If Petrol Ted hadn't sold out to Haymarket...

[Wacky Racer]

If original PH founder Petrol Ted had not sold out to Haymarket several years ago, would PH:-


a) Be still around?

b) Be better than it is now?

c) Worse?

d) The same?

[GetCarter]

It would still be here, and the forum(s) would be better- less nasty anyway - but It was never going to last.

[Sheets Tabuer]

I'd have won a Lotus.

[Wacky Racer]

Sheets Tabuer said:

I'd have won a Lotus.

Indeed.

[The jiffle king]

Jon Doric would have won a TVR in a field , or would that have been Jaydee?

[Blown2CV]

GetCarter said:

It would still be here, and the forum(s) would be better- less nasty anyway - but It was never going to last.

don't get it. How would selling to a publisher mean individuals posting on the forum conduct themselves differently? Are you saying that pre Haymarket people used to get banned left right and centre?

[GetCarter]

Blown2CV said:

GetCarter said:

It would still be here, and the forum(s) would be better- less nasty anyway - but It was never going to last.

don't get it. How would selling to a publisher mean individuals posting on the forum conduct themselves differently? Are you saying that pre Haymarket people used to get banned left right and centre?

[Blown2CV]

GetCarter said:

Blown2CV said:

GetCarter said:

It would still be here, and the forum(s) would be better- less nasty anyway - but It was never going to last.

don't get it. How would selling to a publisher mean individuals posting on the forum conduct themselves differently? Are you saying that pre Haymarket people used to get banned left right and centre?

well fair enough. I guess the major difference for me then is that i would be banned from using it.

[thebraketester]

Blown2CV said:

GetCarter said:

It would still be here, and the forum(s) would be better- less nasty anyway - but It was never going to last.

don't get it. How would selling to a publisher mean individuals posting on the forum conduct themselves differently? Are you saying that pre Haymarket people used to get banned left right and centre?

Don’t you fking start.......




Merry Christmas. :-)

[vaud]

We'd still be playing the game.

[Bungleaio]

vaud said:

We'd still be playing the game.

[ninepoint2]

We would probably have a name and shame section, pretty shocking that it's not allowed under current ownership IMHO.

[Muzzer79]

ninepoint2 said:

We would probably have a name and shame section, pretty shocking that it's not allowed under current ownership IMHO.

I can pretty confidently say we wouldn’t

Regardless of ownership, no-one needs the kind of grief naming and shaming can bring.

Ted was also pretty fair in his belief that both sides should have a say.

[anonymous-user]

The name and shaming policy was there before it got sold I’m pretty sure.

[Sheets Tabuer]

El stovey said:

The name and shaming policy was there before it got sold I’m pretty sure.

Yeah we've never been allowed to name and shame.

[vaud]

ninepoint2 said:

We would probably have a name and shame section, pretty shocking that it's not allowed under current ownership IMHO.

It's about being sued.

Small forums that have no assets are not worth suing. Big forums with revenue streams are.

Name and shame is a double edged sword. Some sellers are terrible. Some customers have an unrealistic expectation and the truth of a story is sometimes the middle ground, but it is impossible for moderators to find where it is, so best to just ban n&s.

[Blown2CV]

Muzzer79 said:

ninepoint2 said:

We would probably have a name and shame section, pretty shocking that it's not allowed under current ownership IMHO.

I can pretty confidently say we wouldn’t

Regardless of ownership, no-one needs the kind of grief naming and shaming can bring.

Ted was also pretty fair in his belief that both sides should have a say.

there is no way any company would agree to let users publish damning accounts of other businesses essentially unverified and laying the publisher (not the user) open to massive loss of earnings suits that they don't even want or need, let alone be sure they can defend.

[miniman]

Blown2CV said:

there is no way any company would agree to let users publish damning accounts of other businesses essentially unverified and laying the publisher (not the user) open to massive loss of earnings suits that they don't even want or need, let alone be sure they can defend.

How does Tripadvisor work then?

[vaud]

miniman said:

How does Tripadvisor work then?

https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2014/nov/19/tri...

[sc0tt]

We might still have a cringe thread.