[Boosted]

I for one think this is B.S. to put Sam on Moderation and to close his post. Even the Axiom guy said they talked offline so there was an effort there.

It is a darn shame that the words "CUSTOMER SERVICE" has been put to the way side.

I for one would not buy anything from Axiom now that this has come to a head and really doubt that I would buy anything from any Supporting vender of the site. I am a supporting member of this site becasue I believe in it. But now hav eto question the Intergraty of it due to the very quick and might I say hastley actions taken for Axiom after 1 post and against a member here. It seems to me if you do not give money to this site then you are nothing to them.

Just a shame....

 

[Troy Roberts]

Please read the FAQ regarding disputes with other members. http://www.ssrfanatic.com/forum/faq.php?faq=new_faq_item3#faq_disputes

The Forum allows members to post regarding a bad transaction with a vendor or another Forum member, but only after they have made a reasonable effort to resolve the issue offline.

Then, when a post is made outlining the problem, the post must be factual and may not deteriorate into a rant or a vendor/tuner-bashing exercise.

We leave such threads open as long as they conform with Forum rules/guidelines and in order to give all sides in an issue the opportunity to comment. Forum members who have information relevant to the dispute may contribute to the thread, but should refrain from jumping in just for the purpose of stating their opinion.

After each side has had a chance to post, the threads are locked and archived for future reference.

The matter may not be addressed in multiple threads or revisited with the same already-posted information on subsequent days.

fyi... Sam has been flirting with moderation for some time. He has been discussed in the mods corner previously. The move to moderation was not due only to this one case. It was probalby going to happen soon one way or another anyway.

Also, Axiom is not a Supporting Vendor. They are Supporting Members. I actually do need to talk to them about that.

I take offense to the integrity comment. We are following the rules outlined in the FAQ and enforced equally no matter supporting status. The rules are there to keep the site civil and give everyone a fair shot at airing greivances.

We need to weigh the ability to express opinions with the fact that there are many out there who will use a site like ours to "blackmail" vendors and other members into particular actions with the threat of taking it public before it is appropriate to do so.

I have been running forum sites for long enough to know that you can also get a very negative tone going if you allow unchecked disputes to take over the forum. The rules we have setup have worked well for years on other sites and I expect that they will do so here as well.


You may also want to read the FAQ about open criticism of the site/moderators.

The Forum welcomes constructive criticism. But questions or comments regarding the the Forum or the actions of its moderators must be made in IMs or e-mails and not in open threads.

The Forum's moderators are volunteers who help enforce the site's rules and guidelines. Please don't make their jobs any more difficult than it needs to be by criticizing them in open threads.

 

[Troy Roberts]

Just to add one more bit - if new events occur in a case like this then it is ok to repost at that time. For example, if a refund is promised (as it was in the original thread) and it never materializes then it is completely appropriate to post the facts about the missing refund.

We want to get the facts out but not let the forum degenerate.