Registered: Dec 1999
Location:
Posts: 18

I'm afraid we can't trust a good Visor Central review of a product now if Visor Central is *selling* that same product.

Eraser

[This message has been edited by Eraser (edited 04-07-2000).]

Registered: Aug 1999
Location: Inverness, FL
Posts: 428

That's a real concern that we had, and I am glad you brought it up.

However, there is no gain of polishing a review. That would simply be stupid, it wouldn't help sell products, and it would damage our reputation. Here is why:

VisorCentral is a very open forum, and people will spread the words about products. In addition, each product we review has a "User Review" section where you can voice your concerns.

A bad product is a always gonna be a bad product - and those will get low review - we will see to it.

[This message has been edited by marcus (edited 04-07-2000).]

Registered: Dec 1999
Location: "Children are a gift from God, they are a reward"
Posts: 1049

Eraser,
why do you say that? If this was a fly-by-night operation that didn't already have a history behind it I might agree, but c'mon this is VisorCentral! You can go back right now and read the reviews (and the posts) pertaining to almost all of the products offered so far- They are not all glowing and rosy. James and everyone here have spent quite a bit of time and effort to build a community here- if you could trust them yesterday, why can't you trust them today? I sell things myself, often to long time clients. They have come to trust me and my judgement. They know that I am after a lifetime relationship, a "marriage", not a one time "quickie in an alley". Good sales is about a win-win solution, not just about moving product.
Sorry that my response is longer than your post, but until the VisorCentral staff screws you by giving a crappy product a great review and you buy it from them (and aren't able to return the product) and you get an experience of what you're talking about, please don't denigrate them and their integrity. Nobody slams PalmHQ and they do almost the same thing.
Theory is useless in this world, experience is everything.

Michael

Registered: Dec 1999
Location:
Posts: 18

quote:

---

Originally posted by BobbyMike:
Eraser,
if you could trust them yesterday, why can't you trust them today?

---

Registered: Feb 2000
Location:
Posts: 41

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Eraser:
[B]I'm afraid we can't trust a good Visor Central review of a product now if Visor Central is *selling* that same product.

Eraser: Please don't add me to "we". You can say that you won't be able to trust the reviews, but you cannot add the whole community to your statement. I've been a member since February and have come to trust the reveiws. Because Visor Central is now selling products they are reviewing makes no difference to me. Say what you want, but again, don't clump the rest of the community in with your opinion.

Sorry, I just get upset when I see a "we" and was not given a chance to voice. So now I have spoken!


------------------
Deb Auld

Registered: Dec 1999
Location: Connecticut USA
Posts: 2682

All of the reviews I've seen here tend to be backed up by actual user experiences (except, of course, those "sneak peaks" James is always teasing us with). I personally have never been an impulse buyer because someone said something was good. I try to get several opinions and certainly VisorCentral members are not bashful. Furthermore, have you ever read some of the reviews at other sites like Amazon, Buy.com, etc? Everything they sell is "the best", etc.

I visited VisorCentral for over a month before registering as a memeber and then took another month before deciding to buy a Visor. I compared notes, read the reviews, and listened to the others who already had their Visors.

Cases, styli, accessories, and, most importantly, the Visor itself, have been heavily discussed here at VC. And I imagine when those 3rd party Springboards start appearing we'll see even more heated debate.

I'm not going to like everything the next person does nor will they like my choices. But at least, in my experience anyway, we have a forum here to discuss pro's and con's and come to our own conclusions.

Oh, and one other thing... nobody ever said we HAVE to purchase from the VC store. I'll still shop around for the best price if I really want something. In my case, I'd love for VC to be to lowest cost, but if they're not... I'm sure Marcus and company are very well aware of this.

Caveat Emptor!


------------------
MarkEagle - Ice is nice!

Registered: Mar 2000
Location:
Posts: 6

I came here to post the very same same question. I am pleased with the response. I even like the store.
Thanks.

Registered: Dec 1999
Location:
Posts: 72

The first product i went to in the store was the pda panache stylus and i noticed they used an excert from the review. Well, i can tell you it was not biased, they chose a qoute which mentioned that the stylus is a tight fit and some other tidbit against it. This alone shows they want the buyer to decide whether he or she can live with it.
I can already tell i will buy from you (visor central) in the future.

Registered: Sep 1999
Location: Texan in Calgary for a while
Posts: 1361

As the person that does most of the reviews, I will say that the reviews are completely separate from the store. Marcus is handling the store, and my reviews cover the product itself. If I see something in a product that I don't like, I'm going to say it in the review. What I don't like you may not have a problem with at all.

When Marcus told me about the store, one of my concerns was that people would question the integrity of the reviews here. That's why I like the fact that when you read a review, you can not only see an overall rating but also the Pros/cons of each item so you can get the full picture.

In terms of the store itself, I try to distance myself from any involvement in it. I am too busy getting my hands on new stuff to review to mess with the store . And you can always read other user's comments at the end of each review to see if they jive with what I said.

I take great pride in the reviews that I write, and would never jeopardize the integrity of my reviews.

------------------
James Hromadka
VisorCentral.com
Personal Website: http://www.Hromadka.com

[This message has been edited by JHromadka (edited 04-07-2000).]

Registered: Jan 2000
Location:
Posts: 434

I was going to stay out of this; but, James, your reply did the opposite of what I'm guessing you intended. As long as it was just Marcus responding, I was content to let Eraser make the case. Your response forced me to review both this site, and your bio. Only by reading your bio do I have any assurance that Peracto doesn't have "food on the table" control over your reviews. Yes. This certainly supports your assertion that your reviews will not be biased by the VC store.

Sadly, your personal integrity and good intentions are not the real issue here. Even if they were, they are damaged by your failure to grasp something critical. When engaged in a journalistic endeavor (and your title is "Senior Editor"), you are subject to journalism's ethical standards.

VisorCentral can not dodge the conflit of interest issue when "the #1 independent resource for visor information" adds an eStore to the mix. It is reasonable to assume that a news and reviews site will adhere to journalistic standards of behavior. Selling what your report on is inherently unethical. End of story.

The issue is not that James or anyone else here at VC has lied or misrepresented a product, or that they are abusing their abilities to moderate the discussion boards - - they have never done so to my knowledge. Rather, the issue is that they have crossed an ethical line that shouldn't be crossed if you take your reporting responsibilities seriously. It is probably the case that the PHB at PeractoMedia who manages VC never even made the connection between this site and anything having to do with journalism. If true, this leaves James in a very uncomfortable position . . .

Registered: Dec 1999
Location: Connecticut USA
Posts: 2682

quote:

---

Originally posted by yucca:
Selling what your report on is inherently unethical. End of story.

---

Registered: Jan 2000
Location:
Posts: 434

Of course not! There is a vast difference between selling advertising space, and actually selling the product. I'm surprised that you would even raise the issue.

FWIW, I'm not suggesting that the management of advertising is not without its ethical pitfalls; but there are well established practices that reduce the severity and frequency of ethically questionable scenarios.

<OL TYPE=1>
<LI> The news service does not write the ad.
<LI> The advertiser can not select the placement of the ad relative to any particular story.
<LI> There are organizational barriers between news and ad staff.
<LI> The ad is distinguishable from the news.
<LI> The profit from ad space is not tied to the success or failure of a product (a trade magazine example)
</OL>

BTW, this is by no means an exhaustive list.

Registered: Dec 1999
Location: Connecticut USA
Posts: 2682

Well... this is an issue where nobody is right or wrong. It all depends on your point of view.

I will say this... if I (and I'm speaking just for myself here) ever sense any impropriety on the part of the VC staff, I'll be the first one out the door. I do not believe this will ever happen, however. The entire staff has been nothing but professional in its dealings here.

As for the 5 points addressed above, in the context of this site, they are exactly what I see the staff is doing.


------------------
MarkEagle - Ice is nice!

Registered: Jan 2000
Location:
Posts: 434

Then why is Marcus still doing pieces about products? I don't see any institutional barriers between the news and reviews side of the operation and the commercial side. So far, all we have is a statement that James is too busy doing reviews to be involved in the store.

Again let me state that I see no reason to doubt the actions and good intentions of James and Marcus, but organizationally this is a mess that does not inspire confidence.

[This message has been edited by yucca (edited 04-09-2000).]

Registered: Dec 1999
Location: Connecticut USA
Posts: 2682

quote:

---

Originally posted by yucca:
Then why is Marcus still doing pieces about products?

---

Registered: Jan 2000
Location:
Posts: 434

You were the one making the claim: "As for the 5 points addressed above, in the context of this site, they are exactly what I see the staff is doing." I pointed out that this a patently incorrect. The thread you refer to is exactly what I was referring to. This shows that the operations of the store are not compartmentalized - separate from the news portion of the site. I was hoping that Marcus had done previous reviews, and this was just the last news assignment that he had to clear off his desk. If this is his first review, then the situation is far worse than I imagined.

Re: Amazon. Now you are just being silly. Amazon has never claimed to be anything more than a store. VC proudly proclaims themselves to be "the #1 independent resource for visor information" - and the leading three sections on the site's subject bar are news, articles and reviews. This is the sort of billing made by the likes of Byte, ZD-Net, C-Net, etc. James is the Senior Editor, a news media title. The standards are entirely different for the news media than they are for Amazon.

Now. If your point is that VC has always been a store; and, if true, then you are entirely correct about all of this. Is this what you've been trying to say all along?

Registered: Dec 1999
Location:
Posts: 103

Whoa! No one should take any review from any source, no matter how reliable, as the final word. Every review is based on the reviewer's own biases. You take the raw data from the review and compare that against what you were/are expecting from the product. And if you are serious, you read more that one review on the product.

Do you think I believe half the things the Ziff-Davis rags say? They have excellent labs, but again the reviews are biased by the reviewer. I take from the reviews the data and form my own conclusions.

While I enjoy reading the reviews here, I find the discussion board more valuable. At least in these boards you can view what others feel about a product (good and a lot of bad). Again, these have to be taken with a grain of salt.

All in all, take this web site for what it is: a great place to see new products and an even better place to talk about them.

------------------
Jay

Registered: Dec 1999
Location: "Children are a gift from God, they are a reward"
Posts: 1049

I'm not sure how having a store and having reviews on this site can be construed as unethical. Everything that they do here is aboveboard. You as the user/possible customer know that there is a connection between the two. They aren't hiding a connection. Do you know what stocks the owners/publishers of your favorite magazines own? How do you know that the reviews you read there are unbiased? Unless you spend all your time doing deep research on them, you can't know for sure. All you can do is watch and see if they are "soft" in their reviews and use multiple sources for your evaluation purposes. Journalism is not a clean industry. There's too much money in it. I think you do James and the rest a disservice by comparing them to the media in general. My opinion of this site still stands- until they prove my wrong by commiting an act that proves them to be unworthy of my trust.
Michael

Registered: Jan 2000
Location:
Posts: 434

Who said anything about taking any review as the final word on anything?

In this thread I have repeatedly stated that I am not referring to individual behavior or bias; but to structural deficiences that are inconsistent with those of a news organization. The original packaging of the site, and James' post on this matter lead me to believe that this is/was a goal for VC. If VC is really serious about being a news provider (and we have no confirmation that this is so), where am I wrong in pointing out a fundamental problem with the way they are implementing the store? I'm not going through all this trouble because I think that this site sucks.

I agree. This is still the best place to discuss all things Visor related.

Registered: Jan 2000
Location:
Posts: 434

BobbyMike - - I'm not going to rehash the stuff I've already been over, and I don't think this is the appropriate forum for a debate on the relative merits of the US news media.

re: bias - - All reporters are biased. Part of the editor's job is mitigating the effects of this bias in a story. This is a constant battle for the reporter, editor and the profession as a whole. In the case of VC, you don't fight bias by opening a store.

re: "I think you do James and the rest a disservice by comparing them to the media in general." The comparison is unavoidable. They are the media! VC is a publication of PeractoMedia. Don't believe me? The following is from the corporate web site (I've added the emphasis):

quote:

---

The PeractoMedia division is currently responsible for overseeing Peracto�s online publications. PeractoMedia maintains several informational websites that generate revenue through advertising. Currently, VisorCentral.com, EditingCentral.com, and TrinityCentral.com are all developed and maintained through the PeractoMedia division.

---

I presume that PeractoCommerce is responsible for the online store. It is a pity that they couldn't have kept the two completely separate from each other here at VC.