Censorship

[matthew.brough]

I've always viewed tsi as a down the pub meeting of alarm companies. A few suppliers have also joined in the debate and the ones that have embraced it have done well and the ones that have been schoolyard bullies have lost.

 

Most people on here are employees of a n other and in another thread there is a perceived threat against an employee for daring to have discussed an issue with the suppliers product/service. This got me thinking, whilst we have welcomed suppliers to the forum, would the fact that those suppliers may talk to engineers bosses frighten people into not posting issues and exxperiences which is the whole point of the forum?

 

My view is my guys are free to post what they want. It isn't my business to try and censor them talking outside school. All I would ask is that what is said is truthful and based on their own personal expereience rather than chinese whispers but I don't see I have any rights as an employer to try and police this. I think it can often say a lot for a company that accepts critisim and shows what they have done to resolve something rather than make threats to silence someone highlighting a proper issue.

 

It may come as a surpise but I am fond of Webway for all the things they have done for us and the service they provide. If they made a major screw up I'd happily discuss it here and I'm positive the screw up would be fixed promptly and that Jim would talk about it openly here rather than getting their lawyers to send me nasty chain mail. Indeed one of my fondnesses of the platform have been their response when we have had issues on our network that they have helped morning noon and night to fix.

 

We have made some grade 1 screw ups as does everyone but it has often been the way we have addressed it that has effected the outcome and the customers view of us rather than the mistake in the first place.

[PeterJames]

The forum is a tool that helps all that use it and there should be no fear of reprisals to debate openly here. I read the post in question and interpreted it as a direct threat to a well respected member here, I know that others did exactly the same. In my book the poster has come across as nothing but a school yard bully who should take into account that there are many of his own customers that participate on these forums, posters and non posters. I dont think it would be that image I would want reflected for my company I am sure Steve would rather of been consulted about its content before it was posted

[matthew.brough]

The forum is a tool that helps all that use it and there should be no fear of reprisals to debate openly here. I read the post in question and interpreted it as a direct threat to a well respected member here, I know that others did exactly the same. In my book the poster has come across as nothing but a school yard bully who should take into account that there are many of his own customers that participate on these forums, posters and non posters. I dont think it would be that image I would want reflected for my company I am sure Steve would rather of been consulted about its content before it was posted

Threat seems to have worked. Not 2 hours after it was posted, the company that made the threat has been cleared of any blame.

 

Pure co-insidence I am sure

[kka]

think you have made some good points. I think suppliers should accept the fact that not everybody is going to be a fan. everybody has they own opinions. there should always be a platform for debate. at the end of the day you are not going to change someone opinion of your service/product simple by speaking to their boss.

[norman]

The forum is a tool that helps all that use it and there should be no fear of reprisals to debate openly here. I read the post in question and interpreted it as a direct threat to a well respected member here, I know that others did exactly the same. In my book the poster has come across as nothing but a school yard bully who should take into account that there are many of his own customers that participate on these forums, posters and non posters. I dont think it would be that image I would want reflected for my company I am sure Steve would rather of been consulted about its content before it was posted

that's how I interpreted it.

[MrHappy]

Threat seems to have worked. Not 2 hours after it was posted, the company that made the threat has been cleared of any blame.

 

Pure co-insidence I am sure

 

I read the whole topic from the start with the assumption that CSL would be the party at fault (whats the calibre unit called this week & did it ever launch?)

 

I never gave the ARC a 2nd thought until PR smoothie Rodger offered to kick the OP in the balls (I parapahse)

[james.wilson]

Lol

[matthew.brough]

think you have made some good points. I think suppliers should accept the fact that not everybody is going to be a fan. everybody has they own opinions. there should always be a platform for debate. at the end of the day you are not going to change someone opinion of your service/product simple by speaking to their boss.

Might scare others into keeping quiet incase someone has a word with someone elses boss.

 

[matthew.brough]

Talking of schoolyard bullies http://youtu.be/QjK3lQZShZk

Lwillis can be porky and Kimber can be little kid. Ding ding!

[cybergibbons]

I initially joined and have stayed because open discussion is promoted here. I think companies coming down on individuals is not on especially if there is truth in it. The way the site is moderated promotes that - James and the others have left numerous posts up of mine which would have resulted in an outright ban on other forums.

 

In the days of the internet you need to be able to communicate and engage with people, like Webway have done with me. I posted a picture that Webway weren't happy with, and they politely asked for it to come down, simple. No threats to my employers, not even any kind of implied threat, just a polite question.