There is a controversy brewing and this time it is not really about eBay - or is it?
It seems that Debbie Levitt CEO of ASWAS, an eBay Stores designer and consulting company based in Boston, MA and a personal friend, has come out very strongly against the grass roots marketing efforts of Bonanzle.com. A Prominent blogger and also a friend, Henrietta of the Red Ink Diary has responded quite directly to Debbie's take on the Bonanzle Action Club.
Henrietta has been a friend to Bonanzle.com since the beginning, I don't think she is a member of the BAC, but could be. It is a pretty small club of only 50 people when weighed against the 30,000 members of Bonanzle. Yet the effects of its political style grass roots effort to get out the word about the site seem to have gained some attention in eBay circles (where Debbie Levitt is a big swimmer).
The Article on the Red Ink Diary is available for all to read in its entirety here Red Ink Diary. I have included a short quote below to give you the idea of where Henrietta stands. (Note: Links to the articles Debbie Levitt wrote in the ASWAS blog are included, just as they appeared in the Red Ink Diary.) I don't know if I would have been quite as direct as Henrietta was in her post, but she expressed her point without leaving any doubt.
From the RedInkDiary
The words which come to my mind are confrontational, short fuse, defensive, impulsive, and ‘no thank you’. This person seems to have a bee up her butt about Bonanzle and for such an important, influential and successful business owner, (I quote below from her profile on Practical eCommerce) to devote her valuable time to badmouthing a site which should be beneath her notice and that of her presumably paid staff; does make me wonder.
...the CEO of eBay’s first Certified Service Provider, which offers services for online sellers including branding, design, and personalized sales and marketing strategies. (She is) eBay’s first Certified Consultant and the first Education Specialist trained by eBay. Her recognized expertise as well as her approach to online branding, marketing and strategy are redefining the model of what are “good” eBay listings, eBay Stores, or websites.
She has written two posts about it this month. One on February 10th which has a comment by Mark Dorsey and an illuminating response to that comment by the blogger.
“As for helping me with future content, I have tried to contact you a number of times through email and Twitter, and that’s as far as things have gone. I guess I’d only matter if I were a BAC member.
“
Shame on you Mark for not realizing what an important and influential person you were failing to treat with awe and respectful deference.
The second post is today and comments have been closed. You may however comment here on Red INK
End of Red Ink Diary Quote - All Rights Reserved
Personally I have no idea why Debbie Levitt would raise such a ruckus over the Bonanzle Action Committee. They are just happy members and sellers on the Bonanzle.com platform who freely give of their time to help increase the reach and awareness of an upstart bootstrapping eCommerce alternative that has simply grown faster than any other in history.
Did the 50 members of the Bonanzle Action Club help that growth along?
- You bet! - how much they helped is really indeterminable.
Is it evil, backhanded or unfair?
- No way! - The tactic has been used the world over.
eBay has their own shills and cheerleaders, they almost invented the practice and they did it on a much larger scale than 50 unpaid members of a small site that has grown beyond anyone's expectations. These are people who actually sell product on the site they are promoting, not some paid staff working out of a boiler room. The difference here is that the BAC members are doing it in a new medium called social networking and they are effective at adding dialog to sites where there already was an interest. (They could be more effective, but that is a matter for a different post).
I have been writing about Bonanzle since before the Bonanzle Action Club (BAC) came into being. I am not a member of the BAC and I will never be a member of the BAC because membership is closed. I have written good things about Bonanzle because I instantly saw the advantages offered by the site, it worked, it is easy to use and because I liked it.
I have been so impressed that I have created an off Bonanzle website development project for its members that is known as Bonanzle Webstores. This is not funded, administered or run by the team at Bonanzle or its ownership yet they have been more than helpful in the creation and development of our program because it will help bring in new traffic to Bonanzle.com and its merchants.
I have never been paid, offered payment, bribed or told what to say. I have also written honest critiques which in most cases have been accepted and acted upon by the founder of the site Bill Harding. While the site is not perfect and there are several improvements that could be enacted, the founder and head programmer works hard to make the site work for all of its members on a daily basis.
Bonanzle is a very interesting and ever expanding marketplace that has piqued mine and several thousand other peoples interest. The entire massive and ever expanding groundswell of acceptance has not come from just 50 people repeating the same comments on several blogs or sites around the Internet (something I have a problem with - please be original BAC members i.e. paraphrase your comments on blogs - don't quote verbatim what the BAC blast says each time - OK - just say what you feel in your comments) . The interest has come both from within the seller base and from outside the community from sites like Google and from blogs like this one.
The BAC members are simply reaching outside the site to make the site known to those who have never been exposed to it. From there the decision is completely in the consumers hands, try Bonanzle or not - it is up to the potential member. The BAC does nothing to trick or deceive people into trying the site.
I agree with Debbie Levitt on one point however.
I dislike the term or slogan "Best eBay alternative", in fact I dislike any mention of eBay when referring to Bonanzle. They are two different marketplaces, two different systems of eCommerce and they really have no comparisons at all, other than history.
The history of eBay is one of a grass roots driven growth curve built on social interaction (first between sellers and then between buyers and sellers). Bonanzle has re-created that excitement from the early days of eBay, when sellers sold to sellers and everyone helped one another learn how to use the tools provided by the venue to become successful. Bonanzle and eBay both have the same history in regards to a fantastic growth curve and they both share a history of having a very small marketing budget. eBay was not perfect when it started and is still not perfect all these years later. I would wager that if you could access a screenshot or go back in time to read the forum comments of users of eBay after roughly 6 months of operations and compare that to the Bonanzle site we see today, the differences of platform and the similarities in regards to history would be oh so clear.
In today's world of internet marketing, having a small marketing budget does not necessarily rule you out from competing for business.
Being creative by using customers enthusiasm is a fantastic way to create evangelists for your brand. This is exactly what Mark Dorsey at Bonanzle has done with just 50 of his best customers. I am certain he has many more volunteers for the BAC but for management reasons they have kept the number small.
I am sure the method of marketing being utilized here can be called many different names, is it unfair? No.
Is it unusual?, maybe in this space but it is used by fortune 500 companies the world over in this new World of Internet based marketing. Should it be an issue for a eBay based service provider to come out so strongly against? I really don't think so.
Debbie Levitt, on a personal note...
I want to say that I appreciate the work you do and I have always loved your designs, your speaking and your in depth knowledge of eBay. I don't want you to take my comments here personally, but I don't agree with the implications of your post(s), your insinuation that Mark Dorsey is anything but approachable and informative or that he only speaks with BAC members. I also am uneasy with your inclination to take the negative tact sometimes used against other companies in posts on your blog to somehow promote yourself as a consumer advocate.
Debbie, you are a marketing person and you represent ASWAS as the CEO and as its chief evangelist. Your consumer advocacy always has been one which promotes your own services and that of eBay or other eBay service providers you work with. There is nothing wrong with promotion, and you do a fine job of it - when you discuss matters that pertain to your business, eBay or how your clients excel in new and exciting endeavors online. You have a great track record, an avid following and a long portfolio of quality work.
I really do not understand why you are endeavoring to slow the growth of a new and exciting community of sellers and buyers who simply choose to do eCommerce elsewhere besides eBay.
The people who choose to use Bonanzle really have no effect upon your business. Does it help your company to point out what you think are wrongs that in fact have no effect on you, on your clients or really eBay in any way? I understand how you want to expose wrongs and be a stand up person who is respected in your industry, and in fact, you have been that person for many years. Take the respect and knowledge and experience and use it to promote the good of your community, add to the knowledge base of your clients and readers by interjecting reason and not necessarily interjecting doubt where none existed.
The members of the BAC are only a small problem for those of us who have to approve their comments, and to me.. that is no problem at all because comments are what bring a blog to life.
The media thrives on news, and believe it or not, Bonanzle is news.
Bonanzle has something people like, sales are being made by the merchants who use all of the tools available to them on the Bonanzle platform, and there are improvements being made almost on a daily basis. There is no way that Mark Dorsey on his own could gather the attention that he has for his company without some help. He can either pay cash for that help, or he can use customers who are also evangelists. The ring of truth always comes from actual customers - on this I am sure we can agree.
You and I ask for testimonials from our clients - is this really all that different?
Except for the fact that Bonanzle Action Club Members give testimony each and every week on the behalf of Bonanzle.
I am actually envious - I don't have as many clients as Bonanzle.com has that are so impressed with my work that they would take 20 minutes of time each week to promote for me. The ones I do have, I cherish, but I have yet to organize them into a committee. Having clients that sing your praises is the best marketing in the world... Using the power of word of mouth is a basic tenant of all marketing.
Maybe you and I should look at creating something like the BAC ... Hmmmm iBusinessLogic Action Committee - Naw, it doesn't sound right, does it.... ASWAS-AC?
Tell you what, I will join your AC if you join mine....
- Bonanzle Action Club - Creative Word of Mouth Marketing (0.328)
- ChannelAdvisor Catalyst @ Pinehurst Day 1 Complete - Quick Notes (0.297)
- COMMUNICATION should be open - Not restricted! eBay - Please Read This! (0.297)
- eBay Changes Coming in 2008 - Are you an inefficient Seller? No Listing Fees? (RANDOM - 0.019)
(Sorry, that should have been “you and I.” That will teach me to type so early in the morning.)
That’s OK. That’s why I have been saying we could ALL do better.
I could have communicated better.
People could have personally attacked me less.
This blog could have posted facts instead of creating a controversy where there was none, and manipulating how people should feel about things by wrapping Scott’s opinion in personal smears of me, or accusing me of things I’m not actually doing. It’s AWFULLY hard to defend yourself against things you never said or did.
We could all have done better. It would have been a nice thing.
Henrietta, not mentioning me by name gets you no points when you refer to the person as the CEO of As Was and link people to my blog posts.
That kind of gives it away.
So no points for not mentioning my name… especially when your follow-up post mentioned my name, and decided to go further into your campaign to discredit me.
In my blog, when I’m not mentioning people’s names, I also don’t mention their companies or link to their sites. I think that’s the more professional way to not mention someone’s name.
You wrote 2 smear posts about me in “a series about professionalism.” I love the irony of it. Is this the series about professionalism that starts with the post about thinking you’re a small eBay seller? Where does the series start and end, exactly?
You found so little to complain about me that you had to actually use a blog post I wrote about a girl who dumped her drink on me at a concert. You then complained that I even blog about my bad former landlord! Oh no, not that! You had a REALLY had time finding material that made me look bad, but you did what you could with what you thought you had.
Henrietta, you will truly have a field day then with tomorrow’s blog post about my terrible former domain registrar!
I hope your next post will be about how professional you are when you write smear posts about people who you think said something bad about Bonanzle. It’s not the first time you’ve done it.
Can you tell us why individuals who you think are saying something negative about Bonanzle deserve write-ups like this, and how that helps you and Bonanzle? If at some point my company is offering services that deeply help Bonanzle sellers, will you support us or will you link back to posts discrediting us?
Just in case any of the members of the BAC are reading here – when they’re leaving links to Bonanzle in people’s blog comments, they need to remember to put in the http:// otherwise the links usually don’t work.
(Disclaimer: I have no idea whether the people who leave the incorrect links are members of the BAC or not. Nor am I encouraging them to leave any links anywhere. But if anyone is going to leave any link, it might as well be a link that works.)
In Defense of Henrietta…. (not that she needs ANY help)
I feel she is trying to point out all one needs to know about eccomerce and things that can help or hurt your business, and it is strictly up to the reader to deside if she is right or wrong, if it applies to them and their business or not.
I have found her articles refreshing and spot on…and have never found her to mis quote or mislead her readers.
The same is true for Scott.
I thank them both of two great blogs and look forward to reading more!
What a soap opera!!
I tried Bonanzle 3 times. Once when they began, again a couple of months later, and then again just recently. I listed a variety of products that I do well with elsewhere, but not one item sold. This same variety of products I had listed at Bonanzle are items I’ve had no difficulty selling elsewhere.
It does seem that the buying and selling activity at Bonanzle results primarily from members selling to each other. For me, it didn’t and doesn’t work.
I do see some of the same usernames all over the web extolling the virtues of Bonanzle, but it’s become clear to anyone who gets around, that there is a clear and concerted effort to provide disinformation and propaganda about Bonanzle for the purpose of driving more traffic to the site. The same familiar usernames pop up all over the web.
I think that when the early rush of Bonanzle members buying and selling among themselves wears off, and is seen for what it really is, things will dies down there.
As for many of the other alternative sites, there are a few that are making steady and sure progress in all areas, with real sales, and listing numbers that are also correct.
I like Etsy, if only I had handmade items to sell, I would explore it.
I think all of these unfair attacks do illustrate Debbie’s point about Bonanzle and some of the more “enthusiastic” supporters. In my opinion, a professional seller will give all opinions of a site a fair evaulation which is what Debbie’s blog was, a fair evaluation.
Unprofessional sellers (of which Bonanzle seems to have more than its fair share of) will attack and harass anyone who has a different of opinion of their site, in an effort to beat down the person making the evaulation.
Bonanzle is a nice little social club but professional sellers should look elsewhere.
How anyone can justify the way Bonanzle market their business is well beyond my capabilities.
Lies, deception and false information appears to be the normal for this site and their BAC members. Not to mention the blatant cyber thuggery practiced against any person who even dares say BOO against them.
If ever there was a site i would NOT wish to sell my products on, or even be associated with it is Bonanzle.
@zannon I heard that Etsy also has a vintage area if that helps you at all in selling there. I have heard good things about Etsy too. Have never tried them.
As far as selling on Bonanzle. Its still growing, in the beginning on eBay it was the same, same on any sales site, most of the sales are to other sellers BUT I have personally seen sales myself that are coming in just to buy who found my items on google. I have a friend whom sells dog treats who has MUCH traffic that is not other sellers.
Its fair to say that in the start of any selling site you will get a lot of sellers selling to each other, especially since most sellers are online buyers as well. Because we are comfortable with the idea of making purchases online. I am a big online buyer, but also a seller. Does my selling on Bonanzle make my purchases any less worthy? If I stopped selling online tomorrow, I would still be a buyer, it is convenient.
I am sorry it did not work out for you. Not every site works for every person. Especially when sites are starting out. Bonanzle has grown at super speeds, but we have to also remember it is still just growing. Maybe amazingly BUT it is not a household name yet. I honestly believe in time it will be though.
Check out that Etsy vintage section. I have not looked into it yet, but I believe I heard about it on the Auction Wally show. If you have anything that fits, maybe that would work for you.
Best wishes
Kim
NoLuck
“a professional seller will give all opinions of a site a fair evaulation which is what Debbie’s blog was, a fair evaluation.”
A professional seller? and a fair evaluation?
It’s pretty obvious that you didn’t read the original blog Ms. Levitt wrote because it had nothing to do with any kind of site evaluation. It was about astroturfing and BAC.
Ms. Levitt is Not a Seller, not in the traditional sense. “I don’t really have stuff to sell. Just our services” and if she was doing a “fair” site evaluation her blog title would certainly not have been “Astroturfing:Fake Grassroots Campaigns”.
Go back a few posts and you’ll see quoted content from her blog where she actually admitted (just last month) to hiring and paying people to astroturf for her.
How quickly Ms. Levitt forgets that the thing she accused
BAC members of is something she had just admitted to doing.
When the fallout started, Ms. Levitt went to Bonanzle and basically told everyone over and over and over again that she would remove her blog IF they changed things on their site to HER satisfaction AND she made it quite apparent that she was expecting them to do it immediately. Note the refreshing the page comment she made.
“WOULD SOMEONE PLEASE CHANGE THAT WORDING! I said I’d take down my ENTIRE post if someone did that (and let me know since I’m not refreshing the pages, looking for changes). I’d retract it all!”
Ms. Levitt, that God complex, are those for sale somewhere?
I feel sorry for Ms. Levitt. She really should focus on her own business and that of her customers.
Since Ms. Levitt has a history of this behavior, maybe she should just park her keyboard for a while and think about what her business objectives really should be.
Hi, NS. If you’re going to work to discredit me, don’t forget to work on all the people who have publicly come out and said the same or similar things, including Scott Pooler in this blog and its comments. And be proud! Put your real name.
Let me explain the idea of changing my post.
My post came out. I thought I was just pointing at some bizarre text on a website that made it look like potentially unethical things were going on. Not everybody took it the way I meant it, though some did.
1) I start talking to people in Bonanzle forums. They see what I saw. They understand how an outsider could get really turned off by that wording.
2) Some are calling for the marketplace to “look in the mirror” and “rethink” these things. People assure me that the Big Cheeses are very attentive, and would probably change wording like this so it doesn’t alienate outsiders.
3) Well, if they’re going to change the wording, then it makes no sense to point at them for the wording! So I suggest that if they are going to change it, I’d take down that part of my blog post. If they changed the wording, and I didn’t take down the post, then there would be an outcry of WHY am I accusing them of this when the wording’s not there.
So it only made sense to suggest that if the wording goes away, the blog post would change. I gain nothing by writing a blog post about something that’s not there anymore. I’m not into making fake controversies.
As a marketing person, I thought the wording should change. I stated that passionately on the forums. Would you like to publicly discredit EVERYBODY who says something passionately on the Bonanzle forums?
I think it’s beyond a shame that a company would leave wording on its site that could make people think something unethical is going on!
4) Based on the feedback I was getting from Bonanzle sellers, and including comments here from Bill, I figured Bonanzle was very likely to change that wording. So I made the first move, and changed my blog post. The blog post had plenty of good points, and stands quite well without any reference to Bonanzle.
5) I still have the right to post to my blog if I see marketing I think is really great or not that great. This marketing was not that great, and I’m allowed to stand up and say that.
I’ve received a lot of private emails and seen some blog comments. People are welcoming me to the club. Evidently, if you come out on the internet and say anything that makes it look like you don’t like Bonanzle, you can expect a lynch mob. You can expect to be personally smeared and discredited. You can expect to get all kinds of comments or posts from people who think they have to attack you.
I think that’s bad marketing. I think a reputation like that is bad. I think that’s going to hurt things. I think a climate like that will keep some people from the website. I think that this is another thing that Bonanzle should consider changing.
I was turned off by the site and the vocal sellers’ attitude before I went to the site. I am now on the site, and many people are very nice, but the vocal people are still turning me off. While I took my post down, I’m promising to use the site, try things, shop and buy, and write something more positive about it, people are still crapping on me. And this is supposed to show me what a fresh and friendly place this is?
I believe the Big Cheeses could have some control over this. They could go to the people who do this non-anonymously, and tell them they don’t want this sort of internet venom associated with their sellers and the Bonanzle name. Remember that Googling Bonanzle is going to bring up some of the venom that’s out there from sellers.
Look at this blog post. Someone here literally said that anybody who said they had a bad experience with Mark is a liar. That’s a little heavy-handed, and I think things like that will reflect potentially badly on the perception of that community. And this blog post was expertly designed to show up in search results.
That’s the story. I know trying to make me look personally bad seems like a good idea, but remember that no matter how bad you can make me look, this problem doesn’t go away. That means I’m not the problem. Things other people are doing are your problem. I’m just pointing at it.
This whole thing is TRULY amazing! Not only in the surge of attention that this has given Bonanzle but to Ms Levitt as well.
And what is equally amazing is the amount of time that has been spent by Ms Levitt defending her blog. Does she have the right to her opinion? YES. This IS America and we still have free speech. BUT when something is said or printed that defames the subject at hand, that is when Free Speech no longer applies. Unfortunatley her words are seen in the light by many.
Example:
When you say that you quote: “suggest that if they are going to change it, I’d take down that part of my blog post”:quote
That comes across a little like Blackmail. (JMO)
I DO commend Ms Levitt for changing her blog post. Well done.
I would suggest, however that EVERYONE needs to be alittle more careful in typing in the future.
Hey, renegade. I was worried about you with that tornado warning yesterday. Are you ok?
Blackmail? You realise you are accusing me of a crime in writing and in public. I’ve been told that’s libel. So when you say that people should be careful what they type, I say yes, and back at you.
I’m not sure adding “just my opinion” helps when you are accusing me of a crime.
It’s not blackmail. If the site doesn’t change, or I find something else they do that I think is bad or weird marketing, I will feel free to blog about it. It’s also not blackmail because I took my post down before they made a change, if they made a change.
And if you want me to stop getting attention and stop defending myself, well, you may want to stop writing things that make me feel like I should defend myself. I’m not likely to let a blackmail accusation go without a response.
You’re right that free speech ends at lies. I just blogged about that, and I feel very strongly about that. I wrote about that and then astroturfing. I’m strongly against any lies and manipulation.
I never defamed Bonanzle. I am allowed to have the opinion that something on their website looks like something is potentially unethical. The CEO said he understood how I took it that way. Other sellers said they saw how I took it that way. That’s not defamation. As I said before, if the wording on the site makes it sound like something unethical is going on, and is turning off outsiders, I think that wording should be changed. That’s not defamation. It’s a marketing statement that others are agreeing with.
No one has to work to make you look bad or discredit you Debbie…
You do just fine on your own, and the more you rail on this subject (or any other previous rant), the worse you look.
Continue posting your conspiracy plots and cult references on Twitter and elsewhere, make every comment that does not agree with you into a personal attack, a vengeful way to bring you down from your lofty heights… And no one will need spend an iota of time wasted on “making you look bad”.
I really don’t have the time or inclination to worry much anymore about what it is you think or do. I have a business to run and clients to serve.
Presumably you do as well?
If not, you may want to take a different tact with your ramblings because I really, honestly and truly hate to see what it is you have done to yourself here and elsewhere. Take a breath, sit back, step away… Get some perspective, enjoy life for a moment.
Then go spam someones long term client with spiteful BS saying that your direct competitor has stolen from them, tell someone else how good you are by pointing out how bad their current service provider is… Go ahead and use that kind of finger pointing marketing tactic again and again… that will make you feel all better inside.
Just keep your missives and lunacy away from my clients, they are fairly stable people and don’t deserve to have their days interrupted in such a rude fashion. Any further contact in this manner will be addressed with haste and with the full backing of the Cann Spam act.
Don’t act like you did not do this, or that it was just emailing and soliciting your services, your email was a direct attack on a company that was in an active and continual business relationship with the businesses you spammed. Your email did not promote your services as much as it defamed your competitors with unfounded and liableous remarks.
It is from this sort of history that you stand at the top of Mount ASWAS and claim marketing superiority.
This is where you stand to shout and say you have the right – no the imperative to seek out and find any comment in a company blog that may give the appearance of ooooh something you determined might be unethical.
Do you really think anyone who knows you does not understand that you really have no clue about what is unethical and what is not?
Would you like me to print your spam email for all to see your real opinion of ethics?
Get off the horse Debbie his back is weak from all the BS you carry with you.
As for your backwatering on the Bonanzle issue, you can claim all you want that everyone in the world agrees with you. After all you are the only one still talking about this since you changed your post to remove the parts that had everyone including myself mystified about your depth of misunderstanding.
It really is not your job to go about picking fights with companies that have not asked your opinion. You are not a “consumer advocate” you are a marketer, a person who “sells her services” to anyone who will listen.
If all they can hear is your negative jargon about this company or that company. Establishments who are doing something or everything all wrong, well then what will your audience think positive about you?
This is not High School, we are not in a he said she said click’ it’s not my friends vs your friends….
Grow up – please.
And really, just back away from this train wreck, you have done enough damage to yourself here.
I have to get back to work…
Scott, has anyone ever told you you’re cute when you’re threatened by me?
It’s amazing how many things you are comfortable concocting, creating, and manipulating. As I said to you here [http://aswas.typepad.com/hall_of_fame/2009/02/the-perfect-manipulation.html], you can keep pointing fingers at me hoping nobody will notice you. My post, your response to it, and the other comments tell the story quite well.
You have one thing you want to hold against me, and you’re going to use and over and over and over… just like a true friend would. Yes, only a true friend like my good friend, Scott Pooler, would be able to latch on to one thing I’ve done that was wrong, and keep rebroadcasting it in the hopes that it will have the maximum negative effect.
It would be very interesting if people did that to you. Maybe you are trying so hard to discredit me now because you are afraid that I will do that to you. Well, turnabout is fair play, but I have told you that I will never treat you as you have treated me.
I did one thing wrong, and I came out publicly to admit it and apologise. Name another company or CEO in our industry who has done that. Have the people who (currently or used to) sign your checks come out to apologise for the not-total-truths they have been telling their clients? Have the companies who spam my clients come out to admit it and apologise?
So you can keep singing the same song about the one time I emailed some people who were not my clients, and I’ll continue NOT embarking on any campaign to discredit you. Sometimes, bad marketing doesn’t need me to point at it, even though those do make for interesting blog posts… that are typically followed by the Scott Pooler Google keyword buzzword bingo everybodys-names-in-tags “response” post.
Scott, it’s not your job to pick fights with me. I never asked your opinion. As per your advice above.
You can keep pointing fingers at me, and using all the buzz words to try to change people’s opinions. “High school,” “grow up” (good one… haven’t heard that since high school), “lofty heights,” and all the usual “I’m too busy for this, but here I am writing more about this.” The people who know me know what you’re up to. The people who believe you will believe you until they get wise to who you are and what motivates all of your posts, comments, and everything you do.
Only a true friend who thinks I’ve done enough damage to myself would take the time out of his day to publish a blog post designed to pull out everything’s he got to make me look as bad as possible. I’m so glad I have a friend like you, Scott. Thanks for everything you’ve done for me.
Ms Levitt,
Wow! what a quick response! And I thank you for your concern about the Tornado warning I was under.
Now I apologize if you misinterpreted my words…I CLEARLY stated that
QUOTE: BUT when something is said or printed that defames the subject at hand, that is when Free Speech no longer applies. Unfortunately her words are seen in the light by many :QUOTE
I NEVER said you set out to do this…I merely stated that
QUOTE: Unfortunately her words are seen in the light by many :QUOTE
And I also not SAY you WERE Blackmailing I stated
QUOTE: That comes across a little like Blackmail. (JMO) :QUOTE
Please, take the time to FULLY read comments. I have done the same thing, as we all have, read something quickly and misread the ACTUAL point one was trying to convey.
Thank you again, for your concern and your timely response.
I wrote an article about the controversy, I stated my opinion on that controversy, I did not attack you in any way shape or form other than to disagree with your conclusions. anyone can read my article above and see that I never defamed you, or slandered you or committed any other act of conspiracy.
And really – do friends spam other friends clients trying to steal business as you have? It may be a point in the past Debbie, but our real friendship – if we ever had one, ended the day I read your slanderous and crass email to my clients.
You asked me for forgiveness privately when I confronted you on the ill advised and illegal manner in which you chose to once again market yourself with negative and ridiculous claims. You called the truce, I stood by it until you went right back to your silly and unfounded ramblings less than a week later. Your truce meant little to you obviously even though by calling it you may have avoided legal repercussions.
This is still an option on the table. I really do not want to pursue it, but do you think this current crusade you are on will inspire me to continue to be as tolerant?
Publicly I said you were a personal friend, it was a nice thing for me to do. Now I admit it was a great mistake. Why would I want to associate myself with your off putting and completely out there way of dealing with clients or more importantly other peoples clients. It may have been one of my greatest regrets to have ever uttered that you were my friend. Now that it is over and there are no doubts about where we stand, are we really going to continue with this?
Are you going to come back time and again and make point after point that makes little or no sense? Will you continue… or will you
Just give it a rest.
Scott, who is on a crusade? You are posting this publicly in my blog yesterday and in your blog today when really, this sounds like something we should be taking up privately.
You don’t get to call an email that contained zero false information “slanderous.” The email may have been unwelcomed, but it’s not slanderous. Everything in that email was true. Everything I blogged about that topic is and was true.
So let me get this right. If I continue defending myself, you will advise your clients to spend their time and money launching lawsuits against me because they got one email from me 5 weeks ago that I later apologised for sending… an email containing no false information and therefore no slander.
You want me to be quiet and “stop my crusade” or you’re going to be “less tolerant” of something that might have “legal repercussions” for me?
OK, I’ll bite. Please tell me what crusade this is so I know what to stop doing. Please tell me exactly which things you want me to stop defending or talking about so I know exactly what you are expecting to trade for you keeping me safe from these legal repercussions.
Scott, YOU seem to be on a crusade. You are taking time out of your day to write these long posts first to discredit me, then to discredit me, and now to threaten me.
I will continue to defend myself as long as you are launching threats, attacks, and defamation.
Outside of that, I was going to suggest you email me privately, but I think there’s going to be a great irony in how you look in your post and then in all of your comments. I think this is perfection, and will print off a copy.
Deb,
At last count you have posted 28 of the 69 comments on this article. I believe another 8 or 10 comments were either directed by, or posted by you under another name.
In contrast,
I posted one comment on your blog, directly replying to an article you wrote about me.
Who is on the crusade I ask?
Whoa, you are accusing me of astroturfing? I don’t do that. Accusing me of that is LOW.
Are you saying that you can’t imagine that regular people actually agree with me or disagree with you, so I must have written those or had people astroturf for me?
I can’t believe I am left on the defensive to answer to your lies and false claims. You think I like standing in front of this target with all these arrows flying? If I thought shill blog posting were good, why would I EVER post under my own name and take all this heat?
I think you’re just going to have to believe that there actually ARE people who have not been scared off, and think for themselves.
Now, check your IP logs, and please say something nice to the readers like, “Scott Pooler has no evidence that Debbie is writing posts under other names. Scott made that up to distract this conversation away from anything that may make him look truly bizarre.”
So you’re saying that if I keep responding to your ever-new threats, accusations, and discrediting, you will direct your clients to whip up legal trouble for me?
I just want to make sure that’s what you’re saying. I want to be REALLY clear on what the “offer on the table” is, as you keep saying.
I think you should be really careful with your defamation, accusations, characterisations, threats, and anything that could have repercussions for you. I’m sitting here saying little other than defending myself from the crap you keep flinging.
So what am I supposed to stop saying and doing?
Man, that poor poor high horse….
Give him some oats will you….
Last count – 29 Comments out of 70 here…. keeping the drama alive…
Whats next?
What’s next is you answering my question directly, Scott!
You launched some pretty dramatic threats and accusations.
You threatened that if I don’t stop my “crusade” you will advise people to launch legal matters against me. That’s poor high horse.
If you want me to stop commenting, you can stop accusing, defaming, and threatening. It’s REALLY that easy.
I’d also like you to apologise for things you’re accusing me of that you can’t prove or know aren’t true. That’d be lovely!
thanks.
….or I could post the letter you spammed around the planet….
How would that be?
Actually that would be in poor taste, my clients have no need to see it again…
Hmmm, how about the “private email(s) you have sent me full of vulgar and foul language?
No, that would be simply out of the question, I have a G rating here.
Me apologize, seriously?
Just a note – I will be away from the desk for several hours and unable to respond to each and every one of these oh so interesting comments from my old friend.
I have to attend to something that makes me money, something positive….
It is just how I roll.
Have a great day!
Wow, a new low for you. One we only previously saw from the Prez of the IMA, who I remember you not really supporting in his low efforts.
Now you’re threatening to take private emails I’ve sent you and make those public. And oh no, Debbie said a curse word, everybody. This is really some low, bottom of barrel scraping, and why? WHY are you doing this or what you expect from me. Threats are usually “do this or I’ll do this.”
So far, we have:
1) You will tell your clients to launch legal matters against me.
2) You will publish private emails I sent you.
3) I am supposed to stop a crusade, but you won’t tell me what this crusade is other than it appears to be me defending myself to each shiny, new accusation or threat you keep posting here.
4) There is an “offer on the table.”
My question is a simple one. You are clearly looking to trade with me. You want to trade my silence and me stopping my “crusade” for you NOT telling your clients to launch legal matters against me and for NOT publishing private emails I have sent to you and other people.
All I am asking is for you to be clear on exactly what you want me to stop doing or saying in order to get this trade.
If you want me to stop saying or doing something else, you’re going to need to be more specific because I don’t understand what I need to do to for the “offer on the table.”
The only thing I’m doing is defending myself against your threats and accusations. If you want me to stop doing that, then you’ll need to stop making them.
It’s really that simple. Want me to stop posting here to defend myself? Stop making threats and accusations that I’m not going to just leave uncontested.
I THINK you are saying, “I’m going to keep punching you, but stop standing up. Just lay down, and let me get the knockout.” But I’m not quite sure. So just please clarify this. Once I know exactly what you want me to stop doing or saying, I’m sure we can bring this to a good, natural, harmonious close.
Thanks.
Scott, you earned my respect long ago and certainly prompts me to refer prospective customers to your business.
The last few days, prepared six dozen pots of coffee to learn, mull about and try to understand why “empowering” or “organically” creating an atmosphere that “naturally” infuses enthusiasm in people appears to trigger ethical standards? Imagine if most businesses were to operate this way? Sounds like a package of success to me.
Will have to ask myself that question the next time I become enthused about something. Is someone going to question my ethics or motives? No way, because that is me and I will defend my enthusiasm – my face, body language and what I say to others reflects it. Has our world come to this?
I am not a professional blogger, and my booth business is a hobby. I am not in BAC. No words can describe how absolutely ecstatic I am with Bonanzle. A site that has presented me with every imaginable tool to utilize my own creativity, borrow others’, challenges and allows me to “think outside the box” to build my hobby. Have not found this elsewhere!
The transparent organic energy there allows me to watch the grass grow in their logo!
Have watched the seeds germinate since August 20, 2008!
Just my two cents! Thanks again Scott…have a wonderful week!
Bonanzle. Is it a web of deception, lies and conspiracy or just a harmless cult?
Can “Professionals” who seem to get pretty steamed about a perceived negative observation really be considered “Professional”?
I am afraid this is just another case of people drinking the Kool Aid in the hopes of being in on the ground floor of the “next big thing”.
One thing that people see is how nervous and insecure Bonanzle members are when it comes to “their” site.
If Bonanzle is so great, why do people feel a need to ruthlessly attack and try to discredit someone who has a different point of view about Bonanzle? Does supporting Bonanzle even when you might wrong given you greater self confidence? Is this a self esteem issue? I do not understand the logic so I have to look to these other causes to understand where this end result comes into play. A confident person with a high self esteem would never feel threatened by a blog which in no way attacks “their” site. And Bonanzle members do seem to be very threatened. Could it be because the author has hit a sensitive nerve called “the truth” and now members must do everything they can to repair the damage?
Pretty sad testimony for Bonanzle and people will see this thread and draw the same conclusions.
Cleo asked:
“Will have to ask myself that question the next time I become enthused about something. Is someone going to question my ethics or motives? No way, because that is me and I will defend my enthusiasm – my face, body language and what I say to others reflects it. Has our world come to this?”
When Scott himself in these blog comments writes that he believes that comments that agree with me were either written by me under another name OR I paid/directed people to write them, then our world has come to this.
By not believing that people who think for themselves have come here to post without me sending them here (or being these other people), Scott proves the point and answers your question. Ethics and motives are being questioned everywhere and by everybody.
Which was the point of my astroturfing blog post.
Debbie Levitt
I have to admit that this saga has made for interesting reading, though I must say sadly depressing.
While I COMPLETELY support your right to express your feelings and opinions regarding any subject you wish in your blog, it is obvious by your posts that you have an agenda.
“There are things on the Bonanzle website that make it sound like some things that go on there are possibly not totally ethical. ”
OK, this is your opinion and you are completely within your right to express it. However, when you make statements such as “I suggested in the Bonanzle forums that if Mark wants to change how the website reads, I’m happy to take down my whole blog post and retract the whole thing” readers will develop their own perceptions of this act.
Basically, if I am understanding this correctly, if Bonanzle does what YOU want, then you will remove your already printed words. You, more so than many should surely understand that once words or images are published on the internet, they NEVER go away.
I am NOT accusing you of anything. I am simply pointing out what PERCEPTION can do.
Blogs and forums by design are intended to generate conversation and in some cases controversy. This event has certainly met the standards for the latter.
While I believe your initial efforts to point out what you feel is poor marketing should have been handled privately rather than in the forums or a blog post, that was your decision.
As you have chosen to affiliate yourself and your business only with eBay, it could be perceived that your position in this matter is self serving. Again, perception is everything.
Finally, ethics is like a glass house. It appears to me that you have a very short memory regarding ethical behavior, apologized for or not, and this matter has caused me to question the sincerity of your apology to me and my listeners.
As one professional to another, I implore you Debbie, to move on to issues that you have control over such as your business and your eBay clients. They deserve your undivided attention. This has gone on long enough!
I do know that if I could bundle all the man hours that everyone has expended in this controversy, I could take a week off of work.
In full disclosure, Scott Pooler is my friend and colleague. Debbie Levitt is an acquaintance and colleague by the fact that she is involved in ecommerce.
“obvious by your posts that you have an agenda. ”
Spoken like a true brainwashed cult member…..you waded your way through about 60 “Pro Bonanzle” posts that had “agenda” written all over them to single out this woman?
If you think about it she could be singing the praises of Bonanzle and getting the empty eyed masses coming to her so that she could be designing their Bonanzle Booths. But because she didn’t do that she must be on eBay’s payroll.
The only thing “obvious” about all of this is the con job being attemped by BZ and the BAC.
If PT Barnum, Jerry Springer and David Copperfield had sat down to design an online selling site the end result would be Bamboozle….pardon me, Bonanzle….but I do not think the similarity in names is any coincidence. More like an inside joke.
Hi, David. A bit of clean-up, then a question for you.
1) What’s so special about Bonanzle? I point out bad and bizarre marketing and behaviour in my blog all the time. That’s what the blog is about. Yet, only now are you telling me that pointing out wording on a website that looks bad is a “private” matter.
So what’s so special about Bonanzle that me quoting their own proud and approved website text should not have copied and pasted in public?
2) I only work only with eBay? Are you serious? I thought you knew me better after all this time! I started my company before eBay exists. There are plenty of things we do for online sellers, eBay sellers or not, as well as online businesses who don’t sell at all. So don’t play the “you’re connected to eBay” card. They don’t control me. They don’t own me. They don’t send me to point at weird wording on a website.
3) What is the purpose in bringing up the one time I did something wrong and then apologised for it? Are you hoping to shame and humiliate me into stopping posting here? Why aren’t you calling for more ethics from other companies when you KNOW what other companies are doing?
Now here’s my question for you, and I’m hoping you can be the voice of reason.
Read Scott’s comments here. He has told me that if I don’t stop my “crusade,” he might tell his clients to take legal action against me, and he might publicly publish emails I sent to him privately that I trusted would remain private.
Questions!
1) Do you have any idea what crusade he’s talking about? He says he has an “offer on the table” for me to basically shut up or he’ll do all these things. Do you know what he wants me to shut up about? Is it what I thought it was, where he just wants to keep threatening me and accusing me here, but doesn’t want me to comment? Or is it something else?
2) Do you find that ethical? Talk about perception, if you didn’t like something I wrote that sounded like I was trying to force Bonanzle to change their wording (which I wasn’t), how do you feel about what Scott has put into comments here?
Did you see how he kept ramping it up with more and new things? He started with trying to discredit me, and when that didn’t shut me up, he moved to suggesting that he will tell his clients to take legal action against me. Then it was accusing me of slander, which is illegal, so you’re accusing me of illegal activity. And then it was that he was going to publicly post my private emails. Did you find that to be ethical?
I know it feels better to keep pointing at me, and I know the best you guys can do is that I sent an email some people didn’t like 5 weeks ago. It wasn’t slander. I apologised for sending it. It’s been a dead issue since. And that seems to be the best dirt you have on me.
I know that David’s post was a good move towards distracting people from what Scott was saying and my questions about it. But I’d like to put the spotlight on Scott. This is his blog. He likes the activity and attention. Now I have two questions I want answered.
I want to know if David thinks Scott’s statements and threats here to and at me are appropriate and ethical.
And I want to know what Scott wants me to stop doing in trade for him keeping me out of legal trouble and keeping my private emails private. If I have to buy those by doing something, I want Scott to be really clear on what he wants me to do.
Thanks!
Just an observation:
I cannot find where Scott says that there is an “offer on the table.” On his comment at 9:42 earlier today, he did say there is an “option on the table,” and of course that means something totally different.
Nice blog – keep up the good work!
Hi, anonymous. He did say “option on the table” in the comment you referenced. The quote is:
“This is still an option on the table. I really do not want to pursue it, but do you think this current crusade you are on will inspire me to continue to be as tolerant?”
“Tolerant” refers to him NOT yet advising his clients to take legal action against me. So to me, the operative word isn’t “offer” or “option”… it’s that I am being offered some sort of deal where I’m supposed to do something or else he may not be as “tolerant.” There’s some sort of deal or trade being offered here… so I was saying offer, when you are right, the exact quote was “option.”
Evidently there is something Scott needs me to do, and if I don’t do it, he will advise his clients to pursue legal action against me, and he will publicly post my private emails without my permission.
I seem to have an option somewhere in there. Just trying to figure out what it is so that I know what I’m trading for the “option” for him to not tell him clients to send their lawyers after me.
Debbie… are you done acting like the victim of all time history? Get on with something else. You made mistakes by assuming and not doing your homework. Rather than accepting that, you have gone on a mission of defending your poor victimized self. If you had not written what you did or in the manner you did none of this be even here. Step back and re-evaluate. Attacking back and antagonizing will get you no where in the long run. Stop with the faux compliments and wishes of good things – like you really care. It only comes across as phony
Debbie,
I want to personally thank you for keeping an eye on my blog while I have been out. It’s good to know that you have nothing better to do than personally answer each and every comment made here. Now I can go out and sign up new and exciting clients without worry that you will keep the conversation going for me.
What a sport….
As for this mythical “offer on the table”…
Hmmm, I suppose we may have finally determined the problem here. Either you can not read, or you need an interpreter.
Maybe you should ask for some professional help when it comes to the determining difference between the words “option” and “offer”. I know they look a lot alike, heck my 6 year old daughter had the same problem with complex words like this… Her tutor helped immensely – want her number?
I never offered you anything, my days of negotiation with you ended long ago. You do not stand by anything you say, in my experience. You word is only as good as your apology, and we know what they amount to.
Nope, no offer on the table, just an option available to me, that’s all I said. It is not the only option available, and it really is not within your control what I do or don’t do at this point. Nothing you say can change anything, you have nothing to offer that would interest me.
If you had not sent the spam email, you would not be so defensive about it, if you did not send the personal email full of foul language – you would not be so up in arms. But the fact is that I said that I would not publish either. Not because I am worried about you, but more to protect my clients and readers from being exposed further to your silly rhetoric.
I simply asked you how you would feel if these ghastly documents went public – apparently you would not be happy.
This was a way to point out to you that you no longer have the ethical high ground from which to preach ethics or anything else to people who are not interested in your opinion.
In fact, you are the one who offers to take down posts in exchange for some sort of concession. You in fact have done this multiple times, regarding multiple posts… Why attribute your previous bad behavior to me? I think this is called transference, but I am not a psychiatrist, so I really am unsure… Any doctors in the house?
In fact, you are the one who will completely alter posts to make yourself look better to subsequent readers when you realize you have made a mistake. A practice frowned upon among professional bloggers and/or serious journalists.
Quick Tip: Either remove the post entirely or line out the portions you wish to change and post your retraction under the objectionable section. Never change the post entirely and leave up the same permalink. This is considered unethical and deceptive. But since you do it all the time, and since you hold yourself up as the all knowing determiner of what is right, I figured you would know the basics of journalism and blogging. Oh and ethics…
I did ask you to “give it a rest”, this was a request, not a threat. It was a request because this whole ordeal is oh so tiresome, and you have done enough damage to yourself here. I thought you may want to go tip someone else’s cow…
But hey, if you want to camp here and make this into a conspiracy theory post, all about Debbie Levitt and her perceived enemies, her demons and her phobias…
Go right ahead!
You seem to be having fun sharing these fantasies…
Fire away, I don’t close comments here on the TAJ like you do on your blog.
This is better than a soap opera. I can’t wait to tune in tomorrow.
I read the first As Was post, the one that got altered “Analyzing eBay Alternatives” and the alterations are an improvement over the original which was nasty.
Is it ethical to change a blog after it is written so you look better?
Henriettas Red Ink Diary post in response “What Goes around Comes Around” was rough but Debbie earned it. I liked the full disclosure, honest.
Round 1 Henrietta
Scott writes a proffessional and informative post just like he always does, doesn’t take sides, makes disclosure up front.
Debbie comments here, some things she says are not the way they were but we all make mistakes.
Debbie didn’t like getting back what she dished to Bonanzle and posted “Astroturfing and the Bonanzle Action Club”, (deleted) on As Was. That was a rant. Very professional image. Not.
Henrietta delivered good advice in “Don’t pet the Crocodile” and she writes very well. In scoring professionalism sorry Debbie Henietta takes Round 2.
Poor poor baby Debbie, Henrietta attacked her! She has been tweeting all over and 36 responses later on this blog alone is still rewriting history.
Henrietta seems to have moved on to more serious eCommerce issues.
This is good marketing?
Saints preserve us.
Hey Scott,
You must be feeling like you stuck a stick in a fire ant nest.
The victim wrote more on your blog than you did all year! Looks like she is doing some blog spamming of her own.
I am sure glad she isn’t doing my marketing, I don’t need that kind of notice.
Best
Ray
Debbie belongs in her own Hall of Bad Marketing Fame.
She is only a victim of herself. Debbie seems to want to prove Henrietta right, is she nuts?
Scott wrote a good post, he didn’t trash her.
Unbelievable!
Whatever you write Debbie twists and changes to suit her story.
I Googled her, I guess she does this quite often.
Sad.
Debbie Levitt said to Dave White
“Why aren’t you calling for more ethics from other companies when you KNOW what other companies are doing?”
I am not Dave White but I can answer that.
Because it is none of his business.
Nobody appointed him the ethics monitor.
He has more class than to behave that way.
He has a good professional image which he would like to keep.
His middle name is not Buttinski.
Sheesh
“If what the Bonanzle site says is true, then you get a trust icon for being a viral marketer on Bonanzle’s behalf. If what the site says is true, the icon that would represent trust actually has nothing to do with trust. That’s why I’m calling it the viral marketing boy scout badge.”
That is an outright lie and you know it Debbie Levit. Yes I am a BAC member and the icon says NOTHING about trust.
I wish the heck we could see Debbie’s original blog!
It is hard to understand her venomus reaction here, about a blog that she posted, and then deleted.
It’s better to keep ones mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt!
Wow, this looks like a difference of opinion with a side helping of misunderstanding that has gotten way out of control. I read both Henrietta’s and Debbie’s blogs regularly and appreciate both. I think that what Bonanzle is doing is great, however I agree with Debbie in that there are some issues. Some of the Bonanzle cheerleaders are a bit too defensive for my tastes. I once had the audacity to post an innocent question in a Bonanzle forum regarding the approach Bonanzle takes to listing formats and was flamed so badly that the moderator removed the topic – which in itself is a bit disturbing, since the moderator said she was taking it down so it wouldn’t reflect negatively on Bonanzle. That’s the kind of action that concerns me, since it’s a lot like eBay’s stifling of negative opinion. It’s great to try to spread the word about the site and encourage more users to visit, but being reactionary and flaming people who don’t agree wholeheartedly that the site is the best thing since sliced bread is not the way to do it.
I don’t think there’s some evil plot by either party, however, I do think some of the Bonanzle cheerleaders should tone it down a bit and stop having such knee-jerk reactions to any criticisms of the site. Personal attacks on any side are not the way to encourage good opinion of your venue. People need to chill out a little and not get their dander up when someone disagrees with them.
@Tula
Bonanzle doesn’t have moderators. Users vote on forum posts by tagging and if they are tagged venemus by enough people they are deleted. Nasty but not venemus they shift themselves down to what used to be called quarrels and now called drama.
Here is the help page
http://www.bonanzle.com/site_help/general/topic_tags?title=What+do+topic+tags+do%3F
Tula:
You stated:
QUOTE: I once had the audacity to post an innocent question in a Bonanzle forum regarding the approach Bonanzle takes to listing formats and was flamed so badly that the moderator removed the topic – which in itself is a bit disturbing, since the moderator said she was taking it down so it wouldn’t reflect negatively on Bonanzle.:QUOTE
What was the Name of that Forum??? Was it on Bonanzles Site? Hmmm…Curious.
@ Debbie levitt
“I asked you if you’re a member of the BAC, and if posting to my blog was an assignment from the BAC. I never got an answer to the second question.”
Thats like “when did you last beat your wife”
The issue was Debbie Levitt wrote a post in her marketing company blog critical of Bonanzle in which accusations were made. That blog post got edited to something else later.
Next she accused Bonanzle in her marketing company blog of “astroturfing” which she tells us means you pay people to do viral marketing.
She got comments back on her blog telling her how it worked., not astroturfing. Closed comments at 6 and later deleted the blog.
Henrietta wrote a blog.
Scott saw it. Scott writes 2079 words (some are quotes) or six pages in my word processor on a business topic. Classic style, view 1, view 2, his view, positive recommendations, peace, done. Good post.
Debbie Levitt writes comments
1. 843
2. 269
3. 260
4. 141
5. 233
6. 132
7. 143
8. 235
9. 14
10. 307
11. 268
12. 147
13. 169
14. 206
15. 243
16. 48
17. 19
18. 113
19. 444
20. 310
21. 92
22. 317
23. 791
24. 287
25. 475
26. 297
27. 271
28. 82
29. 379
30. 147
31. 651
32. 202
Total: 8526 words
24 pages in my word processor.
Yes I am a bean counter
Peace.
Done.
Tula,
QUOTE: I once had the audacity to post an innocent question in a Bonanzle forum regarding the approach Bonanzle takes to listing formats and was flamed so badly that the moderator removed the topic – which in itself is a bit disturbing, since the moderator said she was taking it down so it wouldn’t reflect negatively on Bonanzle.:QUOTE
I’m not sure if you are confusing forums, but Bonanzle has never had forum moderators. In fact it is up to the Bonanzle community to tag something as venomous or dramatic, never one individual.
There’s plenty of constructive disagreeing on our forums but if deemed dramatic (by the community) then it is just moved to the drama thread.
@ Renegade and Action Healthy Life
Unfortunately, the “community moderation” system does mean that the zealots and the radicalists have the sway over controlling what is said in the Bonanzle forums.
Moderates (as opposed to moderators) are far less likely to be tagging posts and getting them shifted to “dwama”. This then creates an imbalance of opinion and opens the door for system abuse through clique groups banding together to drown valid but opposing views.
I’ve witnessed the same effect in many real world situations – it can loosely be tagged as peer group pressuring – keep hammering your point of view until others capitulate or belt you on the nose. It’s also tagged in political circles as cyber-bullying, an activity that both the US and EU governments are now giving serious debating time and legislative effort towards combating.
In religious groups it’s referred to as cultism, and this may be the better comparison for the Bonanzle evangelising that is being conducted all over the blogging and forum spheres of ecommerce oriented websites.
If you’ve never moderated an online discussion board or forum (and I do mean moderated, not tagging of posts you disagree with) then you can have no idea how infuriating it is to discover completely off-topic mass spamming to promote a particular other site.
It’s always disheartening to have to issue posting bans or suspensions, but I suspect more and more site owners and their moderators are going to be doing just that in the coming months, if the Bonanzle missionaries don’t temper their enthusiasm – they’re becoming as infuriating as the Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses ringing your doorbell on a Sunday afternoon just as you sit down to tea.
Bonanzle is becoming seen as the Internet’s equivalent to the Church of the Latter Day Sellers, and I am sure that is not what Bill or Mark want.
Which brings us back to some of Scott’s original post – if Bonanzle’s promoters can’t keep it on-topic, then don’t post it. Let the rest of us get on with discussing the original topic.
Just as an example, take your Bonanzle hat off and try reading any AuctionBytes blog post from the last six months compared to the same period a year ago – between the whineBayers and the Bonanzleers, no-one else gets a chance to say anything, and the site is rapidly losing value as an ecommerce news agency. That result is beyond guerilla marketing, it is a new form of cyber-terrorism … and if it goes on much longer Bonanzle will never be able to shake the image of being a nest of keyboard Jihadists.
Think about your actions, and your words, before continuing in the same way as the last six months.
Gaz