White Moose Man v "Social Influencer"...

strandroad

Mountainsandh wrote: »

It's good to have them rough-housed a bit though.
This whole blogger culture is fine for entertainment purposes for the youngsters, but it's not reality, nor should it become or appear so.
Your man just popped a bubble and it's nice to think that some young people, despite the dramatic reactions that are to be expected, might just get the message that not everything will fall into your lap if you ask for it, and that no one who exposes themselves to the public for a living is above scrutiny or criticism.

I agree, that's a good thing to do on occasion, but he's been exposing her for six days straight, he's now filming White House spoof videos to keep the frenzy going. He's as bad as them if not worse. Out-attentioned her in fact.

One day instead of hated groups such as bloggers, millennials or vegans he'll pick on let's say the disabled and his own bubble will burst.

Mountainsandh

strandroad wrote: »

I agree, that's a good thing to do on occasion, but he's been exposing her for six days straight, he's now filming White House spoof videos to keep the frenzy going. He's as bad as them if not worse. Out-attentioned her in fact.
.

I agree he's overdone it now.

B.A._Baracus

Buford T Justice wrote: »

Because this is a discussion forum.

Let's be honest... so many threads descend into the usual madness that is boards.ie where people are just going back and fourth... back and fourth, trying to one-up each other etc. I guess that's what you call discussion right?

riffmongous

Buford T Justice wrote: »

Not healthy how? It appears to be very healthy for his business..

I wonder if it actually is though.. he's been at it for years and each time proclaims a great victory but yet hasn't got enough visitors on Tuesdays and Wednesdays to generate some google visitor statistics.

On Facebook something like 45000 five-star reviews and yet only 70 four stars... something pretty wrong there. From tripadvisor it seems more like they do their business off the back of good food and service.

Guy:Incognito

riffmongous wrote: »

Ah come on but he did, you see then profile photo and click on the profile from the review.

Delete/ report and move on, like every other business out there.

If we're going on profile pics then about 20% of my Facebook friends are full families/couples or children of various ages between birth and 10 or so.

Guy:Incognito

anna080 wrote: »

But he has just replaced the customer is always right mantra with the customer is always wrong. Neither are ideal or good for business. Like Dara said, he's lucky he has mammy and daddy's business to bankroll him because he'd be long gone from any other establishment the big bowsie head on him. He's just as "positive vibes only please" as any blogger he seeks to ridicule.

I havnt seen him take good customers to task. They all seem to be eejits with exaggerated or disputed bad reviews or not customers at all ( the "social onfluencer" and the 14 year old writing a fake review)

Guy:Incognito

strandroad wrote: »

It's not the 1980s, it's not outlandish to expect a dairy free option on the menu, I never came across a cafe in Dublin that wouldn't have them or wouldn't be otherwise accommodating. He made an example out of her because he wanted a sh*tstorm.

When you own a shop/ restaurant etc you get to sell or serve what you like. There's no requirement to cater to any particular taste or request. People are free to ask and they can decline if they want. The proper thing to do then is to leave or not go there . Ranting online that they shoild accomodate you shouldn't come in to it.

endacl

conorhal wrote: »

Ouch, you know you've screwed the pooch when they're ripping the piss out of you on the other side of the world....

That was litch rally funny.

Annasopra

strandroad wrote: »

I agree, that's a good thing to do on occasion, but he's been exposing her for six days straight, he's now filming White House spoof videos to keep the frenzy going. He's as bad as them if not worse. Out-attentioned her in fact.

One day instead of hated groups such as bloggers, millennials or vegans he'll pick on let's say the disabled and his own bubble will burst.

I think he is way worse.

Omackeral

Buford T Justice wrote: »

Not healthy how? It appears to be very healthy for his business..

Just on that point. I work close by this establishment but it's very much on a passing by route on the North Circular Road. Wouldn't have reason to stop at it or pop in. The attention he's brought onto his establishment via an online presence is quite unorthodox but it's very much visible. It kinda piqued my interest a little bit. Out of curiousity, I looked them up and saw a few nice sounding things on their menu. Last week I ended up taking a stroll down and ended up ordering eggs benedict. They were great. I'd go back again. So while I've passed it for years, it's never really been on my radar. Only for the bit of buzz/notoriety it's made for itself in recent times, I doubt I'd have ever stepped foot in there. I may very well return soon.

strandroad

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

When you own a shop/ restaurant etc you get to sell or serve what you like. There's no requirement to cater to any particular taste or request. People are free to ask and they can decline if they want. The proper thing to do then is to leave or not go there . Ranting online that they shoild accomodate you shouldn't come in to it.

It's not the customer who ranted online, it's the owner. That's the point.

meeeeh

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

When you own a shop/ restaurant etc you get to sell or serve what you like. There's no requirement to cater to any particular taste or request. People are free to ask and they can decline if they want. The proper thing to do then is to leave or not go there . Ranting online that they shoild accomodate you shouldn't come in to it.

Should it not? Tell that to Trip Advisor, they made a business out of it. He is picking on popular targets, what is better than an odd vegan bashing to get a mob of idiots following him cheering. It's so predictable and so obvious and people fall for it every time.

511

This is comical: https://www.facebook.com/WhiteMooseCafe/videos/2052113215069284/

Hannibal_Smith

end of the road wrote: »

your man popped nothing from what i can see. he just did his usual (what is in my view) attention seeking. the amount of "calling out" aka attention seeking he gets up to is not healthy tbh.

Yeah. He's the one who's not healthy. Not the freeloader tryna scab all they can in the world :rolleyes:

Blazer

meeeeh wrote: »

Should it not? Tell that to Trip Advisor, they made a business out of it. He is picking on popular targets, what is better than an odd vegan bashing to get a mob of idiots following him cheering. It's so predictable and so obvious and people fall for it every time.

To be honest most vegans are sanctimonious patronizing twats anyway so nobody really cares what they think.
He just fed into that.

georgina toadbum

strandroad wrote: »

It's not the customer who ranted online, it's the owner. That's the point.

Wrong.

The customer left a review on Trip Advisor complaining that there was no vegan dishes.

strandroad

georgina toadbum wrote: »

Wrong.

The customer left a review on Trip Advisor complaining that there was no vegan dishes.

Which is a legit thing to do in 2018. The hostile social media rant was his.

georgina toadbum

strandroad wrote: »

Which is a legit thing to do in 2018. The hostile social media rant was his.

No the legit thing to do is not assume everywhere will cater to your dietary requirements. Google places beforehand. Look at their menu. If there are no dishes suitable. Don't go there.

kunst nugget

He used a photographer's image without permission in 2016 and she asked him to remove it. Rather than respect her wishes, he published her initial message to him and his snarky response to her on his facebook page to further show his edginess. She wasn't looking for a freebie or dissing him or his company. The guy really is a grade A tool.

I suppose he's showing that if you're enough of an arsehole there really is no such thing as bad publicity. How long has he been dragging this blogger thing out for at this stage?

https://petapixel.com/2016/09/08/cafe-mocks-photographer-asked-stolen-photo-taken/

Bambi985

The constant videos & Facebook posts from him are just cringe and embarrassing at this stage. Talk about milking it. I think if he keeps going it’s just going to backfire as people catch onto how much he’s loving the attention & it kind of kills his whole point about self-entitled self-obsessed bloggers.

Gone Drinking

Its annoys me that this is being discussed on forums and the radio. That's exactly why he replied to her email to begin with, he knew by calling her out he'd get just as much if not more social media likes/shares than if she was to come over and like or share his hotel to her 80 thousands followers.

As for her, all she did was squat in tight pants to get followers to begin with so I'm sure she's gained a few more when people started to look her up (You'll probably go look her up now).

It's worked out for both of them, can we please stop talking about it now

chrissb8

strandroad wrote: »

Which is a legit thing to do in 2018. The hostile social media rant was his.

No the argument here is that his restaurant is under no obligation to attend to any special dietary requirements. If you don't like it than tough that's what having choice is about. Google the place before hand and don't just assume. Heck I even do that if I'm going to a restaurant on a night out. On the off chance there's nothing I don't like. Will I be getting p***y if there's nothing I like. No I'll look for somewhere else to eat.

Curly Judge

Blazer wrote: »

To be honest most vegans are sanctimonious patronizing twats anyway so nobody really cares what they think.
He just fed into that.

Heartily agree.
They're right up there with gob****es who insist on the Irish version of their names............even though they may have been christened Burford T Pusser.

endacl

strandroad wrote: »

Which is a legit thing to do in 2018.

Me hole it is.

What is a modern phenomenon is to get one’s knickers in a twist because, no matter the cuisines that are catered to, if one’s personal dietary whims are not, then that business is a bad business and should be made to feel bad.

meeeeh

Blazer wrote: »

To be honest most vegans are sanctimonious patronizing twats anyway so nobody really cares what they think.
He just fed into that.

Well he certainly picked an easy target. A bit of school bully and his fb puppets thing going on there.

endacl

meeeeh wrote: »

Well he certainly picked an easy target.

The vegans? Certainly a worthy one.

Widdershins

kunst nugget wrote: »

He used a photographer's image without permission in 2016 and she asked him to remove it. Rather than respect her wishes, he published her initial message to him and his snarky response to her on his facebook page to further show his edginess. She wasn't looking for a freebie or dissing him or his company. The guy really is a grade A tool.

I suppose he's showing that if you're enough of an arsehole there really is no such thing as bad publicity. How long has he been dragging this blogger thing out for at this stage?

https://petapixel.com/2016/09/08/cafe-mocks-photographer-asked-stolen-photo-taken/

At the very end he says he took the image from the Huffington Post website.

I'm sure it will all die down now as it's just becoming so tedious that people will lose interest.

kunst nugget

Widdershins wrote: »

At the very end he says he took the image from the Huffington Post website.

I'm sure it will all die down now as it's just becoming so tedious that people will lose interest.

It doesn't really matter where he got it from if he didn't get permission to use it.

Blazer

kunst nugget wrote: »

It doesn't really matter where he got it from if he didn't get permission to use it.

Exactly. He’s a complete arsehole as well and a freeloader. I imagine if someone walked into his cafe and took something for nothing he wouldn’t be long complaining.

Widdershins

kunst nugget wrote: »

It doesn't really matter where he got it from if he didn't get permission to use it.

Oh, I know, but I can see how someone using an image from an article might not realise. Unlike taking it directly from the photographers site, or something.

Had he apologised privately and just removed it quietly, not such a big issue.

He's crossed most peoples' personal threshold of what's acceptable and what isn't by now.

_Dara_

Widdershins wrote: »

Oh, I know, but I can see how someone using an image from an article might not realise. Unlike taking it directly from the photographers site, or something.

That's fine but a person's reaction to being asked to credit photographs that aren't theirs is telling of their character. Many people will quickly rectify the matter apologetically and without fuss. And... some won't.

Curly Judge

Yer wan's boyfriend is the real loser here.
The poor chap was looking forward to five days free riding in Phibsborough and it all came to naught.

Widdershins

_Dara_ wrote: »

That's fine but a person's reaction to being asked to credit photographs that aren't theirs is telling of their character. Many people will quickly rectify the matter apologetically and without fuss. And... some won't.

I agree, and I just said as much

The cafe owner isn't impressing as many people now. I think he's lost the run of himself.

_Dara_

Buford T Justice wrote: »

Not healthy how? It appears to be very healthy for his business..

White Moose Cafe only has 159 reviews on Tripadvisor. That's low enough and probably around the average for an off-the-beaten-track cafe in Dublin. Certainly not an exceptional figure. I'd expect the number to be higher if his antics were attracting droves of people.

end of the road

georgina toadbum wrote: »

Wrong.

The customer left a review on Trip Advisor complaining that there was no vegan dishes.

so?

CeilingFly

_Dara_ wrote: »

White Moose Cafe only has 159 reviews on Tripadvisor. That's low enough and probably around the average for an off-the-beaten-track cafe in Dublin. Certainly not an exceptional figure. I'd expect the number to be higher if his antics were attracting droves of people.

almost 700 for Charleville lodge hotel which is the main business.

CeilingFly

Paul Stenson walked into her trap.

If he or anyone did not think yer one Elle did not check him out before sending the requet, they need their head examined.

Before this she had less than 70,000 followers on youtube - now she has 95,000 - a near 40% increase in just a week and all the extra advertising income that will bring her.


What are the chances she pick the one hotel that uses social media the way Paul Stenson does. Then she asks not for just ne or two nights like most reviewers would ask for - she asks for 4 nights around valentines day.

She knew damn well that she'd get a response frm him. She was probably disappointed that he did not name and shame her directly, so decided to do it herself.


January is dreadfully slow in the media - they'll pick up any trash story and the two cuprits delivered in spades.

She gets another 25,000+ follower. He gets a load of publicity. Both are winners. Both are deliriously happy with mega free publicity.

The media are the suckers.

end of the road

chrissb8 wrote: »

No the argument here is that his restaurant is under no obligation to attend to any special dietary requirements. If you don't like it than tough that's what having choice is about. Google the place before hand and don't just assume. Heck I even do that if I'm going to a restaurant on a night out. On the off chance there's nothing I don't like. Will I be getting p***y if there's nothing I like. No I'll look for somewhere else to eat.

the only one who got pissy was little mister attention seeker.

_Dara_

CeilingFly wrote: »

almost 700 for Charleville lodge hotel which is the main business.

And again, for a hotel, that's average enough, even a bit on the low side. More people are likely to review the hotel than the cafe because the hotel would be a base for a lot of people who would be off doing stuff during the day and some would roll their cafe review into it. So 700 reviews is not much to write home about.

Stuckforcash

I remember when he posted a picture of him and his boyfriend a year or more ago there was disbelief/disgust in the comments from his followers he'd won over with with his anti vegan stunt ie American gun enthusiasts that were attracted by the notion of shooting vegans.

I'm sure it was worth it for the publicity though.

Bambi985

CeilingFly wrote: »

Paul Stenson walked into her trap.

If he or anyone did not think yer one Elle did not check him out before sending the requet, they need their head examined.

Before this she had less than 70,000 followers on youtube - now she has 95,000 - a near 40% increase in just a week and all the extra advertising income that will bring her.


What are the chances she pick the one hotel that uses social media the way Paul Stenson does. Then she asks not for just ne or two nights like most reviewers would ask for - she asks for 4 nights around valentines day.

She knew damn well that she'd get a response frm him. She was probably disappointed that he did not name and shame her directly, so decided to do it herself.


January is dreadfully slow in the media - they'll pick up any trash story and the two cuprits delivered in spades.

She gets another 25,000+ follower. He gets a load of publicity. Both are winners. Both are deliriously happy with mega free publicity.

The media are the suckers.

This would be plausible if she wasn't as thick as two short planks, which her youtube videos would suggest her to be.

mariaalice

It a symptom of the culture we live in and ' you can do anything achieve anything regardless of reality.

Not happy with your Job become an influencer they have read about it they will make loads of money inanely talking about their diet exercise or hair and make up, or fed up leaving the baby in the creche and don't like the job stay at home and be an influencer talking about the baba, being a mother.

It a symptom of a superficial vapid self help type of culture.

Buford T Justice

_Dara_ wrote: »

White Moose Cafe only has 159 reviews on Tripadvisor. That's low enough and probably around the average for an off-the-beaten-track cafe in Dublin. Certainly not an exceptional figure. I'd expect the number to be higher if his antics were attracting droves of people.

Tripadvisor reviews are as meaningless as facebook reviews imo, volume counts for nothing.

Oh, and err... see below in regards to attracting numbers

Omackeral wrote: »

Just on that point. I work close by this establishment but it's very much on a passing by route on the North Circular Road. Wouldn't have reason to stop at it or pop in. The attention he's brought onto his establishment via an online presence is quite unorthodox but it's very much visible. It kinda piqued my interest a little bit. Out of curiousity, I looked them up and saw a few nice sounding things on their menu. Last week I ended up taking a stroll down and ended up ordering eggs benedict. They were great. I'd go back again. So while I've passed it for years, it's never really been on my radar. Only for the bit of buzz/notoriety it's made for itself in recent times, I doubt I'd have ever stepped foot in there. I may very well return soon.

CeilingFly wrote: »

Paul Stenson walked into her trap.

If he or anyone did not think yer one Elle did not check him out before sending the requet, they need their head examined.

Before this she had less than 70,000 followers on youtube - now she has 95,000 - a near 40% increase in just a week and all the extra advertising income that will bring her.


What are the chances she pick the one hotel that uses social media the way Paul Stenson does. Then she asks not for just ne or two nights like most reviewers would ask for - she asks for 4 nights around valentines day.

She knew damn well that she'd get a response frm him. She was probably disappointed that he did not name and shame her directly, so decided to do it herself.


January is dreadfully slow in the media - they'll pick up any trash story and the two cuprits delivered in spades.

She gets another 25,000+ follower. He gets a load of publicity. Both are winners. Both are deliriously happy with mega free publicity.

The media are the suckers.

Possibly, but she's likely not intelligent enough for that.

_Dara_

Buford T Justice wrote: »

Tripadvisor reviews are as meaningless as facebook reviews imo, volume counts for nothing.

Yeah... no they're not, it's a great resource. So yes, it is very much just your opinion. Not at all surprising that you would dismiss them though, so jealously have you been defending Mr. Stenson.

I'm gonna go with the Tripadvisor lack of numbers rather than the sample size of one anecdote from a poster here. Especially as I can offset it. I too regularly pass by the place and would go out of my way avoid it, having noticed it.

As another poster said, there aren't enough visitors midweek for google to use for statistics.

And ask yourself: if the place is so popular, why would he periodically need to keep pulling these publicity stunts?

Buford T Justice

_Dara_ wrote: »

I too regularly pass by the place and would go out of my way avoid it, having noticed it.

And to counter this, there are also people who have gone there because of it too

By the way, I'm not defending the individual. I've already said I don't particularly like him, Its his style of dealing with customers / gougers that I like

_Dara_

Buford T Justice wrote: »

And to counter this, there are also people who have gone there because of it too

By the way, I'm not defending the individual. I've already said I don't particularly like him, Its his style of dealing with customers / gougers that I like

His way of dealing with customers is classless and he only gets away with it because of his privileged position. How anyone can admire it is truly beyond me.

AndrewJRenko

CeilingFly wrote: »

Paul Stenson walked into her trap.

If he or anyone did not think yer one Elle did not check him out before sending the requet, they need their head examined.

Before this she had less than 70,000 followers on youtube - now she has 95,000 - a near 40% increase in just a week and all the extra advertising income that will bring her.


What are the chances she pick the one hotel that uses social media the way Paul Stenson does. Then she asks not for just ne or two nights like most reviewers would ask for - she asks for 4 nights around valentines day.

She knew damn well that she'd get a response frm him. She was probably disappointed that he did not name and shame her directly, so decided to do it herself.


January is dreadfully slow in the media - they'll pick up any trash story and the two cuprits delivered in spades.

She gets another 25,000+ follower. He gets a load of publicity. Both are winners. Both are deliriously happy with mega free publicity.

That is extremely unlikely. Hanlon's Razor applies here.

VinLieger

_Dara_ wrote: »

His way of dealing with customers is classless and he only gets away with it because of his privileged position. How anyone can admire it is truly beyond me.

Privileged position? Yes how dare he run 2 successful businesses that employ numerous people....

_Dara_

VinLieger wrote: »

Privileged position? Yes how dare he run 2 successful businesses that employ numerous people....

His parents own the place. He would not get away with carrying on the way he does if they weren't. So yes, that puts him in a privileged position and he abuses it (for online validation). He'd be fired fast from any other establishment for the same behaviour. There's a reason for that. In addition, it's a budget, no-frills accommodation not far from town. There's a particular market for that so the place is always going to do alright for that reason. Don't conflate his carry on with any success the place might have. Anyone googling budget accommodation in Dublin will find it as one of the options and some will go for it.

Buford T Justice

_Dara_ wrote: »

His parents own the place. He would not get away with carrying on the way he does if they weren't. So yes, that puts him in a privileged position and he abuses it (for online validation).

Perhaps not, but he is using his position in this case to do things differently than the traditional method. That doesn't make it wrong.