Why are posts deleted

[AZMSGT]

I think we found the post you're referring to in your thread. It does look like there was a confusion that led to that one post in the thread being removed when it shouldn't have. It has been restored. I'm very sorry about the confusion, and we hope you'll continue to enjoy the site. If you have any further questions about an action by the mod team, I'd encourage you to reach out to us directly via pm. Like I said, we're not perfect, but we try to be approachable and we're willing to discuss any question about a decision or action taken.

When a person reaches out to the Mod team and gets a canned “we will look into it” and never a follow up. That can get very frustrating as I’m sure even a Mod can understand. When people take the time to reach out to you in a private manner, as you request please take the time to answer their concerns.

 

[NS Mike D]

I don't think that is it although you raise a interesting thread for another discussion. A lot of online bullying and harassment could be solved by removing virtual names with real ones although that opens a rather large can of worms. I recall Blizzard saying they would do this years back to prevent online harassment and I thought it was a interesting idea although scrapped rather quickly.

The post you quoted I actually took offense to because it pinpoints a issue with the world today and our political climate. And sadly it is the 3rd post this past weekend that raised the hair on the back of my neck...

To reply to the OP I've often wondered why my posts have been deleted from similar vendor feedback threads I've posted in. I have to say that I absolutely disagree with the sites policy and have tried to discuss it with them. In the end neither of us will change our stance so we agree to disagree and I stay out of that subforum. Helps both of us in the end and other members here.

I will say I've had pretty good results talking to the few mods I have via PM's.

It's a trade off I can live with for having a free site (although I do pay the optional fee). I think it's a huge plus that the vendors find the amount desirable of traffic on this site worthy of their marketing dollars and participation, and I find that the same traffic is very useful for me with regard to the validity of good information I receive.

I think if you are willing to use the search function, take the time to read the posts and make good posts yourself, you can sort through the background noise and identify the trends that are valid.

for example, I already know that most posts about a product will be favorable by owners who likely never owned another product so they have no basis with which to compare. That's ok though. I can weigh those post accordingly.

I am pretty confident though, that if I put in the effort, I will have a good idea about a product, why certain features are either useful or a waste and have a good idea of what other manufacturers are doing.

Trends do surface.

 

[Miller535]

It's a trade off I can live with for having a free site (although I do pay the optional fee). I think it's a huge plus that the vendors find the amount desirable of traffic on this site worthy of their marketing dollars and participation, and I find that the same traffic is very useful for me with regard to the validity of good information I receive.

I think if you are willing to use the search function, take the time to read the posts and make good posts yourself, you can sort through the background noise and identify the trends that are valid.

for example, I already know that most posts about a product will be favorable by owners who likely never owned another product so they have no basis with which to compare. That's ok though. I can weigh those post accordingly.

I am pretty confident though, that if I put in the effort, I will have a good idea about a product, why certain features are either useful or a waste and have a good idea of what other manufacturers are doing.

Trends do surface.

Right. This site is free, how can you really complain about free? If you have a problem with a company (even if they are not a Reef2reef vendor), you should take it up with them. Let them have the chance to make it right with you. Not just go "blasting" companies for what could just simply be a mistake or a faulty product (it happens). When you "blast" a company you are not just blasting a company but people's livelihood.

And I do not know about anyone else here, but I do not have endless money to spend on gear and livestock. While I do greatly value the knowledge and opinions of the members here, I am not going to just blindly buy things because x amount of people did, and follow the masses. I am going to look for reviews elsewhere, and also talk to fellow reefers that I personally know and who are trying to accomplish a similar goal.

 

[Jeremy K.A.]

I made a post asking if anyone from AI actually checked the AI subforum because I was having some issues with newly purchased lights.

I bought 2x AI Prime 16HDs and they're different colors on the same schedule during ramp up and down.

There are many features missing from the app compared to the old lights. These features are shown on their website when they advertise the product.

I thought it was misleading and the quality control on the LED pucks may be inadequate.

Somehow else chimed in about how they've had nothing but horrible experiences with AI. (I know they can't all be bad because they sell quite a bit from what I can tell)

Someone else chimed in and said that since EcoTech bought AI they've done everything in their power to keep it second rate under their own series of products. (This is pure speculation but there are some choices that make you wonder)

The comment I had that was removed said, and I'm saying this exactly as I typed it, "That's American corporatism at it's best. Instead of investing in and innovating your own company or product to face the competition, you just buy them instead."

I don't really know why that should be removed and quite frankly that's the kind of action you see from people afraid of open, honest, mature conversation about a topic.

That was me chiming in about my horrendous experience with them, going on 5 years now. I did not mention it to steal the thread but instead to inform people of how poorly I was treated by one of the biggest names in our hobby. My comment was removed by the mods anyways. I apologize for causing any inconvenience but also feel a lot of the same things you are feeling as well now lol.

 

[MoreReefPlease]

Right. This site is free, how can you really complain about free? If you have a problem with a company (even if they are not a Reef2reef vendor), you should take it up with them. Let them have the chance to make it right with you. Not just go "blasting" companies for what could just simply be a mistake or a faulty product (it happens). When you "blast" a company you are not just blasting a company but people's livelihood.

And I do not know about anyone else here, but I do not have endless money to spend on gear and livestock. While I do greatly value the knowledge and opinions of the members here, I am not going to just blindly buy things because x amount of people did, and follow the masses. I am going to look for reviews elsewhere, and also talk to fellow reefers that I personally know and who are trying to accomplish a similar goal.

If you could make a list of pay to enter reef sites that have more than 10 users, I'm all ears.

Asking a vendor in a vendor thread if they check forums and that you're having issues with a light and are close to returning them is "blasting"? According to Oxford, to "blast" someone is so have strong criticism. So strong criticism is not allowed? I'm not sure if people know the definition of the word.

 

[MoreReefPlease]

It is amazing the lack of comprehension and how emotions can lead one to totally misunderstand a post. ;Facepalm


I suggest you reread my post and the quote to which I was responding. @fishguy242 was talking about posts HE made that were edited. I was letting him know that forum software have auto-censor features that edit out offensive words without mod intervention.

:)

Comprehension is the capacity for full understanding. I missed the quote from the person you quoted. Now that I have the full conversation, I comprehend your initial intent and apologize.

 

[MoreReefPlease]

That was me chiming in about my horrendous experience with them, going on 5 years now. I did not mention it to steal the thread but instead to inform people of how poorly I was treated by one of the biggest names in our hobby. My comment was removed by the mods anyways. I apologize for causing any inconvenience but also feel a lot of the same things you are feeling as well now lol.

You didn't hurt my feelings. I'm glad to know how they treated you.

 

[Miller535]

If you could make a list of pay to enter reef sites that have more than 10 users, I'm all ears.

Asking a vendor in a vendor thread if they check forums and that you're having issues with a light and are close to returning them is "blasting"? According to Oxford, to "blast" someone is so have strong criticism. So strong criticism is not allowed? I'm not sure if people know the definition of the word.

The fact that most sites are free does not negate that you are complaining about a free service. It's free. If you have ever gotten a single thing out of this site, then you got way more then you paid for.

If you have a problem with a vendor or company, you should be directly contacting them. Not posting on forums or social media and addressing it publically. Not at least until you have tried to do it privately, giving the vendor or company that chance to make it right.

 

[NS Mike D]

That was me chiming in about my horrendous experience with them, going on 5 years now. I did not mention it to steal the thread but instead to inform people of how poorly I was treated by one of the biggest names in our hobby. My comment was removed by the mods anyways. I apologize for causing any inconvenience but also feel a lot of the same things you are feeling as well now lol.

not totally. It's still up there quoted in another post. The only thing I can see is that you posted about your dealings and and not the issue with OP and the software. That seems fairly obvious why it was removed

"The staff will remove posts by other parties not pertaining to the transaction."


The explanation if that they want the vendor to have a fair opportunity to address the transaction/issue specific to the OP .

I guess the $64k questions, is if you were permitted to start your own thread about your own experience to which AI could respond and then link that thread to the one that was edited. Two points, as I can see. Your issues seems to not be permitted under the main paragraph "This forum is not intended to be a mechanism for people to vent frustrations about vendors or sales from private parties." and the other thread (while the non-response by AI was pafrt of it) was about a technical issue, the linking of the lights.

 

[Amado]

Site censorship is what allows companies like “mindstream” to take peoples money.
Putting companies ahead of users doesn’t work in the long run. Vertex cerbra was also
A big fail for reef2reef they pushed that product on a lot of people.

 

[andrewey]

The fact that most sites are free does not negate that you are complaining about a free service. It's free. If you have ever gotten a single thing out of this site, then you got way more then you paid for.

If you have a problem with a vendor or company, you should be directly contacting them. Not posting on forums or social media and addressing it publically. Not at least until you have tried to do it privately, giving the vendor or company that chance to make it right.

I don't want to derail this thread, but I have to disagree with some of the points you made. First, I don't think it's inappropriate to "complain" about a company or product on this site. That's actually a very valuable thing for other members to know that a product has a flaw, a company isn't honoring a warranty, etc. I agree that there is a right way and wrong way to do so (contacting the company first, stating the facts in a mature way, etc.), but I've seen a few comments suggesting negative feedback has no place here (not that you said that, this isn't even really targeted at your comments- they're just easy enough to quote given their proximity to the new message box :) ).

Secondly, I don't think the site being free/paid has anything to do with it. I think an honest discussion about things this site does well and doesn't do well is how we make it better as a community. Blind loyalty to the site doesn't help anyone, even if it's free. I provided feedback about the Marketplace change. The mod team took my "complaint" as well as others into mind before making changes. Even if it never changed, the fact that they listened speaks volumes to me. I think it's valuable to provide input, even if it's hard for a company to hear sometimes. Ultimately, it all comes down to this:

It's not what you say, it's how you say it.

 

[NS Mike D]

If you could make a list of pay to enter reef sites that have more than 10 users, I'm all ears.

Asking a vendor in a vendor thread if they check forums and that you're having issues with a light and are close to returning them is "blasting"? According to Oxford, to "blast" someone is so have strong criticism. So strong criticism is not allowed? I'm not sure if people know the definition of the word.

I read your thread. Were you venting your frustrations with AI or were you seeking a solution to a technical question.

It look to me like both. The former is not permitted under the user agreement while the latter is. After review, R2R let you thread stand without editing out the frustration part.

No one is stopping you for setting up your own forum with the rules you want.

You are complaining about a site that permits you to post for free. The site bills get paid by the ads that are driven by the traffic demographics and the fees the vendors pay to list here. If you haven't noticed, the vendors are aware that this user agreement permits negative feedback with the guidelines.

Your thread about the failure of the lights to properly pair is available to the general public to see.

I have seen you post a thank you to R2R for fixing the deletion that was done in error, but not much retraction about the false assumptions you publicly made about their business practices.

Since I do not know the answer to this, I 'll ask you. Did you attempt to contact the R2R mods/admin privately about the removal of your thread before flaming them in you OP here? If you did, what was their response that lead you ask again in this thread and loading it with the false assumptions?

 

[Smarkow]

Site censorship is what allows companies like “mindstream” to take peoples money.
Putting companies ahead of users doesn’t work in the long run. Vertex cerbra was also
A big fail for reef2reef they pushed that product on a lot of people.

I said some pretty harsh Cerebra related things on the Cerebra related forum and was never censored... Just one person's experience. I think the only time I have had a post deleted was in a heated thread where someone was saying objectively false/fake advice... Never got an explanation for the post that was deleted (and that sort of ticked me off, but I got over it). I remember not being able to figure out what I had said that warranted deletion (so clearly wasn't that bad?).

So that this is "The China" of reefing forums... no... instead I would say it is confusing/subjective on what violates the user agreement and what does not?

Just my 0.02... Good luck with your lights :(

 

[JCOLE]

This thread is ******* crazy!

Sorry, I don't have anything helpful to add. I just wanted to try out the censorship feature. :D

 

[Miller535]

I don't want to derail this thread, but I have to disagree with some of the points you made. First, I don't think it's inappropriate to "complain" about a company or product on this site. That's actually a very valuable thing for other members to know that a product has a flaw, a company isn't honoring a warranty, etc. I agree that there is a right way and wrong way to do so (contacting the company first, stating the facts in a mature way, etc.), but I've seen a few comments suggesting negative feedback has no place here (not that you said that, this isn't even really targeted at your comments- they're just easy enough to quote given their proximity to the new message box :) ).

Secondly, I don't think the site being free/paid has anything to do with it. I think an honest discussion about things this site does well and doesn't do well is how we make it better as a community. Blind loyalty to the site doesn't help anyone, even if it's free. I provided feedback about the Marketplace change. The mod team took my "complaint" as well as others into mind before making changes. Even if it never changed, the fact that they listened speaks volumes to me. I think it's valuable to provide input, even if it's hard for a company to hear sometimes. Ultimately, it all comes down to this:

It's not what you say, it's how you say it.

I did not say that you should not be able to say something about a bad experience. My exact words were that you shouldn't be posting it publically " Not at least until you have tried to do it privately, giving the vendor or company that chance to make it right". And as you said respectfully.

As far as my comment about this site being free, there are site rules that everyone of us agreed to when we became members. I am not going to agree to the rules of a free service and then complain about it. But that is not to say that respectful request could not or should not be made to Rev or any of the mods. Because that is making suggestions and request, not complaining.

 

[NS Mike D]

Comprehension is the capacity for full understanding. I missed the quote from the person you quoted. Now that I have the full conversation, I comprehend your initial intent and apologize.

Ok, see how easy it is to let ones emotions prevent them from doing their fact finding.

Given what you now know and R2Rs response after having looked into your inquiry, do you still support your assumptive claims made in you OP?

PS, I do agree with you that this is not a truly independent information site- not sure why anyone using a free ad based with sponsor subscriptions would not think so nor even complain about it on the site in the first place.

 

[NS Mike D]

I did not say that you should not be able to say something about a bad experience. My exact words were that you shouldn't be posting it publically " Not at least until you have tried to do it privately, giving the vendor or company that chance to make it right". And as you said respectfully.

As far as my comment about this site being free, there are site rules that everyone of us agreed to when we became members. I am not going to agree to the rules of a free service and then complain about it. But that is not to say that respectful request could not or should not be made to Rev or any of the mods. Because that is making suggestions and request, not complaining.

^

This

This isn't the first nor the last thread flaming R2R without first finding out the facts of why a post or thread was edited, moved or deleted. In every case I have seen, an explanation is made and the user agreement is sited. Also, I often I will see @revhtree jump in the thread and welcome input on how to better handle negative feedback and how to make the site better.

He has to balance economics with what appears to me as genuine desire to be a positive contribution to the hobby, so it's unrealistic to expect him to agree to a free for all with regard to negative feedback AND keep the site free for users.

If one had a better way of dealing with negative feedback and keeping the site free, I would lover to hear it. I have a pretty extensive experience in the corporate world with companies expanding and turning around failing companies. I am not one to shy away offering my 2 cents on how to do thing better and I am stumped on this one to the point I actually tip my hat off for narrow balancing act they do, especially when you consider that the folks doing Rev's work are basically or outright volunteers.


Venting is a strong human emotional need. I often wonder in the negative threads if that is the driving force or if getting their issue resolved is. While the proverbial squeaky wheel gets the cheese (ie it can be effective), often it's not necessary.

 

[Badilac]

While the proverbial squeaky wheel gets the cheese.

;Bored huh?

You mean the squeaky wheel gets the grease? I've never applied cheese to a squeaky wheel. LOL

 

[NS Mike D]

;Bored huh?

You mean the squeaky wheel gets the grease? I've never applied cheese to a squeaky wheel. LOL

lol. duh



and even worse with my mix up is that the squeaky mouse does not get the cheese. It's the second mouse that gets the cheese.

 

[NS Mike D]

LOL! yeah, and get banned. Trust me on that. I recently spoke to a smaller vendor trying to get to advertising on here, he disclosed the exorbitant fees that r2r wanted and lamented about them. This is nothing more than an advertising platform raking in big bucks and stealing from those that are gullible enough to pay to be a supporter. have no etail benchmarks to evaluate web traffic demographics and sales metrics

I fixed it for you to reflect your implication that the industry are stupid business people that have no access to internet marketing data and that small businesses should have the same access to their target audience as large companies but pay for that same access for less because, well. ..... according to their needs.


interesting analysis from someone who has made 4 post prior to this. (assuming that this isn't a phoenix who was previously banned and has returned to complain about R2R tyranny).