard feelings.
As you write in your invitation to the membership to the EBD campaign: "Thank you for your input, hate mail, participation and/or condemnation."
((My reply: You are welcome.))
Best regards,
Tom / 4-1-1
P.S. Yes. It was good for me.
|
Oct 30 '01
3:13 pm PST
|
|
Re: Dang!!!!!!!!!!! (Reply to this comment)
by KMINER
Back again, to see the furither comments - as I one of the first to read this --
and posted under hear as Val is one person I especially trust and I fully realize her participation in the W/O as I am certain she realizes my non-participation ...
I am all for social CHANGE - I would have gladly typed my voice to a Write off that may have been titled something else, was clear, and refrained from references to sucking dogs, attacking others on the site, and other vulgarities -
I have nevert considered myself a prude and read certain members disgusting remarks here with great humor, as Val knows from private emails we've had ...
However, I keep hearing bits about this need for the EBD and "social change" and affiliations with Ghandi and MLK - I'd like to think about from what I remember about their teachings that they felt change did NOT involve some of the vulgar language that was displayed (for ex" Nirav, my dog wouldnt lick your X if your X was ..." and etc...) == what is the POINT of such drivel? For many it turned us off from any DECENT potential your arguement may have had ...
I think the orginal founders EBD hopefully had a true voice( dont know sordid but have read his page a few times as of late), and wanted an extensive participation - I'd hope they did not however want people to just rant on about whatever irks them -
I read some comment here about punishing the 100 that wrote well for the 20 that did not - and find that fair -- that's my cross to bear I guess, as I still cannot get the vile words of some out of my head, and it now becomes affiliated with this event ...
it is a shame .... in the end, a change was made, and we each have come to our beliefs in HOW that change was made, and while MANY do not agree, I certainly hope life goes on ...
|
Oct 30 '01
3:02 pm PST
|
|
One More Thing... (Reply to this comment)
by nifer
it appears, as people are deleting their EBD w/o reviews as word spreads of the return of the edit/delete function we fought for, that the only mentions of the w/o are in the protesting reviews. Also, I have written a review under this topic in the past and have not earned Eroyalties from it, but have earned IS -- which I'm assuming your three EBD protest reviews will, too.
What an interesting twist.
xoxo ~ jennifer
|
Oct 30 '01
1:33 pm PST
|
|
As Always... (Reply to this comment)
by nifer
a very well written review. Thank you for sharing your thoughts and comments on this topic again.
Since you asked, I will answer -- my EBD review earned me $0.77 prior to me deleting it. My participation in the "Disney" w/o has earned me $0.88 as of today. Originally, to save time and hassle for both parties, I was going to mail Ames $20.00 to cover the $0.88 I've already earned for her and any future monies my review might bring in. Now, I will instead send her $25.00 -- the original $20 to cover the $0.88 from the Disney w/o, and $5.00 extra to cover the $0.77 from the EBD w/o. Someday, if my earnings balance is ever again over $10.00, I will cash out that money and not feel one ounce of guilt over it. Once received, I'll probably take my earnings to the liquor store and purchase a bottle of one of the numerous fine wines you've so eloquently recommended in your many fine reviews.
Meanwhile, I will still be here as I have said I would remain from the start. My previous reviews will remain, however, I may update them and/or delete one or two as is necessary, and I will write more in the future, as the mood strikes me, as I've always said I would from the beginning. I will also continue to read, rate, and comment on reviews as I can, because I enjoy it.
xoxo ~ jennifer
|
Oct 30 '01
12:54 pm PST
|
|
Re: Missed It All... (Reply to this comment)
by 4-1-1
Hello N.
I'll send you a copy of one review that really was the last straw. You'll see that you missed some of the worst examples of vandalism ever perpetrated at the site.
Thanks for stopping by & commenting,
--
Tom / 4-1-1
|
Oct 30 '01
11:28 am PST
|
|
Re: I am not leaving or deleting.....I am ... (Reply to this comment)
by 4-1-1
Well Julia...
Who knows? Maybe if a lot of disgruntled people quit, then everyone's share of the income pie will be larger. (Not a safe bet. Writers in foreign countries... they sure have huge obstacles to overcome. Maybe some should band together an ask Epinions to reconsider it redemption limits for those overseas.)
--
Tom / 4-1-1
|
Oct 30 '01
11:22 am PST
|
|
Re: Thanks, Tom (Reply to this comment)
by 4-1-1
Thanks Capri,
Oh... I am sure that there were some who visited the site innocently and were shocked by some of the cruel and perverted things that were written. Some will never return.
Some people called the debacle an act of "conscientious objection." However, they did not display sincere and deeply-held beliefs. They basically rioted.
Well, thankfully, its all over.
Thanks for reading and commenting.
Tom / 4-1-1
|
Oct 30 '01
11:11 am PST
|
|
Re: Tom, (Reply to this comment)
by 4-1-1
Ummm... thanks Susi. You are too kind. Some consider me nothing more than a rogue corporal. I tried to temper my agitation... was made a little upset that the EBD campaign was hijacked by some who wanted to utilize the forum to make personal attacks against some innocent members.
Thanks for your support!
Tom / 4-1-1
|
Oct 30 '01
10:57 am PST
|
|
Re: Your review makes valid points! (Reply to this comment)
by 4-1-1
Thanks Donna,
I really appreciate your input. It makes me feel better knowing that others found reason to find offense with some of the tactics utilized in the recent EBD campaign.
Best regards,
Tom / 4-1-1
|
Oct 30 '01
10:52 am PST
|
|
Re: Thanks Tom (Reply to this comment)
by 4-1-1
Thanks for your thoughts, Andrew.
True, true. Some people think that the contributors to the site... OWN the site. That's a slightly skewed perception. That's like bus riders saying that they own the bus because they ride it everyday.
What is almost funny is that some are attaching "value" to their contributions and calling it "intellectual property." They are always free, I argue, to delete their content if they are not happy with Epinions' TOS.
Epinions, by now, has made it clear that reviews that people have written are really not that valuable. Indeed, they are no longer worth 1˘ per member rating. And that's what the free market is saying, too.
Value, in the future, will be determined by the income share generated.
Oh well... I'm glad it's over. Now, I'll write about beer, cigars and wines again.
Cheers,
Tom / 4-1-1
|
Oct 30 '01
10:25 am PST
|
|
Your review makes valid points! (Reply to this comment)
by donnamr
For me, it boils down to this: each of us joins communities (Epinions or otherwise) for specific purposes. When those communities cease to provide what we need, desire, or believe in, we move on to others. If we don't want to leave, then we must seek to improve those organizations. Unfortunately, there are always those who carry things too far and turn good intentioned activities into means that undermine or denigrate. We saw a great deal of this over the past few days. Bottom line for me: Restricting Edit/Delete functions was a very bad idea, but EBD ranked right up there with that decision. Both highlighted the worst of Epinions. Hopefully, we can do better next time. Wishful thinking? Hope not.
Donna
P.S. Thanks for the reminder that this site is not a writers' forum! I think we forget that too often.
|
Oct 30 '01
10:23 am PST
|
|
Thanks, Tom (Reply to this comment)
by Caprig
For another very good perspective on the recent happenings on Epinons.
Although the objective seems to have been achieved, I ask the question
"AT WHAT COST?"
I am always most concerned about the innocent visitors on this site who came here just looking for product information.
What was posted on this site was violation- RAPE of the mind, and it is something that some people will never get over.
How many readers will never come back because of the charades of the violaters?
Thanks for your perspective,
Capri
|
Oct 30 '01
9:58 am PST
|
|
Thanks Tom (Reply to this comment)
by andaryl
Again speaking the voice of many. I was extremely disappointed by the immature approach of the EBD write off. To me epinions didn't have to restore the edit, they should have just deleted those reviews that violated the TOS on a number of accounts themselves. Those peopel have invested millions of dollars and thousands of hours. They should have control over what gets published and not allow a few to vandalize their investment. What they did was only a short term measure to ensure the future stability of the site and I would guess that most of those people are voicing their anger at not getting paid anymore while hiding behind a minor quibble over wether we can edit. Like I said in a comment a few days ago, if you don't like it, leave. Epinions is a voluntary website where you partcipate at your own freewill. You are not employed by the company and they restrict you in very few ways. Some of my rev
iews are better than others, some are badly written, but epinions allows me the opportunity to post them, unedited, regardless of content. Epinions is truly a site of free speech. The tools they provide us are a luxury, it makes me sick to see so called respected, and respectful members abusing this platform.
Thanks for your comments and words on this matter Tom. You've made everyone realize that the EBD people are in the minority.
Cheers
Tom
|
Oct 30 '01
9:31 am PST
|
|
Missed It All... (Reply to this comment)
by ermitano
I haven't been around the site for a while but I gather there was a bit of a tiff. Honestly never even considered making money from my reviews. Would make it seem too much like work, and I've quite enough of that as it is.
Wish I got to read some of the EBD posts if only for curiosity's sake.
|
Oct 30 '01
9:23 am PST
|
|
Tom, (Reply to this comment)
by susidee34
I consider you what is termed 'An Officer and A Gentleman'. I applaud you.
Susi
|
Oct 30 '01
9:08 am PST
|
|
Re: Taking the money... (Reply to this comment)
by 4-1-1
Hello Leah,
There's no rule, written or unwritten, that defines the best time to make a redemption request. Some say make a request at the earliest time possible. Personally, I'll wait until 11/1/01 when the royalty program ends. It will be easier to monitor how the Income Share program works after that date.
--
Tom / 4-1-1
|
Oct 30 '01
9:01 am PST
|
|
Re: hey my brother (Reply to this comment)
by 4-1-1
Hey Mike,
I think Epinions would have restored the Edit/Delete function in time. I don't doubt that the write-off hastened executives to restore the function ASAP. However, the manner and tenor of the W/O was something that, indeed, divided the community because it called for the darkest, dirtiest, most exaggerated methods. The same result could have been achieved if a different title was chosen (e.g., "We're Not Going to Take It Anymore"), and if the vile allusions to bestiality were omitted, and if defamatory language aimed against other members and officers of epinions were not included in the W/O pieces.
The money that Epinions pays to participants in the EBD is not a big issue. I grant you that argument. The psychic damage was pretty substantial, though. I don't suspect many advertisers on the site were aware of the problem. Some innocent surfers who visited the site for the first time might have noticed some of these reviews.
Hey bro... I know you like writing here, and I enjoy reading your material. Thank you, too, for your friendship.
--
Tom / 4-1-1
|
Oct 30 '01
8:52 am PST
|
|
Money for nothing... (Reply to this comment)
by dtobias
I think I got about 50 cents from my EBD article... money I quite likely will never redeem anyway, given that the absence of eroyalties and partner site income after Nov. 1, and the very low income share I've been receiving lately, mean that it may be a very long time before my total ever reaches $10 (I submitted a redemption request last week for my previous balance).
|
Oct 30 '01
8:40 am PST
|
|
Re: Time of confessions... (Reply to this comment)
by 4-1-1
Actually, squabbles like this make the site more interesting. If there was no argument going on, no give-and-take battles between Epinions and its members -- and between members themselves -- then things would be pretty boring here and would just proceed on a natural course (and that, sadly, was nothing more than a personality contest).
Sites are defined by the crises they endure.
--
Tom / 4-1-1
|
Oct 30 '01
8:36 am PST
|
|
Re: I believe you missed the point . . . . (Reply to this comment)
by 4-1-1
I was making a point against the haters.
Q: Haven't you ever heard about "strength in numbers?"
A: Sure. But everyone could have banded together and participated under a different banner. The "Epinions Blows Dog" campaign was not exactly an appropriate title, and the title encouraged some (not all) to write some pretty awful things. The same group of people could have written off-topic pieces under a different title and achieved the same results. Strength in numbers? Sure. That's why thieves join gangs, and terrorists join networks. I understand the concept.
2) I do believe that Epinions would have restored the edit/delete option in time. Note that the "Edit/Delete" function is not ours. This feature is something that Epinions developed to add functionality to the site.
3) I have deleted no members from my WOT during the EBD write-off. The people I refer to in my commentary are those who openly expressed hatred for Epinions and who have defamed others by name, using the most vile and filthy language.
Q: In conclusion, your title "You Sniveling Cry Babies" is, in my opinion, WAY OUT OF LINE. Since when are people considered cry babies to voice their opinions?
A: All the haters who defiled the site, incited more hate, and vowed to leave or do damage to Epinions... these are the cry babies.
Perhaps you jumped to some conclusions. I write directly to those who hate Epinions and intended to damage the site and its chances for survival.
[[ Sorry, but that's the way I feel.
Have a great day! ]]
Hey... I have no problem with anything you wrote. You have a nice day, too.
--
Tom / 4-1-1
|
Oct 30 '01
8:25 am PST
|
|
Time of confessions... (Reply to this comment)
by vonboob
I have to admit I am fascinated by the vitality that manifested in this community when it really counted. EBD write-off brought out the best and the worst in almost everyone. And you, my friend, might as well concede that even you were not immune to this phenomenon. Frankly, it’s a shame that some of pieces written for EBD are being scrapped; there was some really good staff out there.
Did some people go too far? Absolutely: yes! Were they all wrong and out of line? Perhaps, but I still feel that the outcry was fully justified and the means extremely efficient. And those truly offensive –there were much fewer of them that I expected.
How do the attitude of EBD write-off compare to those who suddenly stopped writing altogether? Heck, half of my reading list has been dead silent all through this “little exercise”. Considering that they used to crank up quite a pile of reviews every week; somehow, the old proverb about rats feels more right here then with those so-called “E-haters”. Somehow, no matter the colors I have more respect for those who did something.
Best regards,
|
Oct 30 '01
8:20 am PST
|
|
|
|
