General Discussion Undecided where to post - do it here. |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
|
![]() |
#1 |
|
Quote:<font br / br / class=\"post\"> Its a good thing dis-allowing freedom of speech, or the freedome to post articles, is good for business. |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
|
One comment on here didn\'t sit well with me...
First of all, Bruce can do whatever he wants. It\'s his forum, he pays the bill so we can educate each other on pheromones or in this case discuss every option available to us, he can do whatever the hell he feels like doing. I\'m surprised he puts up with what he does sometimes. He\'s never taken down a posting that said, \"This stuff is snake oil and doesn\'t work. Bye.\" Yes, there have been a couple of those (not so exaggerated), and to my knowledge they\'re still there. Secondly, freedom of speech is a government thing and in my opinion not complete by any means. If I said I wanted to commit a horrible crime or perform a violent act on a high-profile figure, I\'d be arrested. If that person was high enough, I\'d be in serious trouble. In other words, freedom of speech is only \'guaranteed\' by the government, and even then it has its limits. Thirdly, if I owned a site, I wouldn\'t want to be advertising my competition. To hell with them, let them fend for themselves. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] Many businessmen do list alternative stores if they don\'t have what you need, but they never tell you just to go check competitors\' products. On top of this, Love-scent seems to be the best all-around, anyway, concerning guarantees, prices, and quality. If you want to find something better, it\'s called a SEARCH ENGINE. Type in \'pheromones\' and see what you get. That\'ll get you plenty of other sites as well, and you don\'t need links on this forum to competitors to make it worse. Finally, I do agree that this link in particular was to an article and NOT to a competitor\'s site, but the article was reviewing a competitor\'s product and giving favorable remarks. That\'s a grey area, and I think I might actually side with the poster that it was an article and not a competitor\'s site, but since the article reviewed a competitor\'s product and had nothing to do with Bruce\'s products, I can see why the moderator made such a decision. So there you have it. TMI on how Bruce has every right to do whatever the hell he wants but is pretty fair overall despite this fact. I don\'t know why I felt the need to write this, but I get the itch to preach occasionally... [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img] |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
|
<blockquote>Quote:
One comment on here didn\'t sit well with me... Secondly, freedom of speech is a government thing and in my opinion not complete by any means. If I said I wanted to commit a horrible crime or perform a violent act on a high-profile figure, I\'d be arrested. If that person was high enough, I\'d be in serious trouble. In other words, freedom of speech is only \'guaranteed\' by the government, and even then it has its limits. Pancho, I agree with most of what you said. However, the goverment of the United States does not guarantee freedom of speech. It is a Constitutional right. Part of the 1st amendment. As with all rights, it bears with it, certain resposibilities. I don\'t mean to nit pick, but the understanding of civics in the US today is apalling. |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
|
Censorship is the issue. I am not interesting in debating the interworkings of certain goverment laws on our
freedoms; it is simply fact that the people\'s liberties are only taken away to the extent which the people allow it to be done. If bruce feels that this product was inferior, then the link would have posed no risk. The is a message board, supoorted by someone, yes. So is the New York Times, but we hope they do not censor stories at there disgression. Removing a link to an article because it had a favorable review of another product is laughable; [sarcasm] the only logical conclusion is that the censor must really have something to fear [/sarcasm]. You cant have it both ways. |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
|
You don\'t think the New York Times censors what it prints? That\'s pretty simplistic.
Actually, this is a discussion board. What you think you should have the right to do is similar to visiting a club and handing out fliers describing a competitor\'s product, then complaining when they won\'t let you. It\'s fine to mention a competitor or even discuss them but the moment you started handing out fliers, you stepped over the line of reasonable behavoir. No business would allow that. |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
|
<blockquote>Quote:
Quote:<font class=\"post\"> I know what you mean. That\'s why the word \'guaranteed\' was in quotes because I was being a little sarcastic there. It is a basic right that does require responsibility on the citizen\'s part. Many extremists think that it protects them from everything, when all it does is stop the government from holding your bad opinion of the president or your preaching of a certain viewpoint against you. Also, I understand you being nitpicky, but I was not referring to the US government but any government that protects the rights of the people. There are too many countries represented here to be ignorant and assume everybody loves and follows the USA... Although I love the US, I know we\'re not the best at everything and also know Franki would kick my behind if I said otherwise. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] Grrr... I have to stop being defensive... It\'s a character flaw. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img] |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
|
Quote:<font class=\"post\"> Well said. |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
|
To
those who believe that the link that I deleted was to an \"article\", please check the fine print. If you go to askmen.com and do a search for \"pheromones\" you\'ll find a list of links to so-called articles \"reviewing\" products. Strangely it seems all of the most recently published articles on pheromones are about PherX, who just so happens to be an askmen advertising client. If you took the time to read everything including the fine print, you\'ll see that every review that mentions PherX favorably has a disclaimer line at the top or bottom (or both) that states, \"This article is brought to you in part by Pherx.com\". If one goes further to examine askmen\'s policy on sponsored \"articles\", one finds that the article that is ostensibly being presented as an unbiased review is in fact COMMISSIONED by the ADVERTISER. Thus the link that I deleted was one that led to an ADVERTISEMENT, NOT an ARTICLE in the sense that I see it being argued above. I stand by my decision. Oscar [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 |
|
Ok. Since I am the source of this thread, I am going to talk about how I feel now.
First of all, I did not intend to promote or endorse the Pherx product. Since I am a newbie, I did not know that it would be frowned upon to do such a thing. It was an innocent post. Now, Love-Scent.com is a top of the line resource for anyone who is interested in, or curious about any form of pheromone information. Both the information on this site, and the products offered for sale are superior to most, if not all others offered on the web. This is the conclusion that I have come to through my limited research during the past few weeks. In fact, I stumbled upon this site rather quickly when I first became interested in mones. As an individual who is both new to pheromones, and inquisitive by nature, I though I would just start posting with my questions and random information that I found on the web. I thought that it might be beneficial to both other new members and seasoned ones to do so. I am a firm believer that you can never learn enough. So, I do not regret posting the thread or the link. With that being said, we all know that Love-Scent is a top notch site, with top shelf products and so the owners/creators should not be so upset to welcome a post which is simply attempting to show that there was an interesting article on another site... actually promoting the use of pheromones. I was excited to see that and is why I initially posted the link. On the other hand, if I were a business owner, I would not allow solicitation of other businesses around my customers, if that were the intention of the individuals. It depends on how you look at it. One, if you are so confident in your products, you should welcome the promotions of other \"inferior\" products. This will in the end be beneficial for business because word of mouth will spread that the competitor is crap and they should come to you for the real deal. No this won\'t immediately impact sales, but will in the long run. Second, to the best of my knowledge, most people out there either aren\'t familliar with or have no idea about pheromones. I would be encouraged that the market were to be getting more exposure, and with word of mouth being that my product was the best around, I would be confident that people will be eventually be led to my arena. I could go on and on, but I am kind of rambling.... Peace, Josh |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 |
|
Josh
I don\'t think anybody is upset with you about posting that link. You did it unknowingly and who can be angry about that? It may or may not benefit Bruce in the long run to allow the posting of other sites here. It has caused him problems in the past. So he decided it would not be a good idea to allow it. It falls under the once burned philosophy. I hope you can understand his point of view. Belgareth |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 |
|
|
![]() |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|