Quote:
Originally Posted by Mkelcy
I think it's a good idea IF we can keep it factual and useful and not a vendor bashfest.
I was very pleased that L-G's concern in the Prodigy thread was protecting the members, even at the cost of terminating a sponsor. That buys a lot of site loyalty with me. (By the way is there a way to contribute without going through the evil empire of PayPal?) The Prodigy thread here may have been messy, but I liked the way it was handled here much better than the way it was (not) handled at Pro-Touring.
To avoid people taking advantage of a Vendor Feedback forum, maybe (1) require some minimum number of posts/years of membership before anyone can start such a thread, (2) if practical and not burdensome on the mods, require a pre-posting review of the facts and the member's attempts to resolve the issue with the vendor, and (3) a strict policy of no-vendor bashing in non-Vendor Feedback threads (I don't mean part quality or fit, I mean "I have a monetary issue" threads).
A forum that allowed people to do a little due diligence before spending hundreds, thousands or tens of thousands of dollars with a vendor would be a great service to the community.
|
Mike, that's great feedback. I really like the idea of being a member for a certain amount of time/certain amount of posts before you can create a thread in that section. All 3 of your points are excellent.
