Is it in the best interest of bowhunting sites (and their members) to allow moderators with affiliations to certain companies to moderate the threads in which those products are being discussed? Does anyone else see the potential for lack of objectivity (at best) and censorship (at worst)? No inherent inference. A straight-forward question. I applaud bh.com for their apparent stance, in regards to this.
I will say that I don't have a dog in this fight, nor do I give a flyin petrified cat turd. But, I believe you are right on this Jeff. Just because you represent Bowtech, Matthews, or ABC brand bow does not give the right to inflict bodily harm or mental anguish on someone who does not. Now, that said, I think moderators, members, reps for bow companies can, and should be allowed to voice their "opinions", experience, tips, etc. on any bow/equipment they choose. When someone starts the rash, harsh, insulting, bashing crap, whether moderator or not, they should be reprimanded and called down by admin with a warning first, and then possibly a short term ban from the site. jmho And no, I am not a stalker. ha
There are some folk's opinions I trust regardless regardless of their affiliation with a product. There are other folk's opinions I disregard completely and they may have no, or claim no, affiliation with any product. Whom I do, or do not, trust is based on what I think I know about them and their integrity. What I think I know about them and their integrity is based on what they have written on forums and, in some cases, my personal dealings with them. It is in the best interest of bowhunting sites to have moderators with impeccable integrity. For the most part, I think the sites I visit have moderators like that. If they didn't, I likely would no longer visit them. If the moderators have impeccable integrity then I think the worries about lack of objectivity and partisan censorship are unfounded. I was a site admin for a number of years and it is an extremely difficult job. I think the vast majority of site members have no idea how difficult it can be to maintain balance when there are so many disparate viewpoints, personalities and temperaments involved. Determine who's word you trust and ignore the others. Sounds simple and.......it is LOL :D.
Perception is everything. Whether you believe something in your heart or not the cynical ones (especially if they disagree) will always question the basis for that opinion. The Reality is that it's human nature. Having said that. If a person with credentials "proves" that their motives are not affiliation based, but rather from the heart, this perception can be overcome.
It makes me wonder who you are calling out here. On this site JM and I represent BowTech. I don't know of any threads he has done wrong in and I can assure you that the only posts I have ever done any moderation to are spam threads. So, what stems this thread from you?
On this site JM and I represent BowTech. I don't know of any threads he has done wrong in and I can assure you that the only posts I have ever done any moderation to are spam threads. That's 100% commendable. And, I agree with everything you said. So, what stems this thread from you? Those (individuals and sites) who might not follow the examples you and JM exhibit......not only here....but anywhere (I wasn't site-specific in my question). You probably didn't pay too much attention to this portion of my thread. If you think this conflicts with my original question......refer to the above. For the most part, I think BH.com has taken the stance that they're not going down the road of the original premise (of my post). I applaud BOTH their stance on this AND the "exceptions" (you and JM) on NEVER losing sight of the very thing we all (I think) hope we're getting when we come to this and any hunting forum. Objectivity.
So...if you have a problem with the elected pres......you just move? Hell, all I did was ask a question. If you had a problem with that, you didn't have to click on the thread.
Not the forum just some topics that are not worth the time to type. This for the most is a very good forum too share information an learn from each other. Just seems that some topics are made just to stir the pot. Nothing to be learned. The products I use are not based on who advertises what but rather what works best for me. I have learned after 37 years of hunting that not a single product will put a buck in front of you. It takes foot work, commitment, patiences, an years of experience to decide what works best an not to fall for the next new thing that comes out the following season.
I don't quite equate POTUS or our country with an internet forum... Hell, all you did was ask. All I did was answer. Not a problem. (for me at least) :D
Bottom line is you can't be purely objective. Its a simple conflict of interest. And what I have notice is it makes companies look bad. Kinda bullyish. I honestly don't believe some companies out there are aware of how bad its gotten on forums. Customers bashed, put down, and even banned for raising questions about thier own products they bought. In the end, its not good the forum, its not good for the company. I commend the staff here who are mods and happen to understand this. If I could give some advise to corp sponsors and business's who sell bowhunting products, is to instruct your staff never to get into a peeing match on an open forum. If someone is lying or bashing your product, don't feed thier fires with spin. It will only prolong the negativity with pages and pages of negativity. Advertising a company now days does no need.
when i told my honest opinion of my Mathews reezen last year on the Mathews forum they were ready to burn me at the stake!! There was few giving helpfull advice but many telling me I knew nothing about what i was talking about. All the advice failed, reezen was a pig to shoot and it got sold.
Generally speaking "most" of the mods and reps are pretty fair and open-minded. It's usually those holding onto thier coat-tails that you will find are the most outspoken.
