Bring back Lucretia Campaign

Dear HHO Admin

I think this is really OTT....

''Lucretia''....
''In your profession you should be only too aware that speculative claims such as those which I am clarifying here, can place you in a very uncomfortable position professionally, particularly bearing in mind what a small world we all operate in. I suggest that you take more care with what you post on the forum in future if you wish to remain part of this community.''

For an open forum post I feel it reads very threatening and intimidating. H&H is not anyone’s governing body. If this is the stance HHO Admin continues to take I will feel it necessary to cancel my H&H subscription.

This forum needs helpful, kind and informative people.
 
Well, I haven't read the article in question and so cannot comment on that specifically...but...knowledgeable as she clearly is I would have to say that some of her posts recently had started to become provocative to say the least and even antagonistic in some cases. Whilst I don't particularly condone that sort of behaviour I would say that it is no worse than many others before her have displayed...and they were at worst banned for a few weeks. I think a short ban is not unreasonable...but a permanent ban would be excessive...

...and besides, who will give us the low down on the circuit if she can't
crazy.gif
 
Seems ridiculous to ban her with no prior warning. Bring back Lucretia - many users on here enjoyed her posts and she will be missed.
 
I have pm'ed her before and she was incredibily helpful and thanks to her advice we are able to have a fantastic trainer here in SA. I feel you do need someone who speaks their mind and gives an honest opinion or how else will you ever know the truth?

My 2c worth
 
Rambo - Provocative is not against the terms and conditions, whereas advertising or promoting a product is.
I'm assuming your forum name does not indicated that you run a rug company
smile.gif
but if it did, I suspect a dim view would be taken if, upong listing your entire posting history, we discovered every single post was about your flaming rugs.
What galls me is not so much that Lu was banned, but that P2 were not. Which other company comes on here to promote and defend their product in great long press releases?
At the risk of being banned myself (PM me for an email addy LOL) you might think that frankly no publicity is bad publicity, I couldn't possibly comment.
The only company with greater coverage on here this week is Lush!
 
[ QUOTE ]
Rambo - .
What galls me is not so much that Lu was banned, but that P2 were not. Which other company comes on here to promote and defend their product in great long press releases?
At the risk of being banned myself (PM me for an email addy LOL) you might think that frankly no publicity is bad publicity, I couldn't possibly comment.


[/ QUOTE ]

Agree Point Two have blatantly ADVERTISED on this forum time and time again, even initiating threads to promote their products. Do they get banned / censored / warned - NO. I have sent a PM to H&H Admin asking why they are allowed and encouraged to break FORUM RULES ON ADVERTISING time and time again. Of course a reply from H&H admin has not been received. I rarely post but this I do feel strongly about. There cannot be one rule for this company and yet all the other forum members have to adhere to the rules otherwise they are banned or censored. So you may well never hear from me again
mad.gif
 
IMO while she may or may not have been provocative in previous P2 threads(cant remember and not going through them all to look!) she was not in the last thread,and Admin had NOT warned her in the past.
Unless someone runs over the line screaming,a warning or ban of a few days/weeks is normal.
I dont get the "it could be damaging to you professionaly" either,L is an adult who knows her industry and job. Up to her what risks she takes in what she says.

I think if anyone was going to be banned on that thread,it should have been Pointtwo,who came on with an extremly nasty and insulting post to K-whoever it was has done P2 no favors with that responce.
The questions being asked are good ones that NEED to be asked- their small size will fit boys as young as 9.......asking P2 to show that the jackets do what they are claimed to and hold no or minimal risk of making an injury worse(if the child is heavy enough to activate it) is essential since that information is not avalable in their ad's and their sales staff dont seem to know!
crazy.gif


If a new moterbike helmet came along that had been designed and tested for use horse riding,would you accept it was safe or want more testing done for that specific use?
 
I have to say I am intrigued.

So if you asked outright "Is a Point Two safe for a boy of nine?" in a thread of its own and one who should presumably be the authority on that subject, the proprietor of the company which sells that product, came on to answer the question posting under their company name would that be advertising?

If they had another posting name, say, fanglewurbler, would it be advertising? And if a user called fanglewurbler came on to every body protector thread and sounded off about the benefits of the Point Two would that be advertising and would people believe that they were in fact the proprietor of the company or some randomer?

And following all that, if someone posted a "What XC boots would you recommend?" post and the same people replied each time giving their preferences would that be advertising?
 
Oh I do love grey area's
tongue.gif

There is a thin line between advertising and product recomendation.
In SN there is currently a thread about hoovers(not the most rivating subject but a usefull example
tongue.gif
).
I have sugested the Henry,because I have used the product for a long time and am very impressed with it.
I dont think it is advertising because I have nothing to gain from the poster buying or not buying one- if I was connected to the company I would not have responded as it would in a roundabout way be advertising.

I dont think giving a yes/no answer to a direct question is,but your user name being the company name is and so is relentlesly posting about the wonders of a product.
It would be simple enough to set up a forum for discussion on their own site(would even do them some good in the horse public eyes,a discussion board to answer questions openly in public in black and white when not trying to make a sale is a good thing.Maybe they would even get some feedback on issues/good points the pro's using them have not come across
wink.gif
) and discussion about the product could move there instead of advertising by the back door on here.

I'm sure they do belive in the product,I happen to think the concept is brilliant but am not happy about the testing done and informatin about it out there.

H's Mum has a sucessfull business in the horse world(as do a fair few others),I have never seen her advertise her products,but she does answer questions about it when they are asked.

ETA- Maybe Admin can clear up once and for all what is,and what is not advertising
wink.gif
 
Yes, it would as has been commented upon before.
If I repeatedly recommend Blue Chip (and I do) but have many many other posts about other things, and can be proven to be nothing whatsoever to do with the company, but just a happy customer, and while my opinion holds no professional weight, as I am not an equine nutritionist, it is at least unbiased, as I do not stand to gain by the increased sales of the product.
If I represent a company and come onto a forum where advertising is clearly banned in the T&C - then I would say I might be allowed to answer a direct question (though my answer is not unbiased, is it?) but to repeatedly post long threads promoting my own product, would be advertising, and starting a thread about my own product would be blatant advertising.

In the XC boots example, it has been remarked before that you would be wise to look at the posting history of your advisers, and make a judgment as to whether their advice was unbiased.
 
I'm not discussing Lucretia again as I've said what I think on other threads. However I fail to see why Point 2 should be banned?

Firstly as far as I am aware and surely this is the point most people are missing Point 2 themselves had nothing to do with Lucretia being banned. They were just joining in a discussion on the product

They never once started a thread about their product they always joined in a discussion attempting to answer queries and claims. I know I am amongst several who were impressed with Point 2 for this. The only advertising I saw came from riders that are independent from the company praising it.

From what I saw they appeared pretty shocked that a representative had said the things that Lucretia said they did. What I read on that thread was Lee urging Lucretia to help him identify the culprit.

Lee did make, by his own admission, a childish an inappropriate comment to Kerilli. He apologised for this this and on that thread I believe Kerilli accepted this apology. Should he still be banned for this?

Lucretia had previously started threads about the Point2 IMO she also made claims regarding Faith Cook's treatment by the company which *could* be perceived as slander. Unfortunately we now live in a highly litigious world, HHO is responsible for what is posted on this forum. Even if Point2 have no intention of persuing any action against them HHO have to be seen to be behaving in a correct and lawful manner. It is very sad that Lucretia has been a victim of this but sadly this is the world now that we live in.

Lastly it is HHO's forum, we are allowed to post here but we do so under their defined rules. If the rules are unacceptable to you then go elsewhere [shrug]
 
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not discussing Lucretia again as I've said what I think on other threads. However I fail to see why Point 2 should be banned?

Firstly as far as I am aware and surely this is the point most people are missing Point 2 themselves had nothing to do with Lucretia being banned. They were just joining in a discussion on the product

They never once started a thread about their product they always joined in a discussion attempting to answer queries and claims. I know I am amongst several who were impressed with Point 2 for this. The only advertising I saw came from riders that are independent from the company praising it.

From what I saw they appeared pretty shocked that a representative had said the things that Lucretia said they did. What I read on that thread was Lee urging Lucretia to help him identify the culprit.

Lee did make, by his own admission, a childish an inappropriate comment to Kerilli. He apologised for this this and on that thread I believe Kerilli accepted this apology. Should he still be banned for this?

Lucretia had previously started threads about the Point2 IMO she also made claims regarding Faith Cook's treatment by the company which *could* be perceived as slander. Unfortunately we now live in a highly litigious world, HHO is responsible for what is posted on this forum. Even if Point2 have no intention of persuing any action against them HHO have to be seen to be behaving in a correct and lawful manner. It is very sad that Lucretia has been a victim of this but sadly this is the world now that we live in.

Lastly it is HHO's forum, we are allowed to post here but we do so under their defined rules. If the rules are unacceptable to you then go elsewhere [shrug]

[/ QUOTE ]

Totally agree with the above, so many HHO posters are totally missing the point. This forum does NOT belong to you, you are here by invitation only, H&H own it and I think they are very lenient at what is posted here .

I don't know Lucretia but on looking back through some of her posts she was very aggressive and downright bullying with some other members that didn't aree with everything she said, particularily the post re Michael Whittaker being banned where she became very rude.

On the threads saying'bring back Lucretia' etc of which there are a couple in the same vein....look how many people are bothered compared to the thousands of members on here...says it all really. Nobody has the right to be like that on an open forum it's opinions only... NOT my way or no way.
 
"On the threads saying'bring back Lucretia' etc of which there are a couple in the same vein....look how many people are bothered compared to the thousands of members on here...says it all really."

(If you could possibly imagine me doing a Paxman impersonation here, it would be good)

Mmm. Yes. By that token, it was never worth ending slavery, was it?
 
So many forum hosts believe internet postings give them a safety net to hide behind. Point 2 have gone far and wide BEYOND an ethical response to any questions raised by forum members. They have even mentioned sales, even of non equestrian products (their motorcycle jackets). The many questions raised by H&H forum members should and could have been answered in a PRESS STATEMENT in H&H - not on the forum. There is a legal difference between spouting the wonders of a product (like a vacuum cleaner) you have purchased and used and are happy with, to a company who produces a product to come on here and CONTINUOUSLY promote the benefits of said product.
 
[ QUOTE ]
"On the threads saying'bring back Lucretia' etc of which there are a couple in the same vein....look how many people are bothered compared to the thousands of members on here...says it all really."

(If you could possibly imagine me doing a Paxman impersonation here, it would be good)

Mmm. Yes. By that token, it was never worth ending slavery, was it?

[/ QUOTE ]
grin.gif
 
(QR)
I cant think of many how have behaved perfectly at all times.
When we feel passionate about something feelings run high,the wrong thing can be said(or the right thing the wrong way) but I dont think L has ever been plain nasty for no reason!
Also remember that once in type,our words lose a lot.
I know for a fact if transcrips(sp?) of conversations with my OH were posted that would look like we were screaming at each other when in real life,you can see the cheeky grins and hear the tone of voice which give the words a whole new spin.

Bottom line,L has been banned and the reasons are at best unclear.
Admin have let a hell of a lot worse slip by without a word(from many posters) so why ban L here and now for sod all?
It is against T&C's to attack other users,the point two rep DID but has not had a warning or a ban.
Either everyone follows the rules or the count for nothing.
 
Sorry cefyl, I have to step in. I have never seen Point 2 start up a thread to advertise their products. All I have seen is them reply to posts started about their product, for which I applaud them.

I do think a permanent ban for Lu is OTT, and would like to see her back.
 
[ QUOTE ]
So many forum hosts believe internet postings give them a safety net to hide behind. Point 2 have gone far and wide BEYOND an ethical response to any questions raised by forum members. They have even mentioned sales, even of non equestrian products (their motorcycle jackets). The many questions raised by H&H forum members should and could have been answered in a PRESS STATEMENT in H&H - not on the forum. There is a legal difference between spouting the wonders of a product (like a vacuum cleaner) you have purchased and used and are happy with, to a company who produces a product to come on here and CONTINUOUSLY promote the benefits of said product.

[/ QUOTE ]

You must have been reading different threads to me because I never saw them CONTINUOUSLY promote their products. They only ever stepped into discussions that were already occuring and attempt to answer queries.
Why should they produce a PRESS STATEMENT (I'm not really getting the caps here but hey ho) the questions and statements were being made here on the forum, why not answer them here?
It has been suggested that the doubts Lucretia and Kerilli had should have been made directly to the company but this was shouted down and said that in the public interest it should be done on a public forum....likewise I believe that the company have the right to respond directly on a public forum.

I will say it again. As far as I am aware the banning of Lucretia is nothing to do with the Point 2 company. It just happened because of posts made whilst discussing the product. It was a decision made by HHO who felt her behavour was not in accordance with their terms and conditions.

Admin I think a post just clariying the above point is in order, lots of people seem to be under the illusion that the Point 2 company somehow directly instigated the Lucretia ban.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Admin I think a post just clariying the above point is in order, lots of people seem to be under the illusion that the Point 2 company somehow directly instigated the Lucretia ban.

[/ QUOTE ]
I dont think they are and I dont think P2 have had a hand in the ban.
I DO think Admin are worried that P2 *may* get stroppy about the P2 threads on here.Wht they banned L is pretty much a mystery,MUCH worse has gone unchallenged by Admin when reported(about indivuals and companies) so I dont understand why they reached the decision they did.

ETA,just look back at the KP threads...well,not all of them no-one has time for that
tongue.gif

She is an indiviidual who is dragged over hot coals every other day and has her brand brought into question at about the same rate.
Some really nasty things come out in those threads,but no-one has been warned or banned for saying negative things about her or her trainer.
In the same way she has put herself out there,P2 have put a product out,they have to expect it to be talked about and that some of it wont be what they want to hear.
 
Which lots of people would that be, exactly?
I think we're all clear HHO banned Lucretia. Nobody thinks P2 banned her. We're just not clear who's on the dodgier ground.

If you ban advertising and promotion on a forum, then you cannot allow a company to have a branded presence on that forum, it's nuts.

Is it OK for Katie Price to have her company come on here and respond every time someone says they don't like her stuff? Just in passing mentioning how fab they actually are, where they'll be available, and what new lines they have in stock.

Given Nanny_Ogg's outrageous recommendation for a Henry, can we expect Hoover to pop up to counter her exaggerated claims for her little red friend?

If this is the case, well, hell, it might be worth your while *arranging* for someone to come on here and say 'Don't jolly well used Honest Tony's Turnout rugs, they're crap' so that you can come on here, all branded up, pointing out that they do have jolly nice fastenings, and if they do tear, you'll replace them, and coindidentally, you have a sale on, Saturday.

Madness.
 
I would like to address some of the points listed, but do not want to get into the two sided argument that seems to be developing hence totally losing sight of the purpose of this thread.

I think Rana posted that Lucretia should have been warned - she was warned by Admin perhaps with good intentions at the time for her own care BUT from everything I have read I can not see that she then did anything after that which would warrant a ban.

I think if Admin wanted to make a point there were others that could have been included in the ban Point Two included for his very unfair retort to Kerilli (I know he has since apologised) - a temporary ban for all involved would have been a much more fitting punishment rather than an outright ban for Lucretia alone. Admin comments on Lucretia in her position, but should your career, inside info or whatever be used in deciding whether a post breaks the rules or not. I do not know who Lucretia is but shouldn't the same guidelines be applied to Jo Bloggs, a show jumper, an Olympic Rider or a Gold medal winner in the interest of fairness.

Admin I suspect you will not allow Lucretia to come back as her advice has been very valuable to many of us. I certainly don't support threats of cancelling a subscription but I would ask that you re-consider all points and perhaps allow Lucretia back after a temporary ban with the advise that she considers carefully what she posts in relation to the Point 2 as it is obviously something she feels very passionately about.

KR

Nickirhia99
 
[ QUOTE ]
Given Nanny_Ogg's outrageous recommendation for a Henry, can we expect Hoover to pop up to counter her exaggerated claims for her little red friend?

[/ QUOTE ]
blush.gif
Oi
mad.gif
Wasn't just me
tongue.gif

Besides,Henry's people just got praise,but we might see a "Diane_Dyson" popping up to defend their product
grin.gif
tongue.gif
 
KatB where di you read that I said Point 2 had "started" a thread"? Nowhere because that is not what I said.

I said merely by replying in the length and depth they have to forum posters comments on the Point2 Products have they overstepped the boundary of the forum rules. The depth and bredth of their replies do cross the border into "advertising" simply by continuing to lays claims to the benefits of their products. Advertising no longer needs to be "paid" to clasify as such.

I probably would not have paid much attention to this but for the fact that yesterday a litigation lawer friend (who is herself an advanced event rider) asked what I was posting about and read the whole saga. Internet due to the global nature is not necessarily protected by UK only laws. The audience is as we know on this forum worldwide. Her statement was this is promotional advertising by Point 2.

If for example someone posted on here regarding a product produced by one of our own companies and I chose to respond as in depth as Point 2 has about manufacturing, who I sell to, who future sales are going to, what future products we are developing, and their propsed benefits - this PROMOTION. I.E. Advertising.

Caps are used to get a point across on a particular word/s of importance because as KatB has proved people just do not read another post thoroughly before retorting.

I do not comment very often. I enjoy following some threads, and posters like Lucretia I am sure enlighten and inform many of us. I have also seen many posters threads removed for "advertising" by merely mentioning even their stud. Forum members had links to their own studs / business / whatever removed as H&H deemed it "advertising".

I would suggest that every forum member who has a business interest join in on any topic they wish and discuss in great length their own product or business and promote it at great length to other forum members.

And yes POINT 2 did make this statement on a previous thread : - For the last four years the French police have been testing our motorcycle jackets. The French Government is now in the final stages of completing a contract for 16,000 air jackets. These jackets will be used by the civil servants who use motorbikes in France i.e. the French Police etc. Also :- I have lost count of how many doctors I have sold our jackets to - one that springs to mind, came in about three weeks ago. This again was one of the leading spinal surgeons in this country. He thought it was a good idea and invested in one for his daughter.

Now if this is not promotional advertising then what is?
 
[ QUOTE ]
Sorry cefyl, I have to step in. I have never seen Point 2 start up a thread to advertise their products. All I have seen is them reply to posts started about their product, for which I applaud them.

I do think a permanent ban for Lu is OTT, and would like to see her back.

[/ QUOTE ]

Totally agree
 
Langside - please read my post above - I have NEVER stated anywhere that Point 2 "started" a thread.

I do agree that Lu has been unfarily banned as I am sure I am about to be having questioned H&H admin on their grey area of advertsing definition.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Agree Point Two have blatantly ADVERTISED on this forum time and time again, even initiating threads to promote their products.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry, I believed "initiating threads" would point towards starting threads, being as according to the english language:

"Main Entry: initiate
Part of Speech: verb
Definition: start, introduce
Synonyms:
admit, begin, break the ice, come out with, come up with, commence, dream up, enter, get ball rolling, get feet wet, get under way, inaugurate, induct, install, instate, institute, intro, invest, kick off, launch, make up, open, originate, pioneer, set in motion, set up, take in, take up, trigger, usher in
Antonyms:
close, conclude, end, finish, terminate"

smirk.gif


I CANNOT see how replying to a thread which had already been started on the subject, and so contributing to the topic and discussion could be seen as advertising. If they had "initiated" the discussions or threads themselves, then yes, but all they were doing is joining in with the discussion that had been raised on their products.

Maybe that does make me "naive" on advertising, but I believe my view was shared by a majority of forum members involved in the discussion aswell as HHO who I am sure would have deleted the thread if they believed it was out of place in their terms and conditions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top