***R2R we need your help! We're considering a feedback forum policy change.***

[Daniel@R2R]

Hello everyone! The R2R mod team is considering a change in our feedback forum policy regarding posting of private correspondence in feedback threads.

Our policy for years has been that private correspondence could be summarized but not posted directly (either by direct quote or screenshot). The reason for this is that it seemed best to respect the integrity of private correspondence as such and not allow people to post it on the open forum. It also seemed logical that messages could be "photo-chopped" in order to make them say something they didn't originally say.

However, the climate has changed a bit in the online world, and we realize that it's common practice on most venues for people to post emails and other correspondence received about a transaction as proof for readers of what they are saying took place in a transaction.

We would obviously still restrict people from posting someone else's personal info (name, addresses, email address, phone number, etc). Those things would need to be removed from any screenshots before posting. However, the content of the message could be portrayed either via screenshot or copy/paste.

This is something we're currently considering, and we'd love to hear your opinion on the change. Please let us know your thoughts.

Team R2R

 

[HairyGary]

I think it makes sense to post to the whole conversation or full screens shots, not in piecemeal. A lot can be taken out of context if showing only portions, especially if someone is really opinionated or angry about a situation. Obviously its wise to remove names, addresses etc as you describe.

 

[WV Reefer]

Hello everyone! The R2R mod team is considering a change in our feedback forum policy regarding posting of private correspondence in feedback threads.

Our policy for years has been that private correspondence could be summarized but not posted directly (either by direct quote or screenshot). The reason for this is that it seemed best to respect the integrity of private correspondence as such and not allow people to post it on the open forum. It also seemed logical that messages could be "photo-chopped" in order to make them say something they didn't originally say.

However, the climate has changed a bit in the online world, and we realize that it's common practice on most venues for people to post emails and other correspondence received about a transaction as proof for readers of what they are saying took place in a transaction.

We would obviously still restrict people from posting someone else's personal info (name, addresses, email address, phone number, etc). Those things would need to be removed from any screenshots before posting. However, the content of the message could be portrayed either via screenshot or copy/paste.

This is something we're currently considering, and we'd love to hear your opinion on the change. Please let us know your thoughts.

Team R2R

I think forums like this push businesses to be better. I am all for posting the entire exchange.

 

[Daniel@R2R]

Added a poll.

 

[nautical_nathaniel]

I agree, posting the entire conversation (willing there's enough space for it) is to me the more morally correct way to go. I would limit the personal information given out as well, definitely preventing the name, address, and other contact credentials of the party in question from being seen, especially if they are outside of the R2R community. It can create a very toxic community if individuals are allowed to have negative discussions about an identifiable person or entity without them ever being able to see it occur, dealt with it all the time as an RA in college.

 

[Ranjib]

My thought process is : I think this is a sound idea but has real limitations. Sharing those private correspondence gives us a sense of things being real( like evidence) , but the forum setup is not a judicial process. We exchange our immediate emotional response , and very few are trained for dealing with such system upfront. We have a real risk of delivering mob justice, and creating echo chambers. Our recent learnings from all the growing social media issues indicate this. Constructive criticism is pivotal , but that should not blur the boundary that this is a forum without vetted validation process ( it is trivial to fabricate communications ) , and that’s not the primary goal of this place either. Hence, I think it’s better to share our feelings, and talk about communications (between the complaining part and the vendor) but not to disclose private communications as it is. Just my two cents

 

[Rispa]

My thought process is : I think this is a sound idea but has real limitations. Sharing those private correspondence gives us a sense of things being real( like evidence) , but the forum setup is not a judicial process. We exchange our immediate emotional response , and very few are trained for dealing with such system upfront. We have a real risk of delivering mob justice, and creating echo chambers. Our recent learnings from all the growing social media issues indicate this. Constructive criticism is pivotal , but that should blur the boundary that this is a forum without vetted validation process ( it is trivial to fabricate communications ) , and that’s not the primary goal of this place either. Hence, I think it’s better to share our feelings, and talk about communications (between the complaining part and the vendor) but not to disclose private communications as it is. Just my two cents

Very true . The feedback area does already limit the amount of discussion that can happen in the thread though.

 

[HolisticBear]

We have a real risk of delivering mob justice, and creating echo chambers.

Good points. I also believe any mob response reflects poorly on R2R.

There was a feedback post recently about a live sale. I did not participate and only read about it afterwards. However I was troubled because both the actual live sale and feedback seemed to involve some mob behavior, and that has the potential to dimish the R2R brand.

Anytime one group of R2R users call other group of R2R users 'snowflakes', the entire community is hurt.

 

[Daniel@R2R]

Bumping this up again!

 

[Flippers4pups]

I think that it's important that all replies to a thread be posted for all to see. Stops and starts in a thread could occur making the thread jump around. If a poster wants to discuss in private to the OP, then PM them. Keeps the thread in a line of thought.

Mob runs on a thread should be intervened by mods or reefsquad by guiding the the discussion when possible.

 

[mfinn]

I think that it should be allowed.
In many cases all of the details of a transaction are discussed in a private message and that without that information the feedback thread is just a he said, she said thread.
It might take extra work by a mod to police that part of it to prevent selective editing.

 

[Daniel@R2R]

Bumping this up for the morning crew

 

[Daniel@R2R]

Bumping again for continued discussion

 

[Brew12]

I have mixed feelings about this. I am normally all about open and honest communication. I also believe in accountability and if a person or vendor falls short I don't mind them being called out in public.

However......

Very little is black and white in this hobby. If I get a coral from a vendor and I feel it was the source of aiptasia now infecting my tank I may be upset. However, can I actually prove it came in on a specific frag? Not likely. Even if it did, is that the vendors fault or is it mine for not doing a good QT?

When a motor fails in a system, was it a bad design or was it bad maintenance practice?

Do we blast a supplier for not shipping an order on time when the problem may have been the OEM?

Do we really want R2R to be "the place" to come and leave negative reviews? I don't think so. But, I also don't feel it is right for R2R to protect poor performing vendors either.

With all this in mind this would be my preference.

Allow the OP to create 1 post detailing the exact issues they had.
Allow the vendor to reply with 1 post.
Allow the OP to reply with 1 post and then the thread is locked.

This is much closer to what we have now than opening it up for posting private messages.

 

[Rispa]

I have mixed feelings about this. I am normally all about open and honest communication. I also believe in accountability and if a person or vendor falls short I don't mind them being called out in public.

However......

Very little is black and white in this hobby. If I get a coral from a vendor and I feel it was the source of aiptasia now infecting my tank I may be upset. However, can I actually prove it came in on a specific frag? Not likely. Even if it did, is that the vendors fault or is it mine for not doing a good QT?

When a motor fails in a system, was it a bad design or was it bad maintenance practice?

Do we blast a supplier for not shipping an order on time when the problem may have been the OEM?

Do we really want R2R to be "the place" to come and leave negative reviews? I don't think so. But, I also don't feel it is right for R2R to protect poor performing vendors either.

With all this in mind this would be my preference.

Allow the OP to create 1 post detailing the exact issues they had.
Allow the vendor to reply with 1 post.
Allow the OP to reply with 1 post and then the thread is locked.

This is much closer to what we have now than opening it up for posting private messages.

And the op could be encouraged to wait until communication stops to make the review, so if there is pertinent pms they can be posted in one shot.

Although it's possible that more back and forth is required than the seller responding only once.

 

[mfinn]

I still think a person with a issue with a sale needs to be able to post what the seller has told him.
Maybe it will stop some of the lies some sellers tell in private messages, knowing that what was said could become public.

This has nothing to do about reliable equipment. You buy used equipment, it should always be "buyer beware".

This issue is about being a accountable.
And that goes for both sides.

 

[Daniel@R2R]

I still think a person with a issue with a sale needs to be able to post what the seller has told him.
Maybe it will stop some of the lies some sellers tell in private messages, knowing that what was said could become public.

This has nothing to do about reliable equipment. You buy used equipment, it should always be "buyer beware".

This issue is about being a accountable.
And that goes for both sides.

This is basically my thought as well

 

[Brew12]

I still think a person with a issue with a sale needs to be able to post what the seller has told him.
Maybe it will stop some of the lies some sellers tell in private messages, knowing that what was said could become public.

This has nothing to do about reliable equipment. You buy used equipment, it should always be "buyer beware".

This issue is about being a accountable.
And that goes for both sides.

I should have been more clear. I have no issue at all with the OP posting properly edited copies of any correspondence with the vendor. I just don't want threads to drag out into huge back and forth battles of "he said, she said". We have no way of knowing if what the OP posts as being from the vendor is accurate or out of context.
Let them each have their posts laying out their cases using whatever "evidence" they feel the need. Just don't let it drag on.

 

[mfinn]

I should have been more clear. I have no issue at all with the OP posting properly edited copies of any correspondence with the vendor. I just don't want threads to drag out into huge back and forth battles of "he said, she said". We have no way of knowing if what the OP posts as being from the vendor is accurate or out of context.
Let them each have their posts laying out their cases using whatever "evidence" they feel the need. Just don't let it drag on.

That's just it. If what was said behind the scenes( private messages ), was posted, then it doesn't turn out to be a long drawn out he said, she said.
The evidence is suddenly public.

I'm aiming more at user to user sales.
Vendors have a vested interest in keeping things short and sweet.

And I have yet to see a vendor not bend over backwards to satisfy a customer, even if the person seems out of line ( just my opinion ). I've seen it happen more than a few times. The vendors here on R2R are really great.

But then going with my approach is going to mean added work for mods, checking to make sure the truth is being told and no selective editing was done when bring up pm's.

I can bring up a couple cases from my own history about promises made over and over again in pm's without ever happening.
I suppose a feedback thread should have been posted on my part, but at a certain point I was just exhausted and gave up.

 

[mfinn]

I'm not trying to be argumentative Brew12.
Even though it looks like it.
Just a little burned in this area.