I'm relatively new here but am already very tired of shopper after shopper starting inflammatory threads about companies while NOT providing sufficient facts; often, the original post offers NO facts.

Yes, there are bad companies out there. Yes, it is great when we shoppers warn each other when a company mistreats us. Yes, many of us want to help and support our fellow shoppers, BUT

those threads usually contain plenty of name calling, shouting and vitriol and don't provide other shoppers with any information that is helpful to those shoppers or allows them to help the original poster.

My resolution is not to respond at all to any of those threads unless and until the original poster stops ranting and starts describing clearly what actually happened.

We are shoppers. If we cannot report an event clearly and objectively, who can?

Totally agree, BusyBee. Venting after an unpleasant experience is expected, but there is a difference between venting and throwing a public temper tantrum online. In most public places, complaints are permissible, but inappropriate anger, name-calling, and disruptive behavior are not permitted. And that behavior should not be permitted here. It's my belief that posts that step outside professional behavior should be deleted. I agree we should not feed the anger of a poster who provides no details but bashes a company or another poster. It does not have anything to do the number of posts a poster has, it has to do with presenting their information in a professional manner. If a poster wants to complain about a MSC, giving details of their experience, I'm willing to listen and try to advise them. If I am convinced, based on the details, that the MSC is wrong, I'm with them. If they use inflammatory language and provide no details, it's clear the poster doesn't want to warn anyone and doesn't want advice or help. He just wants to bash the MSC because he is angry.

I totally understand your point BusyBee, however, for the posters that show up and scream, XYZ is a scam, some rebuttal is needed otherwise when searches are made all people see is that and no real information. I don't want my favorite MSPs to start to have trouble getting shoppers because there are too many claims that a company is a scam without ever getting positive comments.

I am really not worried about the few biggest companies as they will continue to pay cheaply and be found by many shoppers. It is the little guys who you don't find until you have been shopping for a while that are likely to be hurt by the scam and ripoff comments.

That is also the reason that many of us get accused of being shills for the companies. If some of those posters would read other threads they would see that many of us have no problem in supporting a poster who has been truly wronged and don't hesitate to give unfavorable opinions of MSCs when they are deserved.

That's why I would be in favor of a requirement to keep a post professional or it gets deleted. Even if we defend after an unreasonable post, the post remains and new readers in many cases believe it. Many new shoppers lack the experience and the frame of reference to distinguish whether or not a complaint is reasonable. For example, we recently had a new poster make a VERY angry complaint about Market Force. She alleged that she had not been paid and was furious. Lots of name-calling, lots of emotion. Over the next few days she realized she was wrong: her money had been direct deposited two weeks earlier. This poster, admirably, did come back and post that she was wrong. She explained that, immediately after performing the MF job, she read a thread on our forum in which two posters said MF is a scam and does not pay. She said they didn't give any information about why they weren't paid, so she assumed that MF just doesn't pay most of its shoppers. She jumped to the conclusion that she would not be paid. Angry and unprofessional posts with no explanation are like snowballs.

On some other sites (youtube, I think) sometimes the comments are hidden. A string of comments will appear, but some will be condensed with a title something like "Most readers found this comment to be offensive or unhelpful or unprofessional" or whatever.

The problem with removing unprofessional posts is that this board becomes "too" moderated. If it becomes "too" moderated, it runs the risk of becoming similar to the V site that so many here complain about. It may also create a fair amount of work for the moderator.

We already have a 'Like' feature on this site. Maybe it would be appropriate to add a 'Dislike' or 'Inappropriate' button and hide the posts that achieve a certain threshold instead of deleting them.

Great point, Joytron! I would love to see such a button. That way, posters are still free to post what they want; other people are warned about the posts but can still read the posts if they choose.

However, when something really inflammatory (such as MSC#1 is a scam) is in the thread title, that is still a problem.

Joytron Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> We already have a 'Like' feature on this site.
> Maybe it would be appropriate to add a 'Dislike'
> or 'Inappropriate' button and hide the posts that
> achieve a certain threshold instead of deleting
> them.

I like that idea. I have often seen a post and not really wanted to respond but I would have "NOT LIKED" if I could. Perhaps it would also be a good idea if we had a "waiting period" after registering. Perhaps a new forum member would be required to wait 48 hours or 72 hours, etc., to be able to post. This would give new forum members an opportunity to read what is already here and get a feel for the forum before posting. Many questions a new forum member might ask would be answered if they read a little before making that first post. And it might certainly cut down on SPAM - spammers come in, register, dump their spam as quickly as they can, and leave. How many would wait 3 days to dump a little spam?

In the case of the unprofessional, slamming posts with no details provided, if you look at some of those, many of the angriest and most offensive are written by posters who register two minutes before posting. They have read nothing. They create a new thread, sometimes multiple new threads, and let loose with the anger and the bashing. If, after registering, a potential angry poster learned he would have to wait 3 days to post, he may decide it is not worth it or he may have more time to compose a rational and professional post, giving details. He might also have an opportunity to reconsider.

When a new poster presents us with a vicious and unreasoned post regarding an MSC we know and trust, it's really difficult to address the issue without getting personally involved. It's even more difficult when it is an assassination not supported by facts.

Unable to offer effective counsel because we don't have background, all we can do is talk about our own positive experiences with the MSC and this further enrages the OP. The OP responds with even more rage because the OP thinks we must be shills for the MSPs if we don't join the dogpile.

This whole process is OH SO WRONG but what should be done about it? I'm not in favor of a closely moderated forum because I post a lot of time right out there on the edge of acceptability. I would hate to get moderated off for expressing a cutting opinion. I don't want to lose the light-handed management here that allows me to rave on about my particular hot buttons.

When we get one of these vitriolic attacks, how would it work if we referred the OP to a search for threads on the company, where they will find all sorts of useful information we have already posted. This would give the OP an opportunity to pick up information regarding issues with the company and that company's shops, including responses from forum members.

The MSCs don’t need me to defend them from shoppers, and I find it difficult to post a measured response to "ABC is a scumbag sleaze of a company that won't pay its shoppers and is stupid and should be put out of business and I'm going to sue I’ve already called a lawyer and my report was PERFECT!". One unbalanced and unprofessional poster won't make any difference in the long run. The MSCs have their own policies in place to deal with those who are not a good fit in this business. Shoppers who don't have the temperament and skills for this don't need me to tell them to do something else. That will take care of its self.

I'm going to start answering posts where I can't really be helpful with a suggestion to do a complete search of threads on the company and then get back to us with specific questions we might actually be able to answer.

AustinMom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That's why I would be in favor of a requirement to
> keep a post professional or it gets deleted. Even
> if we defend after an unreasonable post, the post
> remains and new readers in many cases believe it.
> Many new shoppers lack the experience and the
> frame of reference to distinguish whether or not a
> complaint is reasonable. For example, we recently
> had a new poster make a VERY angry complaint about
> Market Force. She alleged that she had not been
> paid and was furious. Lots of name-calling, lots
> of emotion. Over the next few days she realized
> she was wrong: her money had been direct
> deposited two weeks earlier. This poster,
> admirably, did come back and post that she was
> wrong. She explained that, immediately after
> performing the MF job, she read a thread on our
> forum in which two posters said MF is a scam and
> does not pay. She said they didn't give any
> information about why they weren't paid, so she
> assumed that MF just doesn't pay most of its
> shoppers. She jumped to the conclusion that she
> would not be paid. Angry and unprofessional posts
> with no explanation are like snowballs.

Now I'm curious, as I seem to have missed that thread. Would you mind linking to it?

I'm in favor of a 72 hour waiting period. I think that would cut down on a lot of problems.

So many angry posts, even from experienced shoppers, are the result of not understanding the industry and how MSCs function. It's understandable, since the nature of the business is to keep things secret and that becomes suspect. The concept of any MSC going into business just to defraud shoppers is ridiculous, however. I think every disreputable company started off on the right foot and things went bad after time.

There really needs to be a clearer distinction between the obvious scams, non-paying MSCs, shopper mistreatment and shopper misunderstanding. I would say the majority of complaints come from shopper misunderstanding.

Nobody wants to put out time and money, only to be denied remuneration, and it's frustrating when that happens. I've always felt it would great to have some sort of mediation panel that was supported by the MSCs were experienced shoppers and MSC reps could 'hear' cases brought before them and make a decision on who was in the wrong.

cake... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> AustinMom Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > That's why I would be in favor of a requirement
> to
> > keep a post professional or it gets deleted.
> Even
> > if we defend after an unreasonable post, the
> post
> > remains and new readers in many cases believe
> it.
> > Many new shoppers lack the experience and the
> > frame of reference to distinguish whether or not
> a
> > complaint is reasonable. For example, we
> recently
> > had a new poster make a VERY angry complaint
> about
> > Market Force. She alleged that she had not
> been
> > paid and was furious. Lots of name-calling,
> lots
> > of emotion. Over the next few days she
> realized
> > she was wrong: her money had been direct
> > deposited two weeks earlier. This poster,
> > admirably, did come back and post that she was
> > wrong. She explained that, immediately after
> > performing the MF job, she read a thread on our
> > forum in which two posters said MF is a scam
> and
> > does not pay. She said they didn't give any
> > information about why they weren't paid, so she
> > assumed that MF just doesn't pay most of its
> > shoppers. She jumped to the conclusion that she
> > would not be paid. Angry and unprofessional
> posts
> > with no explanation are like snowballs.
>
> Now I'm curious, as I seem to have missed that
> thread. Would you mind linking to it?

Here is part of it: [www.mysteryshopforum.com]

It went on June-August 2012. The poster first posted several times in June, then came in later, created another identify, and posted the same thing again. When she realized she had actually been paid, she posted:
"I jumped to conclusions on this, and assumed that because my sister had heard that people weren't getting paid from them, that I was one of them. Also, I had thought I was going to be paid through PayPal. So, next time I'll be certain to check my facts before I post anywhere (looking for a nine-to-five and mystery shopping just isn't for me, so I have no reason to post here again). Sorry guys."

She also went back and edited a couple of her earlier posts. Nice that she posted a retraction. I wonder how many angry posters find out later they might be wrong but don't come back.

I am a fairly new poster, but have been reading in this forum for a while. I also find it ridiculous how many people come on just to insult and condemn MSCs.

I like the ideas of deleting posts, but agree that is over moderating the board. I also like the 72 hour waiting period, but still think people would be angry 3 days later. A certain post slamming A-Closer-Look comes to mind in regards to that. I used to wonder why some of you were so defensive, but I now understand after reading the forums for long enough. It is rather insulting to have someone bashing what you support (and who pays you).

I do think the idea of liking and disliking posts will help. Certain websites have the buttons where you can choose if a post was helpful or unhelpful. The more unhelpful a post, or topic, the further down the list it gets pushed. How you integrate this with the time stamp method the forum is currently using, I'm not sure.

There are six forum topics currently available to choose from. I think making sub-categories may also be helpful, so that all these inflammatory posts can be put in their own sub-forum. We could title it "False Claims"

Lots of great ideas here so far. Right now, I am for a combination of a 72-hour rule and a Dislike button.

...or perhaps there could be a category for stating a gripe and having it heard by other 'professionals'.

The reality it is that we have know way of knowing the truth of what other posters tell us, and certain details cannot be disclosed, so any judgement we give is based on little fact anyway. I think many people just like to have their gripes heard by others that can commiserate, however.

In my experience I think it's common for posters to 'stretch' the truth in their favor when complaining about a MSC. Few will ever admit to not following the instructions completely or turning in biased work.

I want to speak in favor of leaving the forum rules as they are, even though I agree that many good rules have been suggested.

That said, I hope we can come up with a way to handle this without changes in the forum. We can change how we respond, or whether we respond, which will change the whole picture without changing the rules.

If we don't come to the MSC's defense, and instead recommend forum searches and keep asking for more and more details along with specific questions they want to ask, the burden shifts to the poster rather than to the responders. This would be an excellent way for the OP to learn more about the MSC and about the forum procedures. It would also be a message that we won't fall for fabrications, and that we want more and more facts. I say we don't provide defense for the MSC or advice for the poster unless we get specific questions, but just keep asking for more and more information until the poster realizes how irrational the OP was.

Let's help them work their own way through the issue by having to search the forum and provide factual detail and specific questions instead of rants.

While I find that to be one of the best suggestions, many of the ranters are one hit wonders, posting multiple times and leaving. I chuckle sometimes when I see a thread where there is post after post after post from long-time members addressing the OP and months later the OP has not responded. Yet for some reason we keep it up, lol!

I agree with you, MDavis. I think it would be most helpful for posters on here to ask questions and ask the poster for the full story. I think sometimes when we defend MSCs, it feeds into their emotions.

Some good questions to ask are:
Did you do the shop within the correct time frame?
Did you shop the exact address given to you by the MSC?
Did you use the correct payment method?
Did you change or omit any of the guidelines?
Can you give us the full story of what happened?


I do think there should be some policy against using terms like "SCAM" and "RIPOFF" unless we're talking about a real live Nigerian scam, or Franchise Compliance.

MD: I'm usually right with you on your posts and love to read your ideas and comments, but this time I have to disagree
"If we don't come to the MSC's defense, and instead recommend forum searches" sounds good, but in reality, if I came to here and ranted and raved about mistreatment from a MSC and someone told me to "search the forum and see what others say about this company" it would just make me madder and start shouting louder. I wouldn't care what good things they did to OTHER people, this is ME they mistreated. OF COURSE I did everything right, no need to ask me those stupid questions, SURE, I'M right.

While I am not in favor of deleting posts, I think a DISLIKE button and a 72 hour waiting period are great ideas.

cake... Wrote:
-
> I do think there should be some policy against
> using terms like "SCAM" and "RIPOFF" unless we're
> talking about a real live Nigerian scam, or
> Franchise Compliance.


I wonder: would it be possible to block the works SCAM, RIPOFF, and maybe a couple of others in the same way the word S--E--X is blocked. ??

BTW, why is S-E-X blocked? I've seen some uses where maybe gender would have been more appropriate, but still....

I can't imagine. I used the word several years ago to denote gender and was initially totally perplexed when my post looked fine but when I submitted, it had all the weird symbols instead of the word.

I can imagine the ads we see on the sidebars would be different if certain words were not blocked....

MDavisnowell Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I want to speak in favor of leaving the forum
> rules as they are...
> ...If we don't come to the MSC's defense, and instead
> recommend forum searches and keep asking for more
> and more details along with specific questions
> they want to ask, the burden shifts to the poster
> rather than to the responders...

I think this is an excellent idea.

I definitely do not want a heavily moderated forum as I do believe that really gets in the way of free flowing ideas. I have been on e-mail groups where every post needs to get approved... No thank you. However, having to have the first post or first five posts approved might not be a bad thing. We may need an additional moderator to take the burden off Jacob if that were considered.

I don't think that a quiet reference to other posts will help the ranter, but it could be a great thing for pointing out to other people who are just searching that there are other sides to the story. If the poster starts with really inflammatory posts, I think it is really rare that they even bother to come back once, much less take into consideration what we say.

I wouldn't mind a disagree/dislike button.

I see what you guys are saying, but seemslike all that monitoring and button adding would be very time consuming. Yeah we all need to ignore more.

I have a suggestion for responding to unsubstantiated ranting posts. A member of this forum has very kindly developed and frequently posts, a welcome letter for new posters, explaining how they might best benefit from the forum in getting started.

Would one of you thoughtful members like to take a stab at developing a moderate and reasoned response that could be posted in reply to the sorts of rants that we are concerned about?

I would STRONGLY suggest that this template not mention that the post is suspicious simply because the poster has few posts. I think that only fans the flames and may delay the dawning of light where there had been only dark smoke. Instead, I would suggest that the template simply explain that in order to be taken seriously and to encourage useful suggestions from other forum members, the poster must be prepared to explain what happened and to answer a set of questions designed to help us understand how the problem arose and the best recourse for helping resolve the issue. There will be a few instances where the OP really has been ripped off (remeber Freeman?) and more instances where it soon becomes clear to the OP that he/she has made a mistake, and we can help them become contributing members (As has happened several times lately.) The rest of the posters will either just disappear of will respond in ways that reveal whether or not the situation can be seriously considered .

You may ask why I am not volunteering to create this template and then be the person to respond with it on the forums. The answer is that, between multi-day shopping routes, I am trying to develop a set of "stickies" for Jacob on the subjects of video and audio recorded shops, video equipment, long interaction scenarios for video and audio shops, and related subjects. I am also monitoring three forums for misleading information and/or questions on video and audio shopping and trying to respond to same.

I agree that one-time ranting posters are annoying. However, I would find it far more annoying to have a bunch of new rules on this forum. If you don't like the post, ignore it. We're not here to defend MSCs or whatnot. We're not here to mollycoddle newbies. This forum, although a great resource, is not the only source for information on the internet. If newbies are genuinely concerned about certain MSCs, they can always dig a bit deeper than a one-time-rant post.

The backspace button is your friend. If you don't like a post or have nothing to contribute, use the button and peruse another thread. Although some members feel the need to put in their 2 cents on everything that's written, not every post deserves a response.

I would not like to change the forum for a few that choose not to punch it out with their schedulers/editors. The freedom of speech we have here is priceless, let's not change. Adding an unlike button is enough, if we don't answer an uncalled for rant, and just hit unlike, they will get the hint. There could be on the stickys a thread for newcomers with rants to read before posting. We privately know the good MSC's without need to defend. I get caught up as well, but no longer. Perhaps we should encourage the MSC's to read the forum and defend themselves, as Sentry does.

Irene,
I think that a sticky about rants would really miss the target. I was thinking of a post that can be replicated as a first answer to any unsubstantiated rant against MSCs or shopping in general.

This would not entail any new rules.