Re: Private Label Tea from PhiladelphiaOn Feb 12, 6:38 am, Joss Wright <j...@nospam.nekrodomos,net > wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 15:28:24 -0800, Dominic T. wrote:
> > Wow, you got a pair of brass ones. I honestly have no time or patience
> > for you or your snake oil. Your website is terrible, offers no
> > information beyond "the best tea in the world" which *must* be true
> > since you have never even visited any growers nor have you listed any
> > origin or really anything beyond piss-poor graphics and generic names.
>
> > Your "ordering system" is solely comprised of an Excel spreadsheet.
> > There's a thing called SSL, you may want to look into it.
>
> > You go ahead and send me a sample of your "best" tea (it can be very
> > small, 1 gaiwan's worth even) and I will pay for the actual shipping
> > costs happily. I would be the first person to shout from the rooftops of
> > its excellence regardless of your lack of tact in this newsgroup, your
> > disrespectful attitude, ignorance, and lack of web savvy. I'm 100%
> > straightforward and honest, and that is what I was to you as well. You
> > came here to astroturf this newsgroup with an advertisement, and I
> > called you on it. Not just me, but everyone here is no stranger to this
> > behavior as it happens quite frequently and is not the way to drum up
> > business.
>
> > Attacking me or anyone here is certainly the wrong way to turn your
> > initial faux pas into anything productive. You made a mistake, apologize
> > and move on. If you'd like to participate in this newsgroup and provide
> > insight, intelligent conversation, and to probably learn a ton about the
> > business you've chosen... go ahead, we'd be glad to learn more about
> > you, the real scoop on your product, and offer help and insight about
> > tea... not business, but tea. Business will naturally follow without
> > ads.
>
> > - Dominic
>
> I realise that jumping into this sort of an argument is unlikely to help
> anything, but I think that you are being entirely too harsh to the
> original poster. The advertisement in question wasn't a mindless spam and,
> even if you objected to it, their responses were apologetic and polite.
> The way that you're behaving towards the original poster is, in my mind,
> far more offensive than their posting of an advertisement here.
>
> On top of that, as has been mentioned before, the FAQ and charter for this
> group does not specifically prohibit advertising except as follows:
>
> "but this newsgroup should NOT be used for advertising herbal tea
> products or discussing tea as anything other than a beverage."
>
> If anything, this implies that advertising C. sinensis based teas /is/
> allowed. If you are going to be this irate about messages like this, I
> suggest that you make sure that the "official" FAQ reflects this. If, that
> is, it really is "the will of the group".
>
> I agree that untargeted spamming is undesirable, but I wouldn't lump what
> appears to be a hand-written message from a small startup company in with
> bulk commercial advertising. I agree that full-on advertising should be
> restricted here, but I don't see any reason why someone representing a
> company should be prevented from talking about their products here
> provided that they don't hammer it home and flood the group.
>
> As a reader of this group, although not a frequent or knowledgeable
> poster, I'm finding it more offensive to read your responses than the
> polite messages from the original poster. It's clear that you dislike this
> advertising, but this is one person who has made a mistake and should be
> treated with some basic respect. A simple, polite message asking them not
> to advertise would be much better than the repeated and personal attacks
> that you're currently flinging at them.
>
> I'm not going to get into an argument, so I won't be replying to this
> message, but I wanted to show (particularly the original poster) that
> there are people here who don't agree with you, especially in terms of the
> way you're expressing yourself. I'm not advocating free-for-all
> advertising, I'm advocating treating other people with a bit of respect,
> even if they've inadvertently broken the rules.
>
> Joss
Joss, you're welcome to your opinion. I was and am 100% honest and I
made every attempt to clarify every point I made. I get so sick and
tired of people defending this kind of thing that I honestly stop
caring. But, when you or someone like you - a casual reader/poster
here - decides to order tea from one of these sites and gets taken or
scammed *then* get back to me about how harsh or terrible I am.
I have spent countless hours and years protecting consumers/banking
online as a profession, if you truly think my comments are unfounded
or baseless then go right ahead. Go ahead and order tea via a
spreadsheet with personal info with ZERO protection or security. No
matter how well meaning or good intentioned, nothing excuses a
complete disregard for customer security. See how much good intentions
help when your identity/private info gets stolen. It's a serious
issue, I take it seriously, I've seen the damage first-hand over and
over.
Once he apologized, I backed off and offered nothing but constructive
criticism. There is little more I can/will do.
- Dominic