Rep Blackmail / LogictechShop

Mikinoz on 17/03/2010 - 18:06

How does anyone else feel about the blackmail by a Rep , my example is with Bargain Crypt aka logitech shop

He would only release a deal if i or the mods removed my neg vote . i really dont have a problem with the mods doing it . But then this is certainly a new way of encouraging the votes

http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/23176?page=1

i have no affiliation with fluidtek or logitech shop neither am i rep for anyone else.

Just though i would run this by the community

Mod — move to Announcement/Feedback forum

Site Discussion

Comments

  • swimmingtoad on 17/03/2010 - 18:19

    i dont see anything wrong with it…

  • insertusernamehere on 17/03/2010 - 18:21

    its about them getting people to vote +ve so that more deals are released. Mikinoz isnt saying he got blackmailed, he's saying OzBargainers are being blackmailed into voting +ve for new deals which means more exposure for logitechshop. Im indifferent, if i get a mad bargain then hey, let it happen.

    • swimmingtoad on 17/03/2010 - 18:21

      …He is saying he was being blackmailed…Read it again…

      • insertusernamehere on 17/03/2010 - 18:37

        touche. there is the bigger issue of everyone being blackmailed though haha

  • Davo1111 on 17/03/2010 - 18:34
    +1

    hmm ive missed the whole event until i read it now.

    Bargaincrypt: "when the neg vote of mikinoz dissapers .and the mods revoke it (if they find it is wrong to vote it neg ). I will push and i mean push my boses to release , illuminated keyboard for $65 delivered."

    I see what you're saying mikinoz. I'll find out what the go is (i'll start up a mod thread).

    PS - thanks for letting us know, sometimes these things fly over our head.

    • swimmingtoad on 17/03/2010 - 18:43

      in that though, his negative was never removed by a mod, he said he revoked it himself..

      • Davo1111 on 17/03/2010 - 18:46
        +2

        yep, but i will discuss it with the mods, perhaps we should update the site rules?

        I'll chat with the mods, then we can get general opinion here. and then possibly update the rules.

      • SomeGuyOnOzB on 17/03/2010 - 23:01
        +1

        I missed that as well.

        I am glad that mikinoz chose to revoke his/her vote before any possibly unruly elements from a 300+ crowd decided to try and start a flame war or something.

        So, I am saying that it does look like Mikinoz was faced with undue pressure to remove his vote.

        Going to have a look at Davo's thread

    • Mikinoz on 17/03/2010 - 19:04
      +1

      Thanks Davo

  • AntMan76 on 17/03/2010 - 23:05

    Doesn't this make you the saviour for anyone wanting that deal? :)

    • Mikinoz on 18/03/2010 - 10:45
      +1

      possibly the way it is portrayed but i wouldnt think so he would have done the deal he was just trying to get his way and push the mods around and me

  • scotty on 17/03/2010 - 23:58
    +7

    Blackmailing other users such as this case is definitely a no-no. That, plus vote-baiting or providing incentive to get other members to vote for the deal (rather than for members to vote on the value of the deal itself) would warrant LogitechShop ban on OzBargain already.

    I am moving this thread to Announcement/Feedback forum as it is closely related to the operation here at OzBargain.

  • inherentchoice on 18/03/2010 - 01:04
    +6

    Just wanted to share some thoughts about such blackmail and vote-baiting:

    1. The voting system is central to OzBargain so if people or reps attempt to manipulate it, this undermines the whole integrity of the site. In other words, the whole idea is to identify good bargains as voted by the community, so if a deal is made popular by coercion or blackmail it is a deceptive misrepresentation that is unfairly allowed to sit amongst and get ahead of the other deals.
    2. I think such tactics allow retailers to 'play the system' to generate more exposure and profits for themselves, at the expense of OzBargain and its integrity.
    3. How will we be able to tell the real deals from the manipulated deals?
    4. If the practice is condoned it will snowball and become worse.
  • ozhunter on 18/03/2010 - 04:58
    -1

    i don't mind it, if more +'s mean more great deals then it doesn't bother me. He does get more +'s by doing what you say he does, but everyone is happy with his deals. He also is constantly on ozbargain to answer questions.

    Just out of curiosity, why did u neg that deal?

    • Mikinoz on 18/03/2010 - 07:16
      +1

      I negged it because it was a dupelicate there were 3 deals that had the same content or were changed to have the same content and title

  • Mikinoz on 18/03/2010 - 07:19

    How about an approval system instead of a vote, with a justification for the approval ie a reason

    this way it would look like people approve / disapprove of the deal it wouldnt need as much moderation as its just approval as oppose to a vote

  • AntMan76 on 18/03/2010 - 08:17

    I think the real issue here is your reasons for revoking the vote. Was it influenced by the comment made by the rep for logitechshop, or was it because it was no longer a dupe?

    I agree it's a bit of a fine line, but he didn't promise another deal, but that he would talk to his bosses about getting a specific deal. He didn't have one ready to go and refused to release it till it was revoked.

  • [Deactivated] on 18/03/2010 - 08:27
    +3

    Mikinoz

    The whole neg vote system needs looking at as the site grows. Originally it was a sign for mods that the deal needs looking at. The report function takes that way. Then we introduced the need for a reason, so that people could see why the vote was negative and assess the vote accordingly.

    Your vote in this situation WAS appropriate** and as you know we have had "discussions" about neg voting in the past. Although if you considered the deal was a "duplicate" reporting it via the report button would have alerted the mods to the issue faster.

    Also reporting the "blackmail" would have been faster with the report function.

    BC also had a right to give an opinion about your opinion BUT NOT to encourage others to pressure you to delete your vote.

    I have shown my concern for this by posting a comment (which I had to do LOL!!) and giving the post a negative vote.

    Playing the BC game, maybe the other mods might like to also neg the post

    ** appropriate because You have a right to an opinion AND you gave your reason.

    • Mikinoz on 18/03/2010 - 08:45
      +2

      Thanks Ozpete, actually i did report it, via the report button.

      • [Deactivated] on 18/03/2010 - 10:35
        +1

        correct you did

        • Mikinoz on 18/03/2010 - 10:39

          Then how is it faster using the report button ?

          • [Deactivated] on 18/03/2010 - 11:13
            +2

            @Mikinoz: Well.

            1 We log in and really see what most people see. When a deal gets put off the "front" page it goes off ours as well. So if we do a quick check during the day we might not see it.

            Keep in mind we are volunteers so we aren't watching all the time - I've missed some great deals by being on a little after it's ended (but I did get the $100 smartypig deal)

            2 We do all look at the report function as a matter of course so we see reports first, by habit (or to be honest, because Scotty told us to) The report function also indicates multiple complaints about a deal. Now if they are "trivial" and we haven't got time to deal with them, we might leave it until we do. But if it's a duplicate, spam, foul language etc we jump on it right away.

            Again you (and your now friend BC) bring up points that we as mods need to better educate users here on - Damn it (LOL) - thanks

            • Mikinoz on 18/03/2010 - 13:32
              +1

              @[Deactivated]: Ahh now that makes so much sense, thanks for clearing that up :)

  • Livert on 18/03/2010 - 09:52

    Just my 2 cents. When I posted the deal it was a completely new deal and would have been completely missed (at least by most) if it were only updated in the UE220 post. So yes, the true duplicate really was the content in the UE220 post as it was only updated AFTER my post was made hence making your argument invalid Mikinoz. I don't condone what BC did to remove your vote but it shouldn't have been there to begin with.

    I'm also dissapointed OzPete that you have decided to neg it on behalf of Mikinoz. It would have been nice to get both sides of the story before doing what you just did.

    • Mikinoz on 18/03/2010 - 10:43
      +2

      This isnt personal Livert, there were three title and descriptions that have the same content

      Its already been validated by the mods so it was valid.

      I am diappointed that fanboys like you who obviously have some involvement with Logoitechshop and his other sockpuppets that seem to be taking over the site and diluting the other bargains

      this 2 cent thing is fun

      • [Deactivated] on 18/03/2010 - 11:02
        +2

        Lets please keep this off personalities and discuss the issues

      • Livert on 18/03/2010 - 13:40
        -2

        The only involvement I have with Logitechshop is the same as everyone else here. As I have mentioned before, I get all my information from the twitter postings or postings by BC here. Fanboy maybe, but I am not a sockpuppet.

      • ohsnap on 20/03/2010 - 10:20

        Agreed, it was definitely not a completely new deal when he posted it. Not only was it updated in the original Logitech thread, but there was also a new post by POWERrevolution, just without the updated links. IMO he could have just updated his post with the links without the need for Livert to post another thread. It definitely became like a competition and everyone was wanting to be "the" poster.

        Edit: Just read below comments by CVonV that the same thing happened to his deal.

  • [Deactivated] on 18/03/2010 - 10:57
    +1

    Lets go thru the steps here.

    Yes when the vote was made it might have had an effect - although 1 neg vote doesn't take a deal off the page, and if the positive vote ratio becomes high then it doesnt.

    By the time BC made the "threat" there was close to 50 positive votes so really the negative vote issue you raise would not have the impact you mention.

    When vendors argue and have running battles with users here, they lose credibility. I have pointed that out to BC before and to his credit he also acknowledges that. But trying to have the community gang up on a negative comment by withholding a deal is not community minded. Hence my negative vote to indicate.

    1. Displeasure with this tactic, which the mod discussion group is running hot about. And may incur some wrath, and or some changes to guidelines and rules. This is on going with different opinions (Please no assumptions on my position either way as you'll probably be wrong))

    2. Restoring Mikinoz's original position
      a.because a revoked vote, can't be restored
      b.even if it could would he dare to go against the wrath that BC may have stirred up.

    3. Indicate to all that the correct procedure here is to use the report button before things get out of hand.

    So the need to get both sides is nothing really to do with the original position. its to do with the way this was handled and the issues that it created.

    Finally we all need to accept as this community grows so will the votes as you have shown already with your excellent deals - which BTW I am looking forward to seeing in my letterbox sometime after Monday.

    Some positives from all this.

    Large positive votes with a neg vote may actually tweak more interest, with community members wondering why? and checking the comments. If the reason is "technical" as in this case, then they won't let it affect their judgment or take up of the deal. Hence that's why mod's have been stressing with every negative post the need for a reason

    LogicShop and BC have been stretching our rules of engagement. This will just help us refine and define these rules, again making everything clearer and better for the future.

    So its all good….

    • Mikinoz on 18/03/2010 - 11:13
      +2

      Agreed i like the bargains thats why i come , dont really care where they are

      also nice to see changes put in to place and the morphing of the website , if it stayed static would be boring and irrelavant in no time

      Come on Group Hug peoples lol

      • bargaincrypt on 18/03/2010 - 12:25
        +1

        I agree and you have my personal apology , please do not let my attitude and wether i made mistakes reflect on logitechshop . as my only intentions were good ones .
        Regards
        BC

  • bargaincrypt on 18/03/2010 - 12:05
    +5

    Ok Guys ,

    Lets make this simple for all , My 1 cents worth .
    i worked my butt off for everyone in here on ozbargains , i listened to every request , we all stayed up nite after nite , we all got good bargains .
    Why are we here, very simple .
    People want to vote negative , so we say why neg , then it spirals .
    Ok warranted to say to a person looking from outside and not a part of the conversation, you'd think its black mail , (ill post a good deal if you remove your vote )
    Fine i tottally agree , and now that its noted that nothing should ever be worded in that format . and i appologise for all if i caused an issue , its not my intention , it was never my intention .
    I do appologise , to all .
    I am Sorry to all
    Mikinoz no hard feelings .
    Ozpete no hard feelings .
    Scotty your website and hardwork is why we are here .so we should be thankful.
    So Im sorry once again , do not take it on Logitechshop . or the store itself , im happy to releif myself from the rep position if scotty wants me to . but i see no point in going further with all this .
    I hope my appology is accepted . if it is , lets move on , close this thread . and get some DAMMMMM good bargains .
    To the Mods please PM me if you like me to resign from my duty as a store rep .
    Best regards
    BC

  • bargaincrypt on 18/03/2010 - 12:27

    So , would you like me to resign my position as Logitechshop rep . If yes im happy to do so , no hard feelings , and i thank you , you all given me more than a good go .

    • [Deactivated] on 18/03/2010 - 12:49
      +6

      BC

      Take it easy mate. You're enthusiastic, and committed. You stretch the rules here. We call you out. But slow down smell the roses read things maybe twice. Take a big breath or two. Remember old saying - it it doesn't add it detracts.

      Then maybe talk to a mod first, before firing all the cannons, and things will be ok.

      You get top votes you offer good deals, just chill…..

      Spend time with more deals, not everyone will like everything, the negative vote doesn't end everything, its just an opinion. - hey Mikinoz and I have had our differences and probably still do. Take it out on a few shipping boxes.

      Laugh like we do…. all is good…. whats the next offer - we'll forgive you then LOL???

      • Mikinoz on 18/03/2010 - 12:56
        +1

        Agreed :)

    • Mikinoz on 18/03/2010 - 12:55
      +1

      I would personally like you to stay, from the bargain perspective i think the community likes the bargains you bring

      Having said that i think you need to cool your jets a bit and calm down.

      When i first came here i was an ass mostly except for the good deals and then that was neglible, after a while you get used to the community and realise its better to have a more open mind or attitude to peoples comments or opinions . At this itme there is nowehre like this on the web that you can interact with your customers so readily and i think this is a great inititive if i could do it better i would which is why i am here and not at my own website.

      I think the apologies were a good start, there's no point talking about sacking or removing your self .

      Most reps are best of not getting too involved or taking it too personally , it ends up reflecting on them as the mods have stated before it tends to reflect badly on them as an individual, the business and the vendor ie logitech

      In saying this i think we should look at minmnising your plethora of bargains ie try to consolidate them into one post every couple of days and if something changes use the forum.

      Good luck hope to see you with a good bargain again soon

  • CVonC on 18/03/2010 - 14:30

    glad things are sorted out.

    can i just add that i posted the logitech guitar/drum bundle before Livert did and someone said that it was a dupe cos it was already mentioned in the previous logitech earphones deal.. and so it was removed.. i'm not complaining, in fact i didn't mind if it was deleted if it was considered to be a dupe.. however, i think there's obviously a lack of consistency with some of the rulings here. that's all

    happy bargain hunting!

    • Livert on 18/03/2010 - 17:47

      Not sure why yours got deleted. I felt that yesterday was the most appropriate time to post it to generate as much exposure to it as possible. Had your post been the active one, it would have already been on page 3. Also, probably more appropriate to start a new thread to discuss this if you want to.

      • CVonC on 18/03/2010 - 17:59

        nah it's all good mate. i wouldn't have been able to keep up with all the links being posted anyway.. so in a way i'm glad you posted it

        there just needs to be more consistency with the deletion of certain bargains. for eg the bluetooth headset from 1sale was deleted just because the price kept fluctuating in the initial hours of the posting.

        • [Deactivated] on 18/03/2010 - 22:20

          I deleted it with message, to clearly state that the price would fluctuate, before re-posting. Its all a matter of letting people know what was going on. That's not inconsistent. Clicking the link and seeing another price is no bargain when it goes higher and higher.

          As for other "inconsistencies - guess what we are human, we can make mistakes, and also we are different personalities, if that's the case just alert us, often we will correct this.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join