# Full Disclosure



## sevenmmm (Mar 5, 2011)

I'm in.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Atta boy, Rick. One more and we have a movement.


----------



## dfaulkner (Mar 26, 2011)

That would absolutely be the adult thing to do! Great (and extremely sensible) idea.


----------



## Ghostwheel (Jan 9, 2011)

I realize I don't post much (read: at all), but I also think that a complaint in a public place should have an owner. A first and last name seems very reasonable. Especially on a social forum like Beesource.

Pete Schlax


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

How can there be 4 Replys and 0 Views. The new system must still have some work to be done on it. This is not a Complaint. But my name will appear anyway. Always does.

That was fast. Somebody delete this post please. Thanx.


----------



## dfaulkner (Mar 26, 2011)

New signature


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

The Consumer Report Forum is a powerful section of BeeSource. It has the power to literally destroy a guys business. So at the very least the complaining person should be required to identify themselves. Is it just me or does it not seem that quite a of these people are new users? When that is the case we really have no idea who they are and at least in one recent incident seem unwilling to identify themselves.... only that they are a cross between a canine and a reptile  - I need more info to judge their credibility.


----------



## MichaBees (Sep 26, 2010)

I strongly agree with you all. 
Denouncing someone’s wrongdoing should never be anonymous –ever.

Aurelio Paez / DBA MichaBees or Micha’s Honey & Bees.


----------



## NorthernIllinoisPlumber (Aug 17, 2010)

How about we go one further...do like other Forums do. 

Only allow the ORIGINAL poster, and the COMPANY/PERSON to respond? Cut out the BS comments, the "you are inexperienced", "I like them", "did me right last year", "its the weather".

This is a consumer report forum, not a consumer debate forum.

It sure would cut out the drama.


----------



## NorthernIllinoisPlumber (Aug 17, 2010)

sqkcrk said:


> It seems only right, considering the incalcuable loss of reputation and income that one may loose from a Posters public complaints.


Everything said on the Web should be taken with a grain of salt. 

How much do you think he lost?


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

NorthernIllinoisPlumber said:


> Everything said on the Web should be taken with a grain of salt.


You are correct.. it should be! But I am not sure that it is. So many nuc buyers are relatively new and I doubt they sift through a thread like this very well.

How much did he loose? Don't know... but guarantee you he did not gain.


----------



## Tom G. Laury (May 24, 2008)

Why do people here use synonyms at all?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

NorthernIllinoisPlumber said:


> Only allow the ORIGINAL poster, and the COMPANY/PERSON to respond?


Not a bad idea.

Tom, good question. When I first became a Moderator, which I no longer am, I asked if I could have my sqkcrk changed to my actual name. Makes sense to me.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

NorthernIllinoisPlumber said:


> How much do you think he lost?


How can one tell? That's why I said "incaluable". You can't really calculate it. In the long run the complainer may have lost quite a bit, b y exposing themselves as who they really are, by his actions here. Tho, we may never rerally know who he is, unless he has the cajones to be honest.


----------



## BoilerJim (Apr 15, 2011)

sqkcrk,

I am in agreement with you, sqkcrk.

Jim


----------



## honeyshack (Jan 6, 2008)

I agree! I also agree that the post should be limited to the Original Post and if the seller chooses to respond, they can.


----------



## RiodeLobo (Oct 11, 2010)

I fully agree on using your full name on the consumer reports forum, but totally disagree with limiting the posts to the consumer and the vendor. A number of times I have seen people come to the defense of a vendor, as was the case of John Pluta or Russell Apiaries. If the post were limited you would only get the view of the consumer, reasonable or not, and perhaps the vendor. With everyone able to input, you get more balance.

Dan Hayden 
Baker City Oregon


----------



## Omie (Nov 10, 2009)

As a woman I would not want to post my full real name or my hometown location on an online forum like this, especially if i was voicing a consumer complaint. No offense, but there are a few people on here that I wouldn't want unexpected visits from. _Guess I'll never be doing any complaining if I get ripped off!_

If such complaint posts are limited to only the original poster and the supposed offender, it'll be a mighty strange thread if no one responds. What happens in a case like Long Creek, with a dozen or so people complaining about their lost money- would there be a dozen threads of individual arguments between them and the person they are complaining about? Sounds pretty dreary.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

My full name is on all my posts...


----------



## Rex Piscator (Oct 12, 2010)

I feel the best solution is locking the Thread to the OP[original poster] and subject individuals involved. Shouldn't 'fear' people into the stopping of their expression by asking for their personal information or 'credentials'. I'm totally new to beekeeping but not being an adult or doing business around the planet; an observation is still an observation, let the number of respondents and their observations build the walls of your 'belief' system. If there are multiple Threads on one particular vendor, so be it!

I agree, this is the Wild, Wild, Internet; everything should be taken with some salt to taste. Such as my very words here!


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Omie said:


> _Guess I'll never be doing any complaining if I get ripped off!_


I can only imagine a consumer complaint from you being quite civil in tone, not vehement or misplaced.

I'm not suggesting that this be a Rule or that anyone has to. Only that they should stand behind their words in full view if they are going to expose someone else as much as some have. 

Thanks for the civil discourse. I don't think we have heard from any of the complainers tho. So this has mostly been one sided, I believe.


----------

