- Posts: 2050
- Thank you received: 0
In case anyone cares...
24 Jul 2013 21:55 #63
by PrintSmith
Replied by PrintSmith on topic In case anyone cares...
I guess ignorance is bliss, at least for me. I see no reason why those of us who frequent this site need to take a side at all. As far as I am concerned, this is the site that I have been a part of and will continue to be a part of while the rest of this gets hashed out. SC is the owner/operator of the site and I am her customer. She said the site had a new address and that is the address that I type into my browser when I want to come here and interact with all of you.
SC has worked very hard to keep my business, and I am sure that she has had some help, encouragement and advice from ComminitiesBound along the way. But contrary to what our president has said, when you have a successful business, you did build that.
I am not one to hold my tongue when I have an opinion on something and I do not plan on altering that. My opinion (just for you archer) is that it was a mistake for CommunitiesBound to attempt to make it a tug of war. If SC violated the contract, then there were avenues that CommunitesBound had to pursue enforcement of that contract without taking the measures they have taken. Who was right and who was wrong should have been determined before any steps were taken by CommunitiesBound and it is likely that none of us would have been the wiser about what went on behind the scenes. If it turned out that SC had violated the contract, then the settlement could have involved a return to what was in place prior to the last transfer with her being responsible for the financial costs of effecting that transfer. Concept didn't pan out well, not enough use of the new features to justify the higher cost, there were a lot of possible explainations that could have been offered as to why a return to the old system was decided upon if that was determined the remedy for the breech that had occurred.
I refuse to be put into the middle of the dispute and so here I will stay until the dispute is settled. I am a conservative after all, and we all know how adverse conservatives are to change, right?
All I ask is for one favor SC. Would you be so kind as to send me a notification via email if I have to go back to typing in 285bound.com to navigate to your site before I try to navigate to mymountaintown only to get an error message that it has disappeared? It would really be unsettling to find out mymountaintown no longer exists, I'm quite attached to my home in the hills, my neighbors, my community - even if some of its members seem to be perpetually misguided and attempt to substitute emotions for reason on a regular basis. There's hope for them yet, I really do believe that I can get most of them to see the light even if they are old, crotchety and stuck in their ways or so young that they can't possibly be expected to know any better yet.
SC has worked very hard to keep my business, and I am sure that she has had some help, encouragement and advice from ComminitiesBound along the way. But contrary to what our president has said, when you have a successful business, you did build that.
I am not one to hold my tongue when I have an opinion on something and I do not plan on altering that. My opinion (just for you archer) is that it was a mistake for CommunitiesBound to attempt to make it a tug of war. If SC violated the contract, then there were avenues that CommunitesBound had to pursue enforcement of that contract without taking the measures they have taken. Who was right and who was wrong should have been determined before any steps were taken by CommunitiesBound and it is likely that none of us would have been the wiser about what went on behind the scenes. If it turned out that SC had violated the contract, then the settlement could have involved a return to what was in place prior to the last transfer with her being responsible for the financial costs of effecting that transfer. Concept didn't pan out well, not enough use of the new features to justify the higher cost, there were a lot of possible explainations that could have been offered as to why a return to the old system was decided upon if that was determined the remedy for the breech that had occurred.
I refuse to be put into the middle of the dispute and so here I will stay until the dispute is settled. I am a conservative after all, and we all know how adverse conservatives are to change, right?
All I ask is for one favor SC. Would you be so kind as to send me a notification via email if I have to go back to typing in 285bound.com to navigate to your site before I try to navigate to mymountaintown only to get an error message that it has disappeared? It would really be unsettling to find out mymountaintown no longer exists, I'm quite attached to my home in the hills, my neighbors, my community - even if some of its members seem to be perpetually misguided and attempt to substitute emotions for reason on a regular basis. There's hope for them yet, I really do believe that I can get most of them to see the light even if they are old, crotchety and stuck in their ways or so young that they can't possibly be expected to know any better yet.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
24 Jul 2013 23:08 #65
by ScienceChic
I do know that no post was ever deleted for having a laughing icon only. There may have been a glitch with attempting to post, or something like that, but no moderator here would EVER do that.
The part where you were naming a poster by name was edited to remove the name only, not deleted entirely, because we've always maintained that posters have a right to anonymity if that's their desire. We may move posts to other forums, but we don't delete because that permanently changes conversations, allows moderators to completely alter the flow of a conversation and control it how they like, and suppress information that may not portray them or their friends in a good light. I saw it a lot on Pinecam, where posts that questioned their mods and admins, or how they operated, were disappeared. Communities Bound (which I'm going to call CB from here on out, just so you know I'm not referring to a person's initials) used to be vehemently against that; I still am - look at how many posts have been put up on this site bashing me, or what the mods here have done, and how this business is run. Not a single one of those was ever deleted - we listened, we talked, we defended, and we changed how we worked to provide you better service, learning from our mistakes and apologizing when we screwed up.
I feel that if a business owner/manager has to hide legitimate complaints about how they operate, then they don't deserve your business, or your respect. If a business owner/manager can't reply to you as themselves, then they aren't being upfront and honest with you, and again, they don't deserve your business or your respect.
I understand that you didn't see the posts that were deleted on 285Bound before they disappeared so you wouldn't be able to gauge for yourself whether they were worthy of deletion. I did see them and they were not, but at the moment you cannot take my word only as I am involved in the situation. Becky did print screen shots and I will be collecting those from her soon and adding it to my collection of evidence which, again, anyone is welcome to come view for themselves and come to their own conclusions - that's how I've always operated, whether I'm discussing global warming, whether Star Trek is better than Star Wars (duh. LOL), or defending my own actions running this site (if I was allowed to post the evidence because it wasn't personal info): I provide links and explanations ad nauseum in invariably TLTR posts (like this one is getting to be, sorry).
Because this is coming up, I want to clear the air on this one point: the contract clearly states that Bound owners are independent affiliates. These sites were originally intended to be tailored to each individual area, custom designed how the owner wished - no cookie-cutter, across-the-board similar design was required (and it was purposely written that way, as that's how the former co-founder jmc insisted it be - that's how he built his businesses that got him inducted into the IT Hall of Fame). If the owner didn't wish to have a "Ring", wanted to moderate like Pinecam does or not moderate at all, didn't want to have advertisers, required members to pay to sign up, etc, they could - it's their right. Nor was "Bound" branding required - so the business does NOT have to be named after the bound.com url that is bought; changing names is allowed within the contract terms.
And none of this is just my opinion, I've had this contract fully vetted by two lawyers and they arrived at the same conclusions - all I did was send it to them and asked them to explain to me what I could and could not do based on the language contained within explaining my obligations and CB's obligations. If you'd like a copy of the response letter they sent to CB's lawyer refuting the accusations leveled at me, I'm happy to provide that as well because everything's addressed in there, point by point. It's not confidential information, it's facts straight and simple.
PrintSmith, thank you for your kind words and for spelling out perfectly how things should have been handled. You've got a deal on the notification.
"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill
Replied by ScienceChic on topic In case anyone cares...
Rick, I am fine with you reserving judgement until seeing everything. It's why I've offered to make appointments at my office and show anyone everything privately so as to not take up everyone's time and attention.Rick wrote: I've had posts removed/deleted before all this ever happened. One was for guessing who a poster was and the other was for laughing about a certain insult of a certain poster. Since I don't know what was deleted, I can't comment on whether it was warranted. Nobody has absolute freedom of speech here... I guarantee I could make a post right now that would be banished to internet hell.
I'm getting tired of defending my neutrality.
I do know that no post was ever deleted for having a laughing icon only. There may have been a glitch with attempting to post, or something like that, but no moderator here would EVER do that.
The part where you were naming a poster by name was edited to remove the name only, not deleted entirely, because we've always maintained that posters have a right to anonymity if that's their desire. We may move posts to other forums, but we don't delete because that permanently changes conversations, allows moderators to completely alter the flow of a conversation and control it how they like, and suppress information that may not portray them or their friends in a good light. I saw it a lot on Pinecam, where posts that questioned their mods and admins, or how they operated, were disappeared. Communities Bound (which I'm going to call CB from here on out, just so you know I'm not referring to a person's initials) used to be vehemently against that; I still am - look at how many posts have been put up on this site bashing me, or what the mods here have done, and how this business is run. Not a single one of those was ever deleted - we listened, we talked, we defended, and we changed how we worked to provide you better service, learning from our mistakes and apologizing when we screwed up.
I feel that if a business owner/manager has to hide legitimate complaints about how they operate, then they don't deserve your business, or your respect. If a business owner/manager can't reply to you as themselves, then they aren't being upfront and honest with you, and again, they don't deserve your business or your respect.
I understand that you didn't see the posts that were deleted on 285Bound before they disappeared so you wouldn't be able to gauge for yourself whether they were worthy of deletion. I did see them and they were not, but at the moment you cannot take my word only as I am involved in the situation. Becky did print screen shots and I will be collecting those from her soon and adding it to my collection of evidence which, again, anyone is welcome to come view for themselves and come to their own conclusions - that's how I've always operated, whether I'm discussing global warming, whether Star Trek is better than Star Wars (duh. LOL), or defending my own actions running this site (if I was allowed to post the evidence because it wasn't personal info): I provide links and explanations ad nauseum in invariably TLTR posts (like this one is getting to be, sorry).
Because this is coming up, I want to clear the air on this one point: the contract clearly states that Bound owners are independent affiliates. These sites were originally intended to be tailored to each individual area, custom designed how the owner wished - no cookie-cutter, across-the-board similar design was required (and it was purposely written that way, as that's how the former co-founder jmc insisted it be - that's how he built his businesses that got him inducted into the IT Hall of Fame). If the owner didn't wish to have a "Ring", wanted to moderate like Pinecam does or not moderate at all, didn't want to have advertisers, required members to pay to sign up, etc, they could - it's their right. Nor was "Bound" branding required - so the business does NOT have to be named after the bound.com url that is bought; changing names is allowed within the contract terms.
And none of this is just my opinion, I've had this contract fully vetted by two lawyers and they arrived at the same conclusions - all I did was send it to them and asked them to explain to me what I could and could not do based on the language contained within explaining my obligations and CB's obligations. If you'd like a copy of the response letter they sent to CB's lawyer refuting the accusations leveled at me, I'm happy to provide that as well because everything's addressed in there, point by point. It's not confidential information, it's facts straight and simple.
PrintSmith, thank you for your kind words and for spelling out perfectly how things should have been handled. You've got a deal on the notification.
"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
25 Jul 2013 09:26 #68
by pacamom
Replied by pacamom on topic In case anyone cares...
"as that's how the former co-founder jmc insisted it be..."
How do you become a former co-founder?
How do you become a former co-founder?
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
25 Jul 2013 14:03 #70
by JMC
Giving people up here an alternative to Pinecam was the goal.
Replied by JMC on topic In case anyone cares...
As Jmc, I was a co founder but have not been involved for a long time."former" will come soon enough.pacamom wrote: "as that's how the former co-founder jmc insisted it be..."
How do you become a former co-founder?
Giving people up here an alternative to Pinecam was the goal.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.517 seconds
sponsors
