Naming + shaming
Author
Discussion

Pistonheader101

Original Poster:

2,206 posts

130 months

Wednesday 30th January 2019
quotequote all
Getting ridiculous now - can’t write a review albeit negative about any company.

It’s getting to the stage where it will be the case of conversations going like so:

1: my Car brakes are squealing

2: what car is it - it’s known to be a common problem on some performance cars

1: it’s a 2009 ******** *********
(Mod edit: no naming or shaming)

2: bruh

Big Al.

69,329 posts

281 months

Wednesday 30th January 2019
quotequote all
Do you have a link to the thread in question?

jeremyc

27,106 posts

307 months

Wednesday 30th January 2019
quotequote all
Pistonheader101 said:
Getting ridiculous now - can’t write a review albeit negative about any company.

It’s getting to the stage where it will be the case of conversations going like so:

1: my Car brakes are squealing

2: what car is it - it’s known to be a common problem on some performance cars

1: it’s a 2009 ******** *********
(Mod edit: no naming or shaming)

2: bruh
That is quite different to posting the facts that "store x is awful for customer service ... store staff are not knowledgable ...".

1. You have no definitive proof of this.

2. It is potentially defamatory.

3. PH has no way of confirming your facts one way or the other (and nor does it want to).

4. There is no way for the store's side of the story to be heard, not that PH wants to become the venue for a customer vs store argument.

If you'd followed the moderator edit lead and not named the business, you might have been in a position to provide the OP with some useful feedback from your experiences.

The naming and shaming rules have been upheld the same way here since the dawn of time, and the explanation of why this is so has not changed either. In fact, there's even a sticky thread telling you why.


Pistonheader101

Original Poster:

2,206 posts

130 months

Wednesday 30th January 2019
quotequote all
jeremyc said:
Pistonheader101 said:
Getting ridiculous now - can’t write a review albeit negative about any company.

It’s getting to the stage where it will be the case of conversations going like so:

1: my Car brakes are squealing

2: what car is it - it’s known to be a common problem on some performance cars

1: it’s a 2009 ******** *********
(Mod edit: no naming or shaming)

2: bruh
That is quite different to posting the facts that "store x is awful for customer service ... store staff are not knowledgable ...".

1. You have no definitive proof of this.

2. It is potentially defamatory.

3. PH has no way of confirming your facts one way or the other (and nor does it want to).

4. There is no way for the store's side of the story to be heard, not that PH wants to become the venue for a customer vs store argument.

If you'd followed the moderator edit lead and not named the business, you might have been in a position to provide the OP with some useful feedback from your experiences.

The naming and shaming rules have upheld the same way here since the dawn of time, and the explanation of why this is so has not changed either. In fact, there's even a sticky thread telling you why.
And how exactly would you know what the store/brand/company in question is without it having a name?

jeremyc

27,106 posts

307 months

Wednesday 30th January 2019
quotequote all
Pistonheader101 said:
And how exactly would you know what the store/brand/company in question is without it having a name?
There's nothing to stop you providing general advice on this type of problem.

Pistonheader101

Original Poster:

2,206 posts

130 months

Wednesday 30th January 2019
quotequote all
jeremyc said:
Pistonheader101 said:
And how exactly would you know what the store/brand/company in question is without it having a name?
There's nothing to stop you providing general advice on this type of problem.
Without knowing the company, you’d be clutching at straws trying to guess their policies or inner workings.

For example the computer exchange company in question has a very different set of communication channels to that of say a high street retailer and thus the advice wouldn’t apply.

There has to be a happy medium somewhere between being able to review/give advice and the mod team being satisfied from a legal point of view?

jeremyc

27,106 posts

307 months

Wednesday 30th January 2019
quotequote all
Pistonheader101 said:
There has to be a happy medium somewhere between being able to review/give advice and the mod team being satisfied from a legal point of view?
There is. Don't make allegations about the named company or present as "facts" potentially defamatory information.

IMHO there are too many around here wanting to use the large audience and reach of PH as leverage against companies rather than simply seeking advice.

In the example that triggered your post the OP could get the consumer advice he was looking for without having to name the store.

selmahoose

5,637 posts

134 months

Wednesday 30th January 2019
quotequote all

A statement must be false to be defamatory.

MG-FIDO

453 posts

260 months

Thursday 31st January 2019
quotequote all
I think this is one of the reasons many of the old TVR crew have decanted over to the various Facebook groups. When you want advice or to compare options it becomes very difficult when people aren't able to share concerns or bad experiences.

bad company

21,401 posts

289 months

Friday 1st February 2019
quotequote all
Such a shame the M5 Warranty thread had to be pulled.

Presumably if the op had just said it was a warranty company without identifying them it would have been ok?

thebraketester

15,501 posts

161 months

Friday 1st February 2019
quotequote all
McDonald’s burgers taste like st.

Is that naming and shaming ?

crmcatee

5,787 posts

250 months

Friday 1st February 2019
quotequote all
No - that's your opinion.