If he wanted to be a contributing member, he would have been ok with Geoff's admonition and stuck around and not thrown a pissy fit and left when warned about schilling etc.

That's all my comment is based on. I don't skim Adult enough to that familiar with all his posts, just the current one referenced in this thread.

Wow. What an astounding lack of perspective this shows.

Could you perhaps afford us lowly members the opportunity to express our opinions in regard to something without being met with your repeated, blatantly condescending sarcasm? That'd be just great.

It's irrelevant, though. Geoff saw fit to reprimand the behavior. The guy proved us right by leaving as soon as he was no longer allowed to push his product. All settled.

"If he wanted to be a contributing member, he would have been ok with Geoff's admonition and stuck around and not thrown a pissy fit and left when warned about schilling etc.

That's all my comment is based on. I don't skim Adult enough to that familiar with all his posts, just the current one referenced in this thread."

Perhaps he feels piled upon after being bullied by a handful of haters and then admonished by the owner over a very few, very vocal, members? I don't think that's being prissy and I distinctly remember a similar dynamic taking place in RAME years ago where all the industry types were driven off by a limited number of asshats too. I emailed Howard too (as suggested by NCmojo) and suggested he go a little lighter on the outright promotion, offering a suggestion for a compromise (though I'm sure some with a chip on their shoulder will find that it isn't enough for them, right NBT?) that might work best.

I think the best compromise is that industry insiders are only allowed to post as normal members and not bring up their company in the forum other than in response to questions by members.

As for promotion, perhaps in turn for this the insiders can work with Geoff and other people on the staff to get content on the front page (not sure if their is an adult front page--never looked for one) in the forms of columns, interviews etc. about upcoming pieces.

That would keep the schilling out of the forum, and provide the non-forum parts of the site with some much needed newsworthy content.


And for being a reviewer here, I'd think you'd know how to use the quote function rather than just pasting and " " text.

So, now there's something wrong with him?

Other than being a Red Sox...

I think the best compromise would be for those who have a problem with a G! approved company person is to utilize their Ignore List.

I'm wondering, is it just a smut thing? Or would everyone have a problem with a WB rep coming here (with a G! approved avie and title) starting threads like Blade Runner super-duper box set to be released 3/25/2034!!?

Oh, and I have to agree with your quote comment.

That would bug me even more. I rarely venture into adult talk, so I'm posting more to avoid having reps from other companies spamming the forums I do read.

Keep that shit in the ads and in the front page content. Ignore user isn't a full solution as you still see the threads they start in the forum listing, people quote their schilling posts in threads they didn't start etc. It's a useful but flawed feature.

Again, I think the reps should only be able to answer questions about their company/product, and not start threads or make posts about them on their own. They should work with Geoff on interviews, news pieces etc. if they want to get their word out and he wants to put it on the site.

Anyway, just my opinion on the matter. It's of course Geoff's decision to make, and it's a pretty minor issue currently as their aren't any other reps that I'm aware of that were starting posts like Howard's to just advertise their product. I just don't want to see a slippery slope where we start seeing a lot of those kinds of posts.

"I think the best compromise is that industry insiders are only allowed to post as normal members and not bring up their company in the forum other than in response to questions by members."

Yeah, that's a compromise, let one side have everything they want. On the other hand, I could make that work REALLY, REALLY well in such a way that it would pissing the living crap out of a few of you. (especially since I'm a member)

As far as the quote function in concerned, it used to be as easy as pressing a button. Then, it became a chore and all the "help" I received didn't make it any easier so I gave up on it. Sorry for the inconvenience but I wasn't picked to head up the porn reviewing team on either my good looks OR my internet skills (thankfully enough).

Oh, and my assessment of Howard's leaving appears to have been pretty accurate (per his last post). By your own admission Josh, you haven't seen everything he's written, and not all of it was spam as you've been led to believe. Well, this conversation has played itself out pretty quickly. I'm off to convince Howard to continue posting so y'all go have fun in your imagined victory dance.

Give me a break. They'd be getting content/headlines on the front page, rather than just posting stuff in the forums. Seems like more than a fair trade IMO.

Plus it keeps with the forum rules. If people can't promote their own sites etc. at all (even in such unassuming ways as links in signatures) why should people who work for companies be exempt from this?

And to refute a reply in advance, I don't have a website, or work for any kind of company remotely related to any of the forums on this site--so it's not personal.


It's still just that easy. Press the quote button below the post you want to quote, edit the text if you need to, and put your post below or above it.

Houstondon, are you dating this guy or something?

I don't go to the adult forum much, but just from reading this thread I've seen many different forum members all express reservations about the poster in question, and you keep shooting them down in the most sarcastic and condescending manner possible.

I read that thread last night and agree that he didn't handle himself very well despite all the hostility towards him. I'd even say at that point, that thread should be locked/deleted to make room for a fresh start. From what I remember, at least, there were some porn stars that posted here a bit which didn't really get any complaints.

No kidding, and these condescending posts aren't what I'd want coming from a representative of my site if I were Geoff.

Stuff like:

That's more or less a sneaky way of calling all the people complaining here asshats.

And his newest post quoted below from the thread where he is responding to Howard in adult is similarly condescending to the people that don't want to see shilling allowed, even by company reps.

That's pretty rude and a very off assessment of the people posting in this thread. This is the feedback forum, all we're doing is making suggestions/offering opinions, about what we'd personally like to see done with these type of company reps.

None of us want to run the place, and I think we are all fine with whatever Geoff decides. We're just putting forth our two cents.

And in this case Geoff agreed at least partially that some of Howard's posts are not the kind he wants from company reps on his site, and he warned Howard to tone those down.

Howard throws a pissy fit and decides to leave as he's clearly only here to promote his company, and Houstondon has to throw his own pissy fit bashing all the people who complained.

That's just not very classy, or professional for someone directly associated with DVD Talk.

But maybe I'm being foolhardy expecting class from a porn reviewer. *






To other reviewers, nothing wrong with porn reviewers, just felt a need to reflect some condescending vibes back his way.

"Press the quote button below the post you want to quote"

As explained, there is no button to push. Thanks for the help though.

"I've seen many different forum members all express reservations about the poster in question"

As also explained, a handful of people compalining does not constitute "many".

"...these condescending posts aren't what I'd want coming from a representative of my site if I were Geoff"

My opinions are my own and the ones on this and related threads are based at least in part on what the owner has previously written. As far as the tone of them not being to the liking of some of you, I suggest that they are reflective of the tone directed my way; nothing more and nothing less. If G! has an issue with them, I'm sure he'll let me know at his earliest convenience though so thanks for playing.

"This is the feedback forum, all we're doing is making suggestions/offering opinions, about what we'd personally like to see done with these type of company reps."

And as a long term member myself, all I'm doing is providing a counter point, one that offers the other side of the matter. The most active pusher of this agenda to ban commercial interests was the one who used terms of endearment such as "fraud" towards the owner so I get the impression that my meager responses were relatively tame by comparison.

"None of us want to run the place, and I think we are all fine with whatever Geoff decides"

And yet some of you got upset that your concerns weren't handled, weren't handled quickly enough, or weren't catered to in a manner to your liking by the owner. Is it that big a stretch to suggest some of you act like you want to run the place? Further, G! had already decided on the matter in the past and reigns Howard in when he goes too far. To hear some of you comment about it, the guy offered nothing but personal promotion postings and that simply wasn't the case. Just because I took the time to defend him as a valuable resource here is no call for snotty remarks either. (Besides, I doubt his wife would be to share him...thankfully enough...lol)

You're right though, this thread has outlived it's intended purpose and a new discussion where people can cool off might work better at discussing the policies involved without the personal commentary. Even someone from MD could probably figure that out (given time of course...back attacha buddy!)

Too bad I'm not from MD and only here for grad school.

touche' lol

Personal attacks reported...and since you felt it necessary to turn this into a juvenile, name-calling altercation, this is the last time I'll dignify anything you have to say with a response. Shame you can't face some simple objection without turning to such crude, ineffective tactics...but whatever.

"Personal attacks reported...and since you felt it necessary to turn this into a juvenile, name-calling altercation, this is the last time I'll dignify anything you have to say with a response. Shame you can't face some simple objection without turning to such crude, ineffective tactics...but whatever."

Report away. They weren't "personal attacks" but I'm glad you've finally decided to clam up since you really weren't offering anything to the discussion outside of parroting a few of the others.

To be up front about it, some of you certainly came across as having chips on your shoulders and I saw first hand how people were driven off RAME by similar tactics. Also, while the handful were fussing about all of this, I worked out a suitable compromise that seems to be acceptable alternative to the "all or nothing" melodrama we've been witness to here and several times in the past on the same subject (and none of you know what was said to Howard or others off the forum now or in the past; while I'm sure banning is seen as the only fair solution by some, at least short of publicly flogging him of course, I can pretty much assure you that offering him guidance was not what you wanted given the comments).

Oh yeah, you came late to the party at the end. If Josh and I can kid around a bit in a display of "it's all cool again", why can't you pick up on it? Again, I think I have a reasonable answer that should work for most people. The alternative could just as easily have been me asking studio reps open ended questions about their upcoming releases; the "solution" offered by Josh when he said "other than in response to questions by members".

Whatever. A person who wants to be on the board isn't going to be driven away by perceived personal attacks.

The guy probably has nothing to shill, so he hasn't been around. Stop posting like he has been crucified like Jesus.

Houston I think you're taking the criticism of the guy a little too personally because you're also in that business. I respect your opinion in reviews, but I think you're going way overboard attacking people here. Other people are just asking as to the clarification of rules, and why this poster was allowed to promote (maybe you just don't like the word shill?) his site more than any other normal member. I understand he's a representative of a company, but I don't feel he was even unfairly attacked. You may be a little biased because you know the man personally and maybe if you took a step back you could see where other people are coming from.

Personally, since you say there are only a few complainers, I also didn't think what he was doing was too cool, but I didn't say anything because I figured it wasn't worth it. I don't think posting the numbers of people complaining and comparing it to the numbers of members of DVDTalk in total was absolutely ridiculous. Not every one of those members even visits Adult, and I think that of the frequent posters there (I would say I'm average) they weren't too thrilled with his threads in general.

You mistake us bashing the guy for thinking we don't want insiders. I think we would all love to have inside access to the studios. But if the studio is just going to post company press lines then what's the point. We can go to their website and get that ourselves. I thought Calico was a decent representative we had over in the Videogame forum, and I don't think there was such a commotion over him posting there. I don't know what happened to him so maybe I'm wrong about that though. I just think we want to interact with that person as we would like any other member, and not feel like we're on the other side of a Carnival routine.

"The guy probably has nothing to shill, so he hasn't been around."

Ahhhhh, the innocence of youth. Vivid releases hundreds of titles a year so the likelihood that they have...nothing to promote...at any given time is pretty far fetched. But I'll stop posting "like he has been crucified" when some of the haters stop posting like it's the end of the world. Granted, I was unaware that defending another forum member was akin to committing a mortal sin but to hear a few of you talk about it, I'm practically Manson's cell mate.

I think he and others are just saying you should be able to defend Howard without resorting to attacking those posting here.

It's enough to just show that he didn't only post shill stuff etc. No need to bitch about the people complaining having a chip on their shoulder, or being asshats etc.

Its the feedback forum, people were just posting that they didn't like his shill posts like the current one in Adult and would prefer company reps not be able to clutter the forums with those kind of things.

It's just expressing an opinion, it doesn't require a chip on the shoulder. Why would anyone have a chip on their shoulder about rules on an internet forum? I can't speak for the others, but I really don't care. I put in my two cents and Geoff does as he sees fit. Nothing worth getting bent out of shape, or having a chip on one's shoulder.

"Other people are just asking as to the clarification of rules" & "You mistake us bashing the guy for thinking we don't want insiders."

Actually, you might want to go read what they posted since that was not the gist of what was requested and/or demanded.

"posting the numbers of people complaining and comparing it to the numbers of members of DVDTalk in total was absolutely ridiculous"

As stated, it was to put some perspective on the matter and there were no attacks. He can be a bit hard to take for those who don't know him but if you read his posts, he offers a lot more than is being said, without having pushed "his website" unlike you're suggesting. Since joining as a member last year, he has promoted a handful of titles and answered even more questions; G! giving him some latitude in doing so (the topic is nothing new, just as some of the supporters of the ban on company reps have been pretty nasty to some of the performers that came on here (isn't that right Mo?).

"I would say I'm average"

Awww, I've read a number of your posts and would disagree. I think you're above average most of the time (I'm not being facetious) but we'll just have to agree to disagree this time as gentlemen often do.

"Why would anyone have a chip on their shoulder about rules on an internet forum?"

I wonder that myself but there are also people that don't want adult content on the website so perhaps it goes hand in hand. Were all of this strictly about this particular forum thread and if there had been no history about the topic, I probably would have made a single posting stating my personal opinion and left it at that. Sadly, this has been an ongoing discussion reaching quite a ways back and therefore I take it a bit more seriously.

G! has weighed in on it in the past and the answers were not to the motivator's liking so we're back in the ring. I appreciate that you've felt strongly enough to come back again and again just as I appreciate that some of us may never agree on the specifics but taken as a whole, my conduct and defense of this particular member has been pretty civil. I suggested a press releases subsection for the company reps to post their more blatant promotions/press releases but given the specifics of what has been said by at least a couple of others, I know that won't be far enough. This is why it's called a compromise. I'm entitled to have an opinion and vigorously defend my point of view too, which I have chosen to do here. I apologize if I hurt anyone's feelings in the process but as I've said before, I reflect back the dripping sarcasm thrown my way just as easily as anyone else. I re-read the thread and some of the previous discussions on the topic to make sure I felt comfortable with my positions (I work nights so it was a good time to take a break and reflect); and while I might have said a few things differently, I stand by my basic stance. Take care buddy.

I've seen no posts here indicative of people not wanting adult content on the site.

They just said they don't want self promoting posts by company reps. I'd say the people obviously don't have a problem with adult content or they wouldn't be venturing into the adult forum to see Howard's posts and/or would start threads (like we've had in the past) rather than posting in this one.

As I said, I don't want to see any shilling posts by industry reps in any of the forums, be it adult talk, store talk, dvd talk, movie talk etc. The topic has no bearing on my view.

Who cares how many titles they produce? I know Vivid is a large company, and if the guy is producing 1,000,000 titles per year, and only schilling for 1 or 100 of them, its still schilling.

I agree.

I think there were a handful of posts that were over the line with shilling, and it seems like they were addressed. He is also asking for input and feedback for the studio, which i think brings value to his posting. I don't read much in the Adult forum, but if he keeps it in one thread, I guess people would know what to expect when they go in the thread, no?

-p

ps. Don, I think you are taking some of these posts too personally. Just my 2 cents from reading this discussion from the outside.