Jump to content

Menu

Recommended Posts

The Product That Must Not Be Named. :lol:

 

:lol:

 

or Writing with Voldemort ??

 

this thread is very interesting. I totally missed the thread on this, but I am enjoying sitting on the sidelines here.

 

I have to say, - Just wow...someone thought his marketing strategy was sound? Or safe?? this is the hive, after all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 299
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Children learn what they live.

 

If they learn to live with spelling errers, they will be poor spelers.

 

If they learn to live with math errers, they will think 1/2 x 1/2 = 1

 

If they learn to live with science errers, they will think correlation equals causality.

 

If they learn to live with ungood writing mistakes might be maden irregardless of the modality formatting presented thusly.

 

 

 

P.S. I spelled some words wrong on purposefully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As someone who wants her kids to write better than she does (which is easy) and well (which is much harder) I imagined I would be researching every last program out there. I missed the fuss, but the very idea that someone doesn't want criticism turns me off to their program entirely, even if ultimately it would have been the best choice. There's no way to have an honest discussion about something when you cannot say anything negative.

 

Let's say hypothetically Maria of Math Mammoth decided that she didn't want criticisms of her product on this forum. (She wouldn't because from what I've heard she's awesome, but that's beside the point). When someone mentions that SM is prettier, that's technically criticizing MM, but there are families, lots of families, that need less visuals or their kids will never focus. How would they decide on MM if they didn't know it had this "weakness" KWIM?

 

So knowing all the reviews I see are going leave out anything that could be construed as negative, I can only assume I'm getting half the picture at most. I can't make a decision with half the information, so I have to take those programs entirely out of the running. There are enough other programs where I can read both sides, all sides really, that there is no need to bother with the ones that I can't.

 

It makes me a little sad, both that there are people like that, and that they are so naive (or arrogant, or short-sighted, or whatever) to not realize the disadvantage they're putting themselves in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Product That Must Not Be Named. :lol:

 

:lol:

 

Children learn what they live.

 

If they learn to live with spelling errers, they will be poor spelers.

 

If they learn to live with math errers, they will think 1/2 x 1/2 = 1

 

If they learn to live with science errers, they will think correlation equals causality.

 

If they learn to live with ungood writing mistakes might be maden irregardless of the modality formatting presented thusly.

 

 

 

P.S. I spelled some words wrong on purposefully.

 

Reading this made my brain hurt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could really understand had he been able to write. This would have stood well for his program/resource.

 

If his writing had not been such a failure, I do not think that any negative comments, like the ones that one posted out of dismay and bewilderment, would have been generated.

 

He had promised a kind of disertation to prove his program's worthiness, well this failed. He ended up embarassed.

 

Now he wants the bad things removed. You can search the forum, and the outcome of that event was there for everyone to read at anytime. His sales must have suffered.

 

He cut the cost to half off at some point. I assume before his attempt to promote his material.

 

There were few users at the time. Some had successfully used it with other programs. We all combine to some extent. Yet, he came out looking unqualified and whiny.

 

With all of that out of the way, the selection to remove is what has made me so aggravated. WE cannot name or provide any negative comments unless we do it in email. That just rubs me wrong.

 

I could see if we had acted like children, but the conversation on that post was educated. I suppose that is what made him appear so foolish too. We were not uneducated mothers, and most of were in the midst of evaluating writing programs with the minutest bit of detail too. We had experience with other resources as well as above average knowledge concerning writing. So .... for lack of better words .... what the heck did we do? Not a thing. We just didn't like the "program not to be named".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Children learn what they live.

 

If they learn to live with spelling errers, they will be poor spelers.

 

If they learn to live with math errers, they will think 1/2 x 1/2 = 1

 

If they learn to live with science errers, they will think correlation equals causality.

 

If they learn to live with ungood writing mistakes might be maden irregardless of the modality formatting presented thusly.

 

 

 

P.S. I spelled some words wrong on purposefully.

 

:lol::lol::lol:

 

Bwahahahahahaha!!! But I came in late and am Still So Confused :001_huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If, as I surmise from reading all this, a product has now been banned from being critiqued on the forums because of fear of litigation, then that makes me really annoyed. It seems to be a pretty small time curriculum, but just the precedent seems bad. If it stays at one minor product we all can't discuss, then, sure, I would rather the mods just sweep it away than PHP have to shell out money to defend themselves. On the other hand, if lots of products suddenly did this, this forum would become very difficult on which to have a useful discussion about curricula and products.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If, as I surmise from reading all this, a product has now been banned from being critiqued on the forums because of fear of litigation, then that makes me really annoyed. It seems to be a pretty small time curriculum, but just the precedent seems bad. If it stays at one minor product we all can't discuss, then, sure, I would rather the mods just sweep it away than PHP have to shell out money to defend themselves. On the other hand, if lots of products suddenly did this, this forum would become very difficult on which to have a useful discussion about curricula and products.

 

 

:iagree:Much better stated.

 

 

We need to be a bit noisy about this. I think. This is a primary reason many of us use this forum. The bad for one person may be a good for another. However, just because a presenter/author "shows himself in public" is not reason enough.

 

Hmmm ...

Edited by ChrissySC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If, as I surmise from reading all this, a product has now been banned from being critiqued on the forums because of fear of litigation, then that makes me really annoyed. It seems to be a pretty small time curriculum, but just the precedent seems bad. If it stays at one minor product we all can't discuss, then, sure, I would rather the mods just sweep it away than PHP have to shell out money to defend themselves. On the other hand, if lots of products suddenly did this, this forum would become very difficult on which to have a useful discussion about curricula and products.

 

It just seems absolutely crazy to me that someone would not want their curriculum discussed on these forums. Every homeschool item we use was discovered on this forum. I never purchase anything without reading tons of reviews on here. And a good portion of those reviews are critical. However, one person's critique (such as too religious, too reformed, too scripted, etc) may be a reason someone else would love the product. Reviews on here are huge advertising for companies. I can only see someone wanting to do this if there was nothing good being said about their program. And then, it might not be that beneficial too any of us anyways...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol::lol::lol:

Big mistake. H-U-G-E. ;)

 

I agree!! Now can someone tell me exactly what it is so I don't buy it on one of my August curriculum binges??? :D

 

But yes, the good stuff stands up to criticism and observation. That's why even though I'm an atheist, I respect the bible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just FYI, do a search for the poster of the no-named-program and the no-named-program.

 

Weird ...

 

I thought that was what someone earlier in the thread said they were doing???

 

 

I think we should all make it known that this type of action is not something we support. I just tossed that in there to toss it.

 

Can you tell that I am still irked! I've never known the forum to do something like this with any resource that we use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point is that when you search, you get the original threads. The threads with the promise of greatness and the answer to why it is so hard to find a wriitng program.

 

The thread where we discussed what the heck that big report was supposed to be can't be found either. I forget who started it, but "duped" was the right word that the OP used for that one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, how disappointing. Remind me never to bother with a product from that company.

 

But my interest was piqued by the possible lawsuit thing, and I googled a bit, just out of sheer curiosity. Apparently 'internet defamation' is quite the burgeoning field of law, although Mr. Author of the Product That Shall Not Be Named wouldn't seem to have much of the proverbial leg to stand on, at least not according to this:

 

http://www.internetdefamationlawblog.com/2009/08/consumer-reviews-a-form-of-permitted-defamation.html

 

and this:

 

http://www.internetdefamationlawblog.com/2010/09/an-internet-service-provider-is-generally-protected-from-liability-for-defamation-by-the-federal-.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, how disappointing. Remind me never to bother with a product from that company.

 

But my interest was piqued by the possible lawsuit thing, and I googled a bit, just out of sheer curiosity. Apparently 'internet defamation' is quite the burgeoning field of law, although Mr. Author of the Product That Shall Not Be Named wouldn't seem to have much of the proverbial leg to stand on, at least not according to this:

 

http://www.internetdefamationlawblog.com/2009/08/consumer-reviews-a-form-of-permitted-defamation.html

 

and this:

 

http://www.internetdefamationlawblog.com/2010/09/an-internet-service-provider-is-generally-protected-from-liability-for-defamation-by-the-federal-.html

 

 

It wasn't defamation by any means. It was shock, disappointment, and utter bewilderment. We critiqued his writing. We questioned his qualifications. He ran.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if the guy realizes he just made a serious marketing error? 33K homeschooling parents have just been told that the material can't stand up to criticism.

 

Exactly! I wouldn't even consider buying or even looking simply because whining about criticism and having all criticism removed from a HOMESCHOOLING chat board where we discuss curriculum in order to BUY is childish and spoiled...to say the least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That bad, eh?

 

 

Worse - really. :glare:

 

 

Edit: It really is a shame, because the program was worth the 40ish dollars. The method he used was a traditional method. It was commonly used to teach high school remedial writing if I remember correctly. The posts are gone, so I don't remember for sure. Maybe the OP of that post can chime in here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:iagree:Much better stated.

 

 

We need to be a bit noisy about this. I think. This is a primary reason many of us use this forum. The bad for one person may be a good for another. However, just because a presenter/author "shows himself in public" is not reason enough.

 

Hmmm ...

:iagree:

 

REALLY REALLY NOISY if this is some sort of new precedent...fear of litigation??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you PM army for the Forces for Good. I've crossed this one of the list forever. Too bad, because it did look like something I would at least look at. Now onto to Facebook where I can tell all my friends what a jerk the guy is.

 

Yeah, this plan o' his is going to work well. :glare:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you PM army for the Forces for Good. I've crossed this one of the list forever. Too bad, because it did look like something I would at least look at. Now onto to Facebook where I can tell all my friends what a jerk the guy is.

 

Yeah, this plan o' his is going to work well. :glare:

 

:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't defamation by any means. It was shock, disappointment, and utter bewilderment. We critiqued his writing. We questioned his qualifications. He ran.

 

Yes, that was precisely my point. The links I cited explain that: (1) defamation is only false statement of fact, not negative opinion or critical truth; and (2) even if someone is making up lies about a company (NOT WHAT WAS HAPPENING HERE) -- i.e., defamation -- the service provider still probably isn't liable.

 

I was just not up on the current state of the law on this myself and thought it was interesting. Considering that 75% of the 10% of the internet that is not pornography seems to be product reviews, it seemed unlikely that there was any kind of actual legal issue here, but OTOH, look at that whole Oprah/beef thing. In any event, sorry to confuse, or distract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:iagree:

 

REALLY REALLY NOISY if this is some sort of new precedent...fear of litigation??

 

 

I am more worried about our forum environment. If we are not allowed any dissenting opinions out of the possible hint of defamation, we are done. Opinions are NOT defamation. And, how does he justify what he did in public? He made himself look like a donkey behind, and we didn't even help.

 

As I've said, the program has merit, but I think he drove it into the ground. :glare:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...