Ethics discussion for purchases never delivered

[govannon]

bangHeadAgainstWall.gif

[MagickalMemories]

My apologies. I was not aware that members were not permitted to have links in their signatures.

See, now THAT little bit of smart-assery was directed straight at me, since *I* was the one who told you to remove the old one. Furthermore, you're misrepresenting what I said. I said you were not allowed to link to THAT PARTICULAR gif.

So, here's your warning (which will be followed by an official, PMed "board warning"):

If you attempt to insult, degrade or inflame any staff member again, you will receive a suspension for the site to last NO LESS than one week.

Eric

P.S. So we're clear, that warning was directed at EVIL INC.

[getupandgo]

The O.P. refers to the posts I pulled my quotes from in particuler in his listing of the links. That implies that those are the ones he agrees with. If they are not, then it would in my opinion, be better for him to not refer to them in particular.
So in your opinion, it is not slanderous to tell lies about someone in order to discredit them? Of course, if someone were to call the Queen of England an adulterating prostitute who engages in child pornography and claim to have proof and furthermore put it out to all of the world's newspapers, it would not be considered libelous either according to that logic.
""But with BTD I have to say what they are doing is outright fraud." Clearly an opinion that he presented as a fact. By the way, did he provide receipts, phone/e-mail statements to prove the basis for his opinion? I did not see them in the post. Of course, he may have provided them somewhere else. If he did, could you please post the link? I would like to see it.
true, a murderer does not have to murder everyone to be a murderer. Of course evidence should , in my opinion, be provided before someone is convicted of being a murderer. Likewise, if someone is accused of murdering everyone, they should murder everyone in order for the statement to be true, in my opinion.
Yes, a boycott is pretty basic. It is an attempt to put someone out of business. It does not mean that I should agree to a boycott of a company. I disagree with you in that I feel that I have a right to disagree with this particular boycott while you disagree with me in claim in that I do not have that right.
Yes, it is my opinion that legal channels should be used to deal with the particular situation at hand. You may disagree with me in that and I totally support your right to do so. It is also my opinion that the legal methods should be tried before resorting to such things as boycotts. It is my opinion that such things as boycotts should be a last resort rather then first.

[EVIL INC]

Good picture getupandgo, it is relevant. I think I will keep that. Maybe it will be taken to heart and the madness will stop.

[maple]

My lack of maturity suprises even my wife, so I have no problem posting the following statment:

@ Evil Inc.
Seriously? For real?
I really hope you are just doing this to be a asshat. Cause if you are, it is funny.
Now on the flip side, if you are being serious, man... it's kind of sad.
You are attempting to manipulate people's words and make yourself seem like the "victim" here. It's not working, you are just kind of making yourself seem like the kind of guy who learned a few five dollar words and now likes to pass yourself off as a "smart guy". We all know the type, he lives in a basement (usually his parents) and is a key board cowboy.
But then again, if you are doing this all for a laugh... well played man, cause you have me laughing. Hard.

[EVIL INC]

Maple, there are already enough people trolling in here. Seeing another one is not even funny. I should know better then to feed the trolls. lol.
Kindly refrain from the blatant name calling and cussing at other members. The English language is varied enough that you do not need to resort to cussing at others to insult them.
I actually do not live in any basement, I have a Ba degree and am capable of participating in an educated debate. I treat others fairly with dignity and respect and that is shown in all of my posts. My apologies to you if my opinions on the matter disagree with yours. Just as I have said before, I ask only the right to have them and express them. I do not interfere with anyone who does as that is their right.

[maple]

Maple, there are already enough people trolling in here. Seeing another one is not even funny. I should know better then to feed the trolls. lol.
Kindly refrain from the blatant name calling and cussing at other members. The English language is varied enough that you do not need to resort to cussing at others to insult them.
I actually do not live in any basement, I have a Ba degree and am capable of participating in an educated debate. I treat others fairly with dignity and respect and that is shown in all of my posts. My apologies to you if my opinions on the matter disagree with yours. Just as I have said before, I ask only the right to have them and express them. I do not interfere with anyone who does as that is their right.

As previously stated, I am not mature, so I will resort to name calling. I find it funny that you call me a troll, when over the last week or so, you have spammed up the BT Forums with your... I guess I will use the word blather. I applaude your earning of a BA degree, thank you for pointing out that you have a college education. Uf you are educated enough to take part in a debate, why don't you show it to all of us? All you have done is attempt to twist people's words and show your own superiority. You have failed at both tasks.
I will bow out of you pointless posting now, as I have nothing more to say. Good luck to you Evil Inc, because I really think you need it.

Now, back to my Mom's basement to eat Cool Ranch chips and drink Code Red. Maybe I will dig up my GED certificate and frame it.

[EVIL INC]

Yes, trying to stop the trolling may appear to be blather. At least it is well reasoned and supported by facts.
I only brought up my college education because you accused me of being uneducated, living in my parents basement and so forth when you had no idea if it was true or not much less have any evidence to support the accusation.
Read the thread or never mind I will sum it up for you.
1. company has issues with keeping up on it's logistics and sending out orders.
2. People complain and boycott company.
3. I suggest that perhaps the boycott should be a last resort in my opinion.
4. the attacks on me about how I do not have the right to have an opinion and I do not have the right to voice my opinion.
5. You arrive and continue with the unjust attacks.

I have presented, facts as facts, opinions as opinions and had others twist my words about, trolling, changing the subject ect ect.
The simplest way to solve the issue is agree to disagree. I will not change my views on the subject. I will continue to feel that justice is better then revenge. I will continue to believe that the owner of the company did not start the company with the sole purpose of ripping people off, that they just got in over their heads and made mistakes that they need to address and fix. I will continue to believe that mind control is a bad thing, that people should be free to have different opinions from one another. I will continue to believe that people should have the right to voice their opinions in a respectful and dignified manner as I have been doing. Nothing anyone is going to say will change my mind on those topics (those are the only ones we are discussing) and I will not change your mind in that you think the exact opposite of what I do on those issues. So we can continue to trade back and forth or we can just accept that we disagree with one another on them.

[blackspade]

This thread is painful.
Having read through it all, I have a few comments shown below in red within the quote. More comments after the quote.

Read the thread or never mind I will sum it up for you.
1. company has issues with keeping up on it's logistics and sending out orders.
A point of agreement. Additionally, they have continued to do so for years. It does not matter their personal intent. What matters is that some customers have been defrauded by either negligence or intent. It does not matter which, as the result is still the same.2. People complain and boycott company.
3. I suggest that perhaps the boycott should be a last resort in my opinion.
And that is your opinion. Boycotts are the single best instrument that the consumer has against poor business practices by both small and large companies. Boycotts are effective because they get the financial attention of whoever owns a company. This leads to two options, correct the problems, or go out of business.
4. the attacks on me about how I do not have the right to have an opinion and I do not have the right to voice my opinion.
No one has attacked you for having an opinion, they have attacked the actual opinion because they do not agree with it and have stated why, in rather painful detail. You are, of course, free to continue to voice that opinion ad nausium, but do not expect others to hold their opinions back either.
5. You arrive and continue with the unjust attacks.


I have presented, facts as facts, opinions as opinions and had others twist my words about, trolling, changing the subject ect ect. Again, this is your opinion on the subject.
The simplest way to solve the issue is agree to disagree. I will not change my views on the subject. I will continue to feel that justice is better then revenge. No one has advocated revenge. Utilizing leagal methods to presure a company to fulfill its responsibilities to its customers is justice whether from consumer presure via boycotts or bad publicity, or through civil and criminal actions. I will continue to believe that the owner of the company did not start the company with the sole purpose of ripping people off (no one voiced that opinion in this thread), that they just got in over their heads and made mistakes that they need to address and fix (obviously, but what is going to make them take this step? According to you, a customer should take large amounts of their valuable time continually contact an unresponsive company to fix probles that should not exist in a well run company). I will continue to believe that mind control (???) is a bad thing, that people should be free to have different opinions from one another. I will continue to believe that people should have the right to voice their opinions in a respectful and dignified manner as I have been doing. Actually, your tone seems condecending and arrogant to me, but that is my opinion Nothing anyone is going to say will change my mind on those topics (those are the only ones we are discussing) and I will not change your mind in that you think the exact opposite of what I do on those issues. So we can continue to trade back and forth or we can just accept that we disagree with one another on them.

The facts as I see them are as follows:
1) BTG has been in business for at least ten years.
2) For a number of these years, especially the last three or four, their business practices have been less than stellar for some of their customers.
3)Some of these people have become fed-up with BTG and decided to take action against the company. Some of thse advocate boycotts, some legal and criminal action. Others feel that voicing their experiences with the company via the internet and word of mouth is the most effective way to change the company's behavior.
4) One of these folks has decided to gather as many individuals together as possible that have had issues with the company, to effect some kind of resolution from BTG.

The resolution that occurs will hopefully benefit both BTG and its customers, but the customer in this case is paramount.

I have to disagree with MM on one thing:

I don't think that this is exclusively a case of misrepresentation. Rather this:
constructive fraud
: conduct that is considered fraud under the law despite the absence of an intent to deceive because it has the same consequences as an actual fraud would have and it is against public interests (as because of the violation of a public or private trust or confidence, the breach of a fiduciary duty, or the use of undue influence) called also legal fraud —compare ACTUAL FRAUD in this entry

My two pennies. Carry on...

[MagickalMemories]

I have to disagree with MM on one thing:

I don't think that this is exclusively a case of misrepresentation. Rather this:
constructive fraud

What?

Disagree?

Where the f*** is my banhammer?!?!
LOL

Actually, the only reason I included Misrepresentation in there is because one definition specifically referenced it. No more. No less.

That being said...

Ssssh.... Don't wake the troll!

[reegsk]

Evil, I have to say, you're either guilty of trolling yourself, or you smell like fresh ham and attract trolls to you. This is the third thread (recently) in which you claim to be the victim of trolling. To be honest, though, the first thread of yours I came across (I believe it's entitled "Random Rant" or somesuch), I was in agreement with you at first. I find it odd, however, that on the one hand you will decry unfriendly practices such as not leaving feedback and using "legal verbage" to back out of trades, but on the other you would adamntly and steadfastly defend a company that has, quite obviously, had a lot of very unfriendly (one could easily argue fraudulent) practices. So which is it? You are steadfastly against unfair practices that injure and upset people who engage in business dealings in good faith, or you steadfastly support businesses who financially injure their clients? Or is it that you're only against unfair practices if you're the victim? I ask not to attack you, but rather to understand your reasoning behind what, to me, appears to be contradictory arguments.

Also, to your claim that others were spreading libel about BTD. . .

Libel (n)

A) A false publication, as in writing, print, signs, or pictures, that damages a person's reputation.

B) The act of presenting such material to the public.

I have thus far not seen anyone intentionally misrepresenting BTD's business actions. They've stated many opinions, yes, all backed by hurt feelings at being treating unfairly. If someone claimed BTD had ripped them off when they had never dealt with BTD, or when their interaction went smoothly, THAT would be libel.

[EVIL INC]

Blackspade, I will address you first. First, the thread is indeed painful to read. Such hatred, bigotry and unnecessary angst for no reason at all.
A point of agreement. Additionally, they have continued to do so for years. It does not matter their personal intent. What matters is that some customers have been defrauded by either negligence or intent. It does not matter which, as the result is still the same
The only point here is the intent. The OP and others throughout the thread are claiming to know the intent of the company. They claim that fraud was the sole purpose of even starting the company.
And that is your opinion. Boycotts are the single best instrument that the consumer has against poor business practices by both small and large companies. Boycotts are effective because they get the financial attention of whoever owns a company. This leads to two options, correct the problems, or go out of business.
Your right, it IS only my opinion. I said it was only my opinion from post one and I have posted it as only my opinion throughout. That is why the others started with their flaming and trolling. They feel that I do not have a right to that opinion. We are humans and all humans are different with different feelings and opinions (even identical twins). I have no problems with their opinions, I just felt that I should have the right to disagree with them (evidently I dont). On the boycott, the intent of many of the people the O.P. represents (along with many of the trolls), according to them, is not to just get the attention of the company and cause it to make changes in itself to solve the problem but to actively continue it until the company goes out of business whether the problem is fixed or not.
No one has attacked you for having an opinion, they have attacked the actual opinion because they do not agree with it and have stated why, in rather painful detail. You are, of course, free to continue to voice that opinion ad nausium, but do not expect others to hold their opinions back either.
Actually, I have been attacked, flamed, trolled at and actually cussed out and threatened. I do not mind others having opinions at all. I encourage it. The issue is that I am stating mine respectfully and with dignity while the "opposition" if you will, take offense to someone disagreeing with them react in a negative manner.
"Again, this is your opinion on the subject. "
Actually that is a fact that is shown in black and white when you read the thread.
"No one has advocated revenge. Utilizing leagal methods to presure a company to fulfill its responsibilities to its customers is justice whether from consumer presure via boycotts or bad publicity, or through civil and criminal actions."
Read above. According to some of the people the O.P. represents and his supporters, the stated intent is to put the company out of business. That, I feel in my opinion, is revenge. I feel that justice would be to only do it until the company makes a turnaround.
"(no one voiced that opinion in this thread),"
If you read this thread, the original and the threads in the links provided, you will see that in this case, I am correct.
"(obviously, but what is going to make them take this step? According to you, a customer should take large amounts of their valuable time continually contact an unresponsive company to fix probles that should not exist in a well run company)."
Yes, it is a pain in the rear to make multiple attempts to contact a company. However, that is life. You do it for the electric, insurance and trash pickup companies but it works. While it may not be right and causes those who are meek get run over but a fact of life is that the squeaky wheel gets oiled.More then one attempt should have been made to contact the company in my opinion. Then, after those contacts are made/attempted, in my opinion they should have been advised of the next step they were going to take. This could be , "hey, if you dont call back, I'm going to the BBB", or "Look, if you dont contact me, I will take my documentation to the NCL Fraud Center". http://www.fraud.org/info/contactnfic.htm
(???) An example of mind control is where you force people to think the way you want them to think. Much as an autmaton. Forexample, telling them do not have a right to have or voice an opinion and then beating them down every time they try to have or voice their own opinion until they just mindlessly agree to whatever opinion they are told to have.
"Actually, your tone seems condecending and arrogant to me, but that is my opinion "
Yes, that is your opinion and you have the right to have it. I apologize if you feel that way as that is not my intent. When I get attacked enough times, I start to become defensive (as does anyone). Also, because of my disability, my typing speech becomes somewhat stilted so I can understand where you could feel that way. I come from an old fashioned country family and us, well, I will not use the derogatory words I have seen used to describe us simple country folk here, are raised to be honest and respectful.
That being said, the O.P. had permission to make his post and not once have I ever questioned that right. I only stated that I disagreed with some of the things he and the people he represents said.

Edit: Reegsk (where does that name come from?) you posted just as I was and mine didnt take so I'm editing it to say hello to you rather then do an all new one.
Your right, I must stop taking ham showers in the mornings.
I feel in my opinion that the company is in the wrong. They need to fix the issues or be shut down in my opinion. The difference is that I feel they should have the option to fix the issues and only be shut down if they dont or are not able to. I also feel it is wrong to assume and accuse the company of intentionally doing it. I dont feel that that fraud was the sole intent of starting the company. I know it makes no difference on the bottom line, but to me, intent means a lot. That is why my stance is the same in both of the threads you mentioned (without contradiction), doing what (I feel) is "right". Likewise, I support the right of others to do the same (even if I disagree with them).
If you read the threads, you will see that the company is accused of intentionally defrauding the customers (not by everyone though) rather then it being mistakes or screw ups. In my view, that is libel. I doubt it would even hold up in a court of law even. It is my opinion and thats why I stated it as only an opinion.

I gotta agree with MM, lets keep this quiet so that we dont wake the trolls.

[Norseman]

EVIL INC wrote:
I gotta agree with MM, lets keep this quiet so that we dont wake the trolls.

:giggle:

[EVIL INC]

Yes, I am well aware that he is referring to me without my ever having done anything to warrant it. I am merely sliding the blame where it belongs. When/ if I do something to warrant it, I will accept it because as I have shown already, I am more then willing to acknowledge when I am in the wrong.

[getupandgo]

Come on, seriously... which one of the mods/admins is behind this?