Sentry Marketing Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> bgriffin Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Sentry Marketing Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > bgriffin Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > It absolutely amazes me that there are
> Sentry
> > > > apologists out there.
> > >
> > >
> > > How is MMMM being a "Sentry apologist"?
> >
> >
> > Interesting that you address me for my snarky
> > remark but didn't bother addressing the actual
> > Sentry shopper that has a problem. Par for the
> > course with you?
>
>
> Interesting that you didn't answer the question.


a·pol·o·gist

noun

noun: apologist; plural noun: apologists



1.



a person who offers an argument in defense of something controversial.



MMMM offered an argument in defense of Sentry. Most people here (besides MMMM and MDN) find the way Sentry does business to be controversial.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/11/2013 01:00AM by bgriffin.

"Most people" may be your opinion, bg, but it is far from accurate. I certainly don't think you speak for the majority of mysteryshop.com members. There are members who like shopping for us and there are members who don't. The feedback is similar to many other companies that are discussed on this forum.

Find me one shopper who doesn't think it's controversial that you zapped my account because I said your company only had one shop in my area and it didn't pay enough to cover the food cost?

Why do you think everyone laughs when someone comes on here and post something negative about your company?

No other company with reps on here react the way you do. The feedback is most certainly NOT similar to other companies.

When people post things about other companies, most people tend to try to understand where the disconnect between the poster and the company is, what happened, etc. When people post things about your company? We all sit back and wait for the laughs that are sure to follow.

This started out being about a report that was not accepted because a shop was not executed within the time window. Then it turned into a personal attack against Dave and Sentry. One excuse to scapegoat somebody is as good as another. I can remember being in that same boat years ago on this forum. Sometimes it happens.

I think it's pretty presumptuous of you to think that you speak for the majority of forum members. The fact is that you belong to a small group of forum members who dislike me and my company. As I stated previously, there is mixed feedback about my company on this forum and this is no different than any other company that is discussed here.

When I did not respond to this thread, there were posts that questioned my credibility as well as calls for me to respond. I responded and am now being attacked for doing so. It's pretty easy to see your hypocrisy. This is exactly the reason I deactivated your account: I don't care for the way you conduct yourself on this site. This is no different than a shopper who elects to stop shopping for a company for their own reasons.



bgriffin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Find me one shopper who doesn't think it's
> controversial that you zapped my account because I
> said your company only had one shop in my area and
> it didn't pay enough to cover the food cost?
>
> Why do you think everyone laughs when someone
> comes on here and post something negative about
> your company?
>
> No other company with reps on here react the way
> you do. The feedback is most certainly NOT
> similar to other companies.
>
> When people post things about other companies,
> most people tend to try to understand where the
> disconnect between the poster and the company is,
> what happened, etc. When people post things about
> your company? We all sit back and wait for the
> laughs that are sure to follow.

Sentry Marketing Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think it's pretty presumptuous of you to think
> that you speak for the majority of forum members.
> The fact is that you belong to a small group of
> forum members who dislike me and my company. As
> I stated previously, there is mixed feedback about
> my company on this forum and this is no different
> than any other company that is discussed here.
>
> When I did not respond to this thread, there were
> posts that questioned my credibility as well as
> calls for me to respond. I responded and am now
> being attacked for doing so. It's pretty easy to
> see your hypocrisy. This is exactly the reason I
> deactivated your account: I don't care for the way
> you conduct yourself on this site. This is no
> different than a shopper who elects to stop
> shopping for a company for their own reasons.
>


My post about popcorn got 6 likes, your most liked post got 2. Now, I'm not saying that means I'm in the majority, but I will say it speaks to the reaction your company gets on this forum. I'm not saying that I speak for the majority, yes, that would be presumptuous, but I do fully believe that a majority of the regular posters on this forum has a less than favorable view of your company. If 1 out of 10 posters not liking a company and 5 out of 10 posters not liking a company are similar, then yes, your feedback here is similar to other companies.

I did not question your credibility or call for you to respond until you responded to my snarky comment (which really was just a snarky comment, because honestly, you're as easy to rile up as a Bama fan) but did not respond to a legitimate complaint. I also did not attack you for responding to the poster. I have no problems with your response to the poster, and honestly probably agree with you. Hence the fact that you have not seen me respond to your response to the poster. I have only responded to your posts directed at me.

I am many, many things, but hypocritical is not one of them. Also, you absolutely did not deactivate my account for being hypocritical. You first deactivated my account because I said on this forum that your company only had one shop in my area that did not pay enough to cover the required costs. You got backlash from that so you reactivated my account and set it so that I could not see any shops. Then after I posted snarky comments about your company you again deactivated my account. I have absolutely no problems with the second deactivation as I fully expected it to happen.

bg,

As I explained back in October, I have no idea what happened to your account at that time. I did deactivate your account based on comments you made in this thread. I never claimed to deactivate your account for being hypocritical.

I'm not going to get into a debate about counting how many people liked your popcorn post. You think that you speak for the majority of forum members and I respectfully disagree. The majority of comments about our company on this thread are not critical of us. I understand that you don't like me or my company, but that doesn't entitle you to your own set of facts. Being the loudest voice in the crowd doesn't mean that you speak for everyone.

There is nothing controversial going on here. Rejected shops are an unfotunate part of the industry and certainly not exclusive to our company. The fact is that our team does everything within their power to prevent any report from being rejected. There are circumstances, however, when the deviation from assignment guidelines impacts the report in a way that does not leave any alternative but to void the shop.

Your snarky comments don't bother me. I was simply pointing out that you ignored my question about MMM being an apologist.

Sentry Marketing Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> bg,
>
> As I explained back in October, I have no idea
> what happened to your account at that time.

Right. And stilllearning really does look like Katie Holmes.


I did
> deactivate your account based on comments you made
> in this thread. I never claimed to deactivate
> your account for being hypocritical.

What part of this quote did I not read correctly?

"It's pretty easy to see your hypocrisy. This is exactly the reason I deactivated your account:"



> I'm not going to get into a debate about counting
> how many people liked your popcorn post. You think
> that you speak for the majority of forum members
> and I respectfully disagree.

We can respectfully agree to disagree on this point.


> The majority of
> comments about our company on this thread are not
> critical of us.

Really?!?! I think perhaps you should reread the thread then. An overwhelming majority are critical of your company.



I understand that you don't like
> me or my company

I really don't, but mostly I just like pulling your chain, because you're fun like that.

, but that doesn't entitle you to
> your own set of facts. Being the loudest voice in
> the crowd doesn't mean that you speak for
> everyone.

I think I've already said I don't speak for everyone.


>
> There is nothing controversial going on here.
> Rejected shops are an unfotunate part of the
> industry and certainly not exclusive to our
> company. The fact is that our team does
> everything within their power to prevent any
> report from being rejected. There are
> circumstances, however, when the deviation from
> assignment guidelines impacts the report in a way
> that does not leave any alternative but to void
> the shop.

Have you ever seen me post the tiniest bit regarding rejected shops? That's not my beef with you at all. Now, I have posted a bit about people complaining about rejected shops, and how I assumed that meant their account would be deactivated, but I have yet to see a poster complain about a rejected shop that I feel shouldn't have been rejected.

>
> Your snarky comments don't bother me. I was simply
> pointing out that you ignored my question about
> MMM being an apologist.

Read the top of this page. I absolutely replied with how MMMM was being an apologist.

Well, since my post is being referred to let me rephrase it.

The points I made apply to any company, not just Sentry. I do not know Dave, have not had a chance/need to communicate with him and have done a grand total of 5 shops for Sentry (out of 2,500 plus I have done for other MSCs).

1. If you do not follow the guidelines (it can be any aspect of them - time, ordering requirements, date, scenario..) the shop will be rejected 99.9% of the time. Why would Sentry be an exception?

2. Reimbursement only shops should be taken only if you need/want the product/service/experience and would have spent your own money on them anyway.

3. I regularly (on a daily basis) communicate with schedulers. The interactions are professional, and to the point. Offer--acceptance/rejection or offer-counteroffer-acceptance/rejection. I dislike the verb "to beg" as it creates the illusion that the shoppers are "oh so indispensable" when in reality there is a multitude of shoppers "out there".

bgriffin and Sentry - please take it private. Your tete-a-tetes are personal.

You don't think it's relevant that shoppers need to know that one mild statement about his company gets you deactivated?

We've heard it before. I don't forget.

HAHAHAHAHA! Fine. Take away all my entertainment why don't you!

I'm with Mert on this. Personal disputes don't belong here. Everyone is free to post whatever, and if someone puts up a post that gets them deactivated it's not helpful if they take issue here repeatedly after it happens. Failure to get along with others is not something we can fix. Hostility won't get us anything we want.

I am one shopper who doesn't think it's controversial that someone got zapped (love the word). I've been zapped and I don't think it would be productive to spend my time dragging a company through the muck because we had differences. I zapped a biggie and then had a change of heart and (guess what??) they won't take me back (who knew?). That's not controversial either. Instead, it shows that even a long time shopper has to live with his/her stupid moves. Most of the shoppers who post on the forum running down a company are here to vent and they don't want helpful comments, but here's a good one to remember: This is a public forum and the personality shown here is displayed to other shoppers and to the mystery shopping companies. We have an opportunity to present ourselves as both considerate and professional.

I don't think it's controversial if someone gets zapped for a legitimate reason, but you can't honestly tell me you think the statement I made about the number of shops available from Sentry in my area is anywhere CLOSE to being a legitimate reason.

I don't find it controversial at all that you were zapped, either time. Whether Sentry had a legitimate reason is up to them, not you and me. Zapping is an equal opportunity option.

See if they are a member of MSPA - you could try contacting them - I do not know their role etc - I have never had anythng like happen to me .

Unfortunately a MSC being a member of the MSPA is not all that important from a shopper's point of view. There are legitimate, reliable companies who are not members. On the other hand, there have been members in good standing who have stopped paying their shoppers according to terms or stopped paying completely and it has taken months before they were removed.

The MSPA is a trade organization made up primarily of mystery shopping companies and as far as I know it does not address individual shopper issues.

Let's be clear here that shopping for a a particular MSC is night a right...it's a privilege. These companies maintain the right to activate and deactivate shoppers as they see fit.

I'm not going to make a judgement on weather or not Dave was being overly-sensitive in deactivating anyone because there should be no controversy about his absolute right to do that for whatever reason he deems appropriate. I find it strange that would be any debate about that...

I don't think there is a debate about it. I also doubt bgriffin would work for Dave if given the oppot to do so again. I think bgriffin was just sharing what he thought was the silly reason why he got deactivated, which is interesting to know. There is no debate about whether or not Dave has the right to deactivate shoppers. However, there IS a disagreement between Dave and bgriffin about the reason behind the deactivation.

Just curious. Did alot_luckiness get their issue resolved? The thread got sidetracked.

Deleted by USER. a protest against (EDITED) for using what I consider an unscrupulous company.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/16/2014 08:38PM by Homebound1961.

Most appropriate bgriffin post:

Holy ICA violation Batman

or

Hrm, wonder how long it too for that account to be deactivated?

Oh, Oh, I think I hear footsteps. Think we will be having company soon? Is popcorn on the menu?

I don't have popcorn but I will be the first to give HB1961 an adhesive wrap to cover his slashed wrists with. He is soon to be deactivated from both the forum and SM. How can anyone be so ^&*&^%

Deleted by USER.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/16/2014 08:40PM by Homebound1961.

I have never done a shop for Sentry, mainly because I have never seen an offer near me, so my opinion from watching the forum over the last few years.

I think the owner has higher than average standards in this industry. I do think that he expects things to be done his way and doesn't necessarily leave a time of room to question his methods. However based on the posts of the number of shoppers who have successfully shopped for them, I do believe that most other shops are paid and accepted.

From my viewpoint, their company that I would do a single shop and see how it goes, rather than picking up a bunch of shops and then start getting rejected

Homebound, you can kiss your money goodbye if you like, but Sentry has always paid me. You have gone over the edge on a single issue and it's questionable whether the check is even late. I believe you shopped on October 31 which would push your editing and completion date into November, therefore pushing the payment date into January. What's your problem? Lost your calendar? Got up on the wrong side of the bed? Bad hair day? Please tell us more.