Gearbest Forum

Chorus_suck

This post has been deleted.

JaMarcusHustle

I asked this in the other thread so I'd like to ask it again here.

JaMarcusHustle wrote: »

I have a question.

Why is this under Bargain Alerts?

Why not in Talk To like most other sponsored forums?

The cynic in me believes that Gearbest would have requested it be put in Bargain Alerts for traffic reasons, given they've specifically targetted this forum before. Did they specifically ask for it to be put here?

I don't see why it should be in Bargain Alerts. Im sure they believe the offer the best bargains, but I'm sure the likes of Three, Virgin Media, Sky and other sponsored forums would claim that too. What makes Gearbest more suitable to Bargain Alerts?

Me thinks GearBest wanted a piece of the BA pie that is traffic and you were happy to oblige despite them going out of their way to break the sites rules.

To elaborate - I'm sure GearBest believe they belong in Bargain Alerts because they offer Bargains on many products. But every company will say this - it doesn't mean they belong in the Bargain Alerts forum though.

To be transparent here (someone has to be), I'll admit that I'm accusing Boards of pandering to Gear Best because they're now a paying customer, and I think Boards has gone above and beyond what they've offered the likes of RicherSounds.ie, Sky, Vodafone, Virgin Media etc. by offering them a subforum in Bargain Alerts - a highly active forum that would contain a lot of users that GearBest specifically want to target.

Probably none of my business, but are GearBest paying any more than those other businesses to have their sub-forum in a more desirable location on the website?

The reason I ask is that Dav is on record as saying that this company cannot be trusted:

Dav wrote:

There is *NOTHING* more insidious and downright evil on a forum like this than shilling. It completely poisons the well of a resource like our Bargain Alerts forum if someone thinks that recommendations and "bargains" can't be trusted.

So the previous stance was that GearBest were a "poision" to the Bargain Alerts forum. Yet now he's more than happy to give them a home...right in the Bargain Alerts forum of all places! Can you explain this thought process?

Are they now trustworthy and no longer a poison? If so, what has changed between today (May 31st) and this time last month (April 30th) that means they are no longer insidious, downright evil and poisonous?

Lovely Bloke

They are now paying.

_Tombstone_

Is anything on their site legit?

scudzilla

So if i got site banned, then offered to pay to come back it'd be ok??

That's exactly what's happened here and IT STINKS

Shame on you boards

RossieMan

Fair enough being allowed on the site.

Why is it alerted in bargain alerts? It's a joke to be honest, put them in the talk to....forum where businesses belong. We'll find them if we need them.

BA is not the place for such a shady company, they haven't changed one bit in all the years. Have a look at other forums and they're at the same old tricks they did here.

CantGetNoSleep

My probably is not only what happened in the past but the sheer crappiness of that company. A lot of orders won't arrive and they really don't care, and will pretty much tell you that after 10 emails. I will continue to comment on individual posts giving my opinion of that company

zarquon

This turnaround gives us all hope. Some right wing groups can now get their own subforum in politics if they stump up some cash and Dav will then change his mind about how dangerous right wing opinion is.

In fact all "insidious"and "evil" groups should now have their own fora if they have 30 pieces of silver

This turnabout by boards is incredibly disappointing and indicative of boards continue slide into the insidious practices it once criticized.

cyning

I actively dislike this decision. Firstly it wasn't one person coming on to shill their business: it was organised shilling. To the point where the company's name was added to the swear filter: how many other times has that happened?

It also comes across as incredibly unfair on those who participated: the instigator has money so can buy their way out of it but those that participated are site banned forever? I really hate shilling: but it's the double standards that are getting to me.

Also why is it a sub forum in bargain alerts?

Finally I do appreciate bills have to be paid. I do. But considering the strength of Davs statement this is really surprising and a complete u-turn... I don't have a problem with sponsored posts or forums but please put it out into Talk to if you have to keep them which I suspect you do.

Lovely Bloke

You really have to ask if the monetisation of Boards.ie is really worth it, is it a failed experiment?

If principled people's heads are going to be turned like this, even if we don't personally agree with those principles, or have had run-ins with the higher-ups, I assume we are all here posting because we do generally have a grá for Boards.ie, so we are all at least looking at the same hymn book, if not the same page.

At the time, Dav posted this in the prison forum

And yet you completely burned any bridges with our communities by being a shill for Gearbest and by profiting from posting fake recommendations on this site on their behalf.

There are barely words to express how vile and despicable I think someone like you is, so don't ever come back.

but the company itself has money, so you know, they are no longer vile and despicable I suppose.

There is *NOTHING* more insidious and downright evil on a forum like this than shilling.

Unless you have some dollars you are willing to spend.

I really think that with all the ads, sponsored content, the endless autoplay video ads, the size and sensitivity of the ads on the touch site - this is a step too far. This feels dirty.

Gearbest.com: Lindell

CantGetNoSleep wrote: »

My probably is not only what happened in the past but the sheer crappiness of that company. A lot of orders won't arrive and they really don't care, and will pretty much tell you that after 10 emails. I will continue to comment on individual posts giving my opinion of that company

Hi friend, pls tell me your order information, I will be your customer service on boards.ie:)

Gearbest.com: Lindell

I am so sorry for those who had come into the picture, we did not realize what would happen to them. Gearbest will never do that to you again. We cannot change what happened, we do not deny our mistakes, but just trying to fix things up. Hope you can understand, and I will very happy to solve your problems with Gearbest, again.

Boards.ie: Niamh

Good morning all

I'll answer as many of your questions as I can here now.

Banned users
Regarding users previously banned for shilling Gearbest - I already answered this earlier in the thread but I'll repeat myself - those people were members of Boards who violated on of the rules of boards. Ergo, they were banned and will remain so. Gearbest were not members of the site, they did not agree to any Terms of Use and they have now both apologised for their part in it and asked to work with us and the boards community.

Why is it in Bargain Alerts not under Talk to?
Talk To forums are very different to sponsored sub-forums. Sponsored forums have always lived in various forums ariound the site, never in the Talk to section. Usually they are placed where most people have been discussing them, e.g. Bespoke Diamonds in the Weddings, Marriage & Civil Partnership forum or Currencies Direct in Living Abroad. Gearbest, despite being on the swear filter for a time, have been most discussed in Bargain Alerts, therefore this is the natural place to put them. The cost of a Talk To forum is far and above that of a Sponsored Forum.

Products
I don't know anything about their products; should you have a query about a specific order, feel free to ask them about it. That is why they are here after all.

Monetisation of Boards is not an experiment, it is a reality if the site is to be kept running in any form.

I understand that after our strong reaction previously that this seems like a turnaround or a cop out. It's not very nice to find out that something has been going on under your nose on your own site and yes we were very "incensed" about it at the time, to borrow a word being used above. That doesn't mean we have to stay angry forever and cut off our nose to spite our face. People have been discussing GB for a long time on the site, they know it and they want to engage with those people. They went about it the wrong way first time, are going about it the right way now and we're happy to do that with them.

SEPT 23 1989

this is the last thing Boards needed at the moment

Lovely Bloke

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

this is the last thing Boards needed at the moment

or...it's exactly what Boards needed at the moment.

It's all about the money, money, money

seamus

You can post all the links you like Baldy, but it seems pretty clear to me in every single one of them that Dav's digust and outrage is directed at the act of shilling, and didn't contain any kind of declaration that Gearbest were to be forever banished from interacting with boards on any level.

If a company can be turned away from shilling to direct contribution, what's the problem?

You come across like a union rep to be honest. Always fighting to stick to an outdated model, even when it makes no sense.

I think you'd rather see boards go down in flames, broke and filled with abusive malcontents, than allow it to try and change with the times.

Lovely Bloke

you think wrong.

Lovely Bloke

it's also not surprising that you

a. resort to getting personal with me (again)
b. "have the back" of your admin/office pals

Like clockwork we are.

seamus

If I thought this was a bad idea, I'd call it out. It's not a bad idea - turn a shilling pest into a paying contributor. What's the problem?

Funny that in the same post you complain about me getting personal, you get personal with me. Double standards?

ibFoxer

Boards.ie: Niamh wrote: »

You can still discuss your personal experience.

Anyone who was site banned for shilling at the time is still banned. This new sponsored sub forum does not negate the fact that those users broke site rules by shilling.

But Niamh, surely any amount of money can't make up for the way that Gearbest conducted themselves previously? It smacks of hunger if i'm honest, and i understand Boards is a business and has to make a certain amount of money, but surely there is a line somewhere?

Chorus_suck

This post has been deleted.

seamus

Chorus_suck wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I've no idea who you are nor do I care about your opinion of me.

I take the logical line every time.

I don't instantly assume that there's some nefarious master clan of evil overlords trying to destroy boards, as the usual suspects here clearly do.

Every decision made, rightly or wrongly, is an individual usually just trying to make the best decision for the site.

This is as true today as it was back in 2003.

Nobody has still pointed out to me what the problem is with converting a shilling pest into a paying contributor. Surely that's the best thing for boards all round - moderator time is no longer wasted having to deal with it and boards gets an income from it.

What's the issue?

Also, bordering on personal abuse and definitely some element of low level trolling.

When you don't agree, just accuse 'em of trolling.

dunworth1

can i ask why is there two threads in different forums? :rolleyes:

can they be merged?

Chorus_suck

This post has been deleted.

Lovely Bloke

The problem is, and it is increasing in it's spread, is that Boards is becoming more and more an advertising bulletin, with users needs and wants taking a pretty far back seat.

Dav was aghast at Gearbest and it's shills, and fair play to him, he came down hard on them last year - nuke from orbit without prejudice - great decision, great to see the community manager looking out for the community.

Now, that company comes along with a few shekels and there's an about face. It's disconcerting, and it speaks to the community. Here's a company that was happy to pay people to shill on Boards.ie, but shure we'll take the money ourselves. Oh, by the way, those users who we banned at the time, who don't have the money to pay their way out of a ban - they can stay banned. We still think they are scum, but not the company that paid them, no siree, them guys are totally cool, now that they are paying us.

It makes sense that Boards takes advertising money, of course it does. But from a moral standpoint, taking money from that particular company seems strange.

Where would a line be drawn.

Godwin moment - if Stormfront wanted to take out a paid advert, and open a recruitment forum under Politics Cafe, would that be cool, because they'd be paying customers after all.

Wibbs

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

or...it's exactly what Boards needed at the moment.

It's all about the money, money, money

No shít sherlock. Unless you're willing to pay for staff and leccy?

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

Like clockwork we are.

I·ro·ny1
ˈīrənē/

You'll never be happy. As I found out in life, there is zero point pandering to people whose viewpoint is predicated on being unhappy. Even if you ran the place I'd give it six months before you'd get pissed off with yourself.

seamus

Chorus_suck wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

No. I'm a moron. Please proceed to multi-quote and link all of the instances where people are outraged but haven't actually given a good reason why this is a bad idea.

ibFoxer

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

The problem is, and it is increasing in it's spread, is that Boards is becoming more and more an advertising bulletin, with users needs and wants taking a pretty far back seat.

Dav was aghast at Gearbest and it's shills, and fair play to him, he came down hard on them last year - nuke from orbit without prejudice - great decision, great to see the community manager looking out for the community.

Now, that company comes along with a few shekels and there's an about face. It's disconcerting, and it speaks to the community. Here's a company that was happy to pay people to shill on Boards.ie, but shure we'll take the money ourselves. Oh, by the way, those users who we banned at the time, who don't have the money to pay their way out of a ban - they can stay banned. We still think they are scum, but not the company that paid them, no siree, them guys are totally cool, now that they are paying us.

It makes sense that Boards takes advertising money, of course it does. But from a moral standpoint, taking money from that particular company seems strange.

Where would a line be drawn.

Godwin moment - if Stormfront wanted to take out a paid advert, and open a recruitment forum under Politics Cafe, would that be cool, because they'd be paying customers after all.

This. Exactly this.

Wibbs

ibFoxer wrote: »

This. Exactly this.

IB I most certainly get why people are pissed off with this. I really bloody do, but the plain if sad fact is in order for this community to survive it requires paying for. And so long as those commercial interests stay where they're supposed to be then fine. If I won the Euro lotto in the morning(if I ever played) I would genuinely try and buy the place and get rid of all the commercial BS that creeps in, but that's the level of loolah land we'd need to get into IB.

Lovely Bloke

@Wibbs, I don't know what irony you are pointing out.

I used the word "we".