That did get really, really, ugly. I haven't seen that kind of nastiness in a while. I will say this, I suspect that one of the people at the heart of the ugliness in that thread is actually someone who disappeared a from here a few weeks ago. I suspect that person is back under another name but just as mean.

Well, the civility was fun while it lasted.

[www.mysteryshopforum.com]

Yup, it's back again. I wish it would go away again and just stay gone this time.

And what was so "uncivilized" about that thread? People expressing their opinions?

People being rude and hurtful to a scheduler who was just trying to be nice.

Did nobody ever consider how Erika would feel after reading that bit of nastiness?

I'm asking you to point out all the alleged "nastiness." I don't expect schedulers to always understand a shoppers perspective. She had an opportunity to learn specifically what and why her email bothered some shoppers. Her response and explanation was accepted. To me it falls under the category, "It seemed like a good idea at the time."

dspeakes Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, the civility was fun while it lasted.
>
> [www.mysteryshopforum.com]


Although I was relatively uninterested in that thread, I thought the sharing of opinions was a very heathy thing, and I thought the thread was civil. I am appalled that you are so proud of the condescending, mean-spirited, and scolding post you made that you would actually call attention to it in another thread.

Lisa and AM are right on the money. That thread was not nasty toward the scheduler and people welcomed her explanation and stated that they understood that the insult was unintentional. The nasty post was the one alledging that anyone who voiced an opinion was being uncivil.

Civility, nastiness, offensive posts, are in the eyes of the beholder. The example of this thread is enlightening. dspeakes, was it objectionable to you because you tried to beat sense into dissenters without success? I did not find the thread rude or crude. I also didn't get incensed with Ace's scratch-off ticket/turkey opportunity. I took it as good-natured fun. Obviously, everyone was not on the same page. Such is life. As a shopper and member of this forum, I do not feel at all compelled to come to the defense of an MSC at the expense of a shopper(s) expressing honest feedback.

Let's see, the title of the thread called the idea "ridiculous" and the body of it said the idea of giving shoppers a little extra bonus of unknown amount should be "taken out behind the barn and shot."

And then everyone jumped on Techman's bandwagon and proceeded to not only belittle the idea (which is rude enough) but to attack Ace in general, malign Payquicker, and just in general never give a thought to the person behind the idea (Erika) and the fact that she is a human being -- a very nice human being, and a caring human being -- who did not deserve to be attacked like that just because you found her "gift" inadequate.

yes, nastiness is what happened on that thread, and now it has turned onto me because I stood up for Erika. I have now been accused of doing so for monetary gain, hoping that I would get a $50 bonus. Never mind that I have done exactly two shops for Ace in two years and there are no shops even available to me. But someone decided to attack my motivation in taking on the bullies who were beating up on Erika (accusing her of disrespecting the very shoppers she was offering bonuses to) and on Ace in general (for having the audacity to use Payquicker, never mind that we already have checks, gift cards, Paypal, direct deposit being used by other companies, but for some reason Payquicker alone is just evil and must be stamped out!).

I took on the bullies because I felt bad for Erika, who was just trying to do something fun and different to give a little something extra to the shoppers who work for her. (I suspect most of the detractors in that thread don't even shop for Ace at all, so what right do they have to be offended by her offer in the first place?) I spoke up because silence implies agreement. I did not agree.

If you're all proud of "liking" Techman's post -- so be it. I will remain ashamed of you. As I was ashamed of the bullies who ganged up on poor Tony Lorenzini. My opinion. My right to have it.

I just wish once in awhile some of you might consider for one moment that the people you are attacking are human beings who have feelings who can be hurt, and to consider that your "opinions" (to which you have a right) might not necessarily need to be shared when the only possible outcome is that someone is going to be hurt by the vehemence of your "sharing."

It's perfectly okay to read Ace's offer and think "I think that's a stupid idea" without have to put it in print for all to see, including the person whose idea it was.

Is it kind? Is it true? Is it helpful? I would be really nice if some people here would take a moment to consider whether what they are about to post meets those three criteria, and if it doesn't, maybe they should reconsider posting it.

God forbid anyone stand up for civility and manners here. It's so much easier to agree with hostility and rudeness and sarcasm.

Don't generalize and lump everyone who disagrees with your singular opinion into the category of bully. You are passionate, we get that. Deep breaths, dspeakes.

dspeakes, if you're looking for hostility and rudeness and sarcasm, read your own posts.

I don't mind taking a beat-down. It won't be my first, and I'm sure it won't be my last. I also felt that thread got unnecessarily nasty.

Mary, if you can't see the difference between being a rude, hateful bully and standing up to a rude, hateful bully, then I don't know what to say.

What ever happened to manners? It's bad enough that a hurtful post is made; must it be applauded? Would you want someone talking about your mother the way Erika was talked about on that thread?

The problem with the internet is people seem to get the idea that they are communicating with a computer instead of another human being. Erika is not a computer and is not a company. She's a person. If that thread had been a conversation taking place in a room with Erika present, do you think people would have been saying the things they did? "Ridiculous" idea? "Take it out and shoot it"? And somehow coming to the conclusion that an offer of extra money constitutes disrespect to the shoppers? How did more money become an insult?

No, people generally can muster up some manners and civility when face to face. But on the internet, everyone is fair game for an attack -- yes, even when they are trying to do something nice that someone thinks isn't nice enough.

Well, then, maybe now we can discuss this calmly.

As I see it, there's no difference in accountability for what may be considered a rude post criticizing Erica's idea and for what may be considered a rude post criticizing forum members who criticized Erica's idea. If both posts are hostile and rude and ill mannered, what's the difference? Is it a bad thing for me to be rude, but it's not a bad thing for you to be rude back to me? What am I supposed to learn from that?

I get what irritated people about the $1.00 to maybe $50.00 turkey offer. It sounded like a sucker come on regardless of how well it may have been meant. Erica and Ace addressed the issue and it seemed like we'd worked out our differences as well as could be expected. Then you jumped on us because we expressed dissenting opinions and you didn't like the way we expressed ourselves or the fact that we didn't accept the turkey deal with a hearty and cheerful thank you.

It's all right for us to disagree with one another and it's all right for us to express different opinions. Yes, we get edgy and we go straight for the gut but that's the nature of an anonymous forum. While I appreciate a dissenting opinion clearly stating the differences and arguing for another outcome, it's hard to take a beat down from someone who has no more right to their opinion than I have to mine.

The way I see the process in that thread is that you kept expressing the opinion we should be grateful for the $1.00 to $50.00 offer and when you didn't get general agreement you gave us a good hot tongue lashing because we're so rude and inconsiderate. We were stubborn and you were mean tempered and we got nowhere with one another.

It takes a consistent and gentle touch to change public opinion. Sometimes it can't be done. Most of the time it takes a very long time and nothing much will ever be accomplished in one thread. You cannot expect to civilize us immediately. If you want to accomplish anything with us, you will have to apply yourself with more care and accept the few rare victories that come along the way. What you are trying to do here will take years and I see no sign you have that kind of patience. Perhaps you need to abandon us to our primitive dispositions. Only you can decide if we're worth your efforts.

I loved the line about the IPhone or the Snickers bar. Thanks, I'll take both.

Frankly, it is Ace that should have stood up and said that, as a company, they took responsibility for accepting the scheduler's idea and running with it. I accept that the scheduler intended no insult. But when it became something that the corporation didn't recognize as potentially very insulting, THAT'S where the problem took root. That's also why most of us have no problem forgiving Erica for a naive idea. ACE is the responsible party and they blew it.

PS to dspeaks - Interesting you should bring my mother into this. Bad idea. You wouldn't want to dust it up with Mama, or Dad either.

I must of missed this and can not find it, can someone show me where this was said? other than dspeakes, saying it.

"Payquicker alone is just evil and must be stamped out!)."

I, for one, appreciated the responses we received from Ace on that thread and I left with a better understanding of what their intention was.

Spaztck,

(Thank you for the kind words.) We've (meaning ACE) noticed that in nearly every thread about us, there is always someone who brings up that they don't like PayQuicker, for whatever reason. It's usually one of a small handful of the same people each time, and that's ok. You all have the right to post your opinion any time you please, and we will still do what we need to do as a company.

What is great about being an independent contractor, as all of our shoppers are, is that you can pick and choose what companies you want to do business with. You can use any criteria you like to make that decision. If you don't like PayQuicker and choose not to work with us for that reason, that's really okay. We want you to be happy shoppers and work for the companies with policies that make you happy.

Of course, we would much rather people come to us with questions instead of asking them here, as adding "check the forums for things I need to answer" is not my favorite to-do list item. But, I will continue to try to keep an eye on the posts here for you all.

Happy Thanksgiving, All!

MaryACE, Disbursements
ACE Mystery Shopping
mary@acemysteryshopping.com

PayQuicker is not my favorite at all. There are so many faster choices. Not sure if it is cheaper for the company if that might be why they pick it instead of other options.

I like Ace and I don't mind waiting a few days for my money. I personally do not find Payquicker any slower than Paypal.

The ONLY time I didn't see my money in my bank was when I neglected to give them my ID (in the beginning).



Oh well. Like Mary said, if you don't like Payquicker, don't work for the MSC that uses them.

Simple, eh?

I have followed this thread and the original thread without comment. I was one of those posters who chose to like the original post and subsequent posts. Frankly, I have not participated in the forum recently because there has been a growing "thought police" mentality brewing. There seems to be a drum beat for everyone to hold hands and be nice, and don't say anything that might hurt someone's feelings. As many have already commented, there was nothing in that thread that was offensive, accept the post by Dspeakes calling out the original poster and other forum members for being mean and nasty.

I received the email, read it and moved on. It was an absolutely offensive email, even if the offense was unintended. I understand why the scheduler and the company thought it was a good idea. They have shops they needed done during a time frame that probably is a challenge because of the holidays. They hoped people would get on board and take more shops because the shop would be paid more than the advertised payment. I don't blame any one for any idea they want to use to get their desired outcome when it comes to business. I do, however, reserve a right to be offended by it. Good intent doesn't wipe away bad ideas. If Ace wanted to reward their shoppers for being loyal partners in the success of their business, how about just advertising the bonus amount, or better yet, send a bonus check. Dont make a game of people's livelihood, where they have to guess, or wait to find out what they earned for their services. Nothing against the company or the scheduler, but to me, it speaks volumes to the general attitude. I hope that schedulers don't have to spin a wheel or roll the dice to see what they will be paid for work performed.

But this post isn't about "The Great Turkey Bonus Debate".

Dspeakes, I don't appreciate your attempts to shut people down in voicing their opinions. We should all be adults here, we can participate or not, we can take offense or not. I don't have a problem with you voicing your opinion, but I don't like your inability to move on, and your grenade throwing comments. Your singling out the original poster and the forum members that happened to agree with him with your vitriol and contempt is insulting. Your accusations describe your behavior, not the original posters. At the risk of joining those ranks of the "mean spirited" people who call it like they see it - this is classic passive aggressive behavior in my book.

rovergirl529 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
I don't have a problem
> with you voicing your opinion,


Obviously, you *do* have a problem with my voicing my opinion. In my opinion, the original post was sarcastic and rude, and those who applauded it were also. You think I don't have the right to express my opinion about the manner in which others expressed their opinion, but you think you have the right to express your opinion about the way in which I expressed mine.

You demand your right to be rude, then call me rude for calling you rude. When does it stop?

"There seems to be a drum beat for everyone to hold hands and be nice, and don't say anything that might hurt someone's feelings. " You say this like this is a bad thing. Are we here to rip each other apart or be supportive? Why do we think schedulers deserve to be treated like dirt here? Why do so many of you applaud it?

dspeakes,

You miss my point, just like you seem to miss everyone else's point. We all got your opinion that you thought the original post was rude. I did not think it was rude. As we often hear said, we should agree to disagree. My point is, you want to dictate what can be said or not said on the forum per your opinions. I don't think anyone has a problem with you voicing your opinion. But you don't stop at voicing your opinion, you want everyone to behave in the manner you deem appropriate.

I don't think anyone treated Erika "like dirt". I think people started a conversation about a MSC's actions. Erika didn't unilaterally decide to offer up this bonus program, and everyone on this forum knows that. Erika was doing her job to get her shops scheduled and no one is treating her badly. She had an idea, some people think it was a bad idea, but no one is attacking Erika and treating her like dirt. Without your intervention to defend Erika and Ace, everyone would have moved on and the thread would have died. I am pretty sure that Erika and Ace would have appreciated that outcome. Instead of letting it die, you chose to not only attack the original poster and other forum members for their likes, you brought the discourse over to another thread in another forum to add fuel to the fire.

Like I said in my original post, I don't believe that we should have "thought police" on the forum.

Edited for accuracy of names.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/02/2014 09:54PM by rovergirl529.

Just to step into the fire for a quick second, her name is "Erika" and Erika, bless her heart, has graciously agreed to do a scheduler's interview for Mystery Shopper Magazine.

Don't y'all love happy endings? I know I do.

The End.

(heart)

Dspeakes,
How many forum members do you and your posse want to drive away from the forum? You do not own this forum or make the rules. Neither do the people who disagree with you. YOU are the one calling names and bullying. YOU are the problem. Time to just get over this when even people who have been absent for months at a time because of the sort of rancor that you engender feel complelled to return to speak up.

What "posse" are you talking about? It seems to me that Dspeakes has been a "posse" of one, here.

The whole issue should have been settled with Erika's and Mary's gracious explanation (waaaaay back on November 18th) which seemed to be generally well-received, including by several who had complained. I was remiss in not being one of the ones to express appreciation for their explanation at the time, other than simply 'liking' Erika's post. I had a lot going on right around then so didn't take the time to post.

Erika's Turkey Bonus idea was indeed sweet, and I said up-front I knew it was well-intentioned. And, the turkey itself? Was cute. (: I thought the comment about Groucho spinning in his grave was just being silly, when I 'liked' it.

I appear to be a posse of one because others who agree with me will PM me their support but don't want to become targets by agreeing with me publicly. After seeing the way some of you rip into me every time I don't agree with you, can you blame them?

I've been in forums before where this same phenomenon existed:

Long-time posters make snarky comments about someone's benign, innocent post, usually a newbie's. (In this case it was a friendly, happy email from a scheduler that was attacked)

Newer, more sympathetic posters speak up in defense of the person attacked or criticized.

Long-time posters' minions jump on the sympathetic posters.

Sympathetic posters defend themselves.

Longtime posters label sympathetic posters as rude, censoring, troublemakers, etc, simply because they dared to disagree with a long-time poster.


Techman labeled the idea stupid. People jumped in and agreed with him. I disagreed. I am now the bad guy for pointing out how many people jumped on his bandwagon.

Business as usual.


You ready to drop it yet?

Dspeakes wrote:

________________________________________
Are you ready to drop it yet?


Not really.

Once again I feel the need to point out that no one attacked you for your opinion, people responded to your commentary that was rude and hostile to other posters. Instead of lecturing us all on our poor manners, could you please provide the exact comments that you thought were so hurtful to the scheduler?? Because I have read the whole thread several times and I don't see what could have offended you, or her, so deeply. If you want to control the conversation, you will need to be more specific on what we are, and are not, allowed to say about schedulers, MSC's, forum members, etc. and would that be inclusive of all or just some of the members of each of those groups?

Was it because Erika's idea was labeled stupid and someone said it her idea should be taken out behind the barn and shot? I think I heard one of our congressmen make the same comment on tv today concerning the current political discourse. And I don't believe anyone told that congressman to stop voicing his opinion. Well, some people of the opposing party probably did, but I am sure nobody took it seriously. But, in case you didn't understand, no one called Erika stupid.

I, for one, am not willing to shut down the natural ebb and flow of our conversations here on the forum at the risk someone might have their feelings hurt. If schedulers don't want to hear what shoppers think about their ideas, they don't have to read the Forum.

rovergirl529 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If you
> want to control the conversation, you will need to
> be more specific on what we are, and are not,
> allowed to say about schedulers, MSC's, forum
> members, etc. and would that be inclusive of all
> or just some of the members of each of those
> groups?

On another forum that I used to moderate for, one of the foundational rules was to attack the idea being discussed/argued, not the individual.

There was some discussion as to how protected company representatives should be if they were also members of the forum. An email sent in an official capacity by a company representative should be fair game to open and honest discussion regardless of whether that individual is a member here. But if an individual expresses a personal opinion here in an unofficial capacity, that individual shouldn't be subject to personal attacks whether they are a shopper or MSC rep.

In the case of turkey bonus it seemed to me that there were a lot of folks discussing the idea or issue at hand and one individual came in with a personal attack, callings posters of a dissenting opinion disgusting. Certainly it can be difficult at times as to what constitutes a personal attack, but name-calling is probably the easiest one to point to as inappropriate.