[NiceCans]

bLue_oNioN you are right, rskbug should not be 'guilty until proven innocent', nobody should.

If I appeared to give that opinion of him in my post well then of course I apologize. My intent was only to contribute information and point out that there was reason for questions to be raised. Perhaps I was not clear. No harm meant.

 

[Daroid]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blitzula This is about helping vendors-not members-first. I think many posters are being very naive about this issue.

Sure, he has a business to run here and has a lot of expenses maintaining it. But the protection for buyers is the result of buying from a certified vendor/seller. That is a help so you don't buy from more guys like Williamgoody. I don't think anyone in here wants headfi to look like the new ebay which it will if a mass seller ebayer finds this site, sees that there's little to no competition and people willing to do group buys, and free registration too.

EDIT: Thread moves really fast ...

 

[Tim D]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bLue_oNioN What I don't agree with is the actions of the many Head-Fi'ers who took it upon themselves to lynch this particular fellow. In the past, e-mails addresses and IPs were actually traced, investigative results were posted -- in this case, people had nothing concrete to go by, but decided to trash the thread regardless. It was needless hostility and completely contrary to the image I had formed of Head-Fi prior to this incident.

Let me know if there are any such attacks left visible to the public. There is always a very fine line between personal attacks and speculations of trust and I haven't seen anything too obvious yet.

As for the use of coupons, I'm no expert on MAP or reseller agreements, but I know for a fact that Dell uses coupons for advertising...they surely aren't doing it to bypass any of their own MSRP guidelines. And what I do know is that it is very easy to argue that publically announcing coupons through 'volunteers' is in fact advertisement and thus violation of MAP, and I know that some distributors are in fact very cautious when it comes to that type of thing. The whole 'it was a third party', I had no control over it thing just isn't going to work...they HAD to have gotten the coupon somewhere...and how?...Advertisement.

Now of course I really don't care if any distributor wants to publically violate their distributor agreements or not, but I just happened to nuke a few more free iPods or free PSP posts. These can be argued to be siblings in nature. Volunteered advertisement that spam the forum full of trash that we have to clean up on a daily basis. Volunteered advertisement may be free advertisement, but I really don't think head-fi would be any more 'free' if we just opened the flood gates for all the free spam to roll on in either. I never consider the spam I get in e-mails to be an act of freedom. This is not to say in the Shure E4c instance that I would equate it *exactly* like the free iPod/PSP spam, but that there are some underlying similarities in how it all works and what motivates it.

 

[ampgalore]

Since when has sharing a coupond code with the community turned into a crime?

Do a search on google, there are thousands of coupon sites on the web. Following the "mainstream" logic of this thread, each and everyone of those sites has the potential to be abused, ergo each and everyone of those sites should be shut down.

This has turned into a witch hunt.

 

[ampgalore]

One more thing, I visit www.fatwallet.com on a regularly basis for coupon deals. And because of those coupons, I have saved thousands of dollars if not more on purchases over the years.

I am sure the thousands of coupons listed and discussed on that site are "evil" as well.

 

[Tim D]

Having been a long-time user of fatwallet or other 'deal' sites, I'd say 10% are genuine deals, 90% are recycled advertisement that look like deals with the use of super secret (yet oddly publically announced) coupons.

I guess wheter you consider yourself 'saving' thousands of dollars compared to 'spending' thousands of dollars on those websites depends on wheter you see things as bull or bear

Another difference is you browse those websites for the sole purpose of looking at ads. Head-fi in all the time I've been around has always done a good job of at the very least 'sectioning' it.

 

[bLue_oNioN]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jude Possibly. I have too much going on right now to sit and prune that thread, but I may do that later.

Thank you very much =)

Quote:

Quote: Originally Posted by viator122 I think you're probably right, he's just a guy with a lack of experience here, poor English skills and a lot of enthusiasm for his discount. You're also right that he has no obligation to be diplomatic. However, when his lack of diplomacy means people here buying at what might not be the best price, you have to admit that Head-Fiers have the right to be protective of their own, you know? He doesn't have to be prudent or diplomatic, but at the same time I don't have to like it. I apologize, at a second glance I see that things which seem clear to me as I type them might not be so clear to others (maybe this was rskbug's problem, too). Those were not direct quotes, they were closer to my impressions of the tone of his posts, although I do believe he said something like, "I am confident you will not get a better price than $178." Quote: Originally Posted by NiceCans bLue_oNioN you are right, rskbug should not be 'guilty until proven innocent', nobody should. If I appeared to give that opinion of him in my post well then of course I apologize. My intent was only to contribute information and point out that there was reason for questions to be raised. Perhaps I was not clear. No harm meant.

No need to apologize whatsoever, I know both of you speak with good intentions and have Head-Fi's interests at heart =)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim D As for the use of coupons, I'm no expert on MAP or reseller agreements, but I know for a fact that Dell uses coupons for advertising...they surely aren't doing it to bypass any of their own MSRP guidelines. And what I do know is that it is very easy to argue that publically announcing coupons through 'volunteers' is in fact advertisement and thus violation of MAP, and I know that some distributors are in fact very cautious when it comes to that type of thing. The whole 'it was a third party', I had no control over it thing just isn't going to work...they HAD to have gotten the coupon somewhere...and how?...Advertisement.

Coupon codes from EarphoneSolutions are, as far as I know, not advertised. From my experience, this is how it works: The customer personally contacts ES over the phone or e-mail, and either asks for a lower price or price match. ES does their best to compromise and creates for the individual a new, unique coupon code with attributes as agreed upon, which you then use at checkout to tag your order. ES always asks specifically that you do not share the coupon code with others. Clearly, this is different from the Dell model, where coupon codes are released en masse to multiple forms of media for high visibility.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim D Now of course I really don't care if any distributor wants to publically violate their distributor agreements or not, but I just happened to nuke a few more free iPods or free PSP posts. These can be argued to be siblings in nature. Volunteered advertisement that spam the thread full of trash that we have to clean up on a daily basis. Volunteered advertisement may be free advertisement, but I really don't think head-fi would be any more 'free' if we just opened the flood gates for all the free spam to roll on in either. I never consider the spam I get in e-mails to be an act of freedom. This is not to say in the Shure E4c instance that I would equate it *exactly* like the free iPod/PSP spam, but that there are some underlying similarities in how it all works and what motivates it.

In the case of freeiPod/PSP posts, the beneficiary is the poster. The motivation is the possible gain of a free iPod or PSP.

In the case of the E4 thread in question, you would have to make the assumption that the OP was associated with EarphoneSolutions, and that he would somehow benefit from making such a post. As far as I know, ES does not provide referral bonuses for sharing coupon codes. Therefore, you would need to specifically assume that he either works for ES, or cares about someone who does. For reasons outlined here, here, and here, I refuse to make the afforementioned assumptions without evidence and draw any parallels between his well-intentioned post and freeiPod/PSP spam.

As a moderator, you may of course have the power to procure such evidence. If you have information in hand, I invite you to share your findings with us.

 

[Tim D]

Speaking for myself I haven't done any investigation so I don't want to make any assumptions. If I speculate anything please take it as an instance that 'could occur' instead of an instance that did occur in this situation. My last line was poorly worded, but I still think the use of coupons with wide audience is pretty much the same advertising mechanism that many other vendors like Dell use. My fault as its probably just the lingering annoyance of having to deal with another free iPod/PSP spam. Plus wheter a vendor is breaking MAP is really up to the manufacturer and vendors to decide, not my problem.

To me, the moment its a 'spread the word' coupon, it is advertisement, but that is just my silly thinking. That doesn't mean its all bad though, there are certainly some Koss coupon codes that roll around sometimes that are nice to know about, but those occur differently from typical 'group buys' as well and come direct from the manufacturer itself so who knows.

Anyhow you do realize the 'typical' coupon scenario you described with individualized coupons still differed from the scenario in the Shure group buy. You are right that we don't see the incentive factor like what is so obvious in the free iPod/PSP deals. I also don't see the obvious incentive for some websites to post Dell coupon deals either, but I do have to wonder how they pay the bills (lets not kid ourselves not all of them are hosted for free by some freedom fighting web dude on his Linux/Apache webserver). I'd find it strange if sponsorship from many minor companies contribute to fund the daily Dell Deal. Although never explictly written, it is a pretty safe assumption that Dell sponsors, i.e. helps pay for those websites. From what I know so far of the upcoming guidelines it should help clear this issue significantly so we don't need to 'investigate' or try to peer into something hidden away from us. Again to be clear I am speculating on what *could* happen as sometimes I could guess at more hidden 'incentive' factors from some 'reviews' I've seen than I did from the Shure e4c group buy announcements. Unfortunately the fact that we don't have psychic super powers is a good reason for the guidelines.

 

[Blitzula]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jude No, this is about the fact that, as it stands now, anyone can start a Group Buy, and so free advertising to advertise a quick sale (and so quick revenue) in the Main Forums is just a profile registration away. If you can't see why that's a problem, then I won't bother arguing this with you.

I'm sympathetic to protecting buyers from dishonest group buys, and if your new policy only does that, I think protecting us was your main goal. If instead your new policy provides protection for your adverstisers from lower prices, then I think attracting sponsors and protecting their profits was the primary goal.

Given your statements and the pattern of the group buy threads development, I personally don't see how one can maintain this is about protecting the users more than the sponsors. But you can easily prove me wrong when the new policy doesn't limit the savings to the consumer in any way.

Side point-as I've repeatedly said, I do appreciate the effort you put into this site.

 

[jude]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blitzula I'm sympathetic to protecting buyers from dishonest group buys, and if your new policy only does that, I think protecting us was your main goal. If instead your new policy provides protection for your adverstisers from lower prices, then I think attracting sponsors and protecting their profits was the primary goal....

This isn't about protecting sponsors. This is about protecting the site. Making advertising free here for Members of the Trade would simply kill the site. And while I've never asserted that the latest group buy thread starter was affiliated with the Member of the Trade, certain things that I saw made it clear to me that guidelines had to be established. Quote:

Originally Posted by Blitzula ....Given your statements and the pattern of the group buy threads development, I personally don't see how one can maintain this is about protecting the users more than the sponsors. But you can easily prove me wrong when the new policy doesn't limit the savings to the consumer in any way....

My biggest responsibility to you or any member here is not to save you eight bucks on earphones. My biggest responsibility to the community, as I see it, is to keep the site going, and able to grow as needed, for the long-term (I think a lot further out than you guys might have to with regard to anything Head-Fi-related, because the commitment just keeps growing). One of the key goals of the policy is to prevent the undermining of the sponsorship and ad structure which is necessary for this site to continue (as opposed to protecting the sponsors themselves), and to do this while allowing group buys, and the savings that can result, to be offered to the community. Quote:

Originally Posted by Blitzula ....Side point-as I've repeatedly said, I do appreciate the effort you put into this site.

Thank you.

 

[vranswer]

I understand now. All is good. Thanks to all for informative responses. Jude, thanks for you vision and one killer website. Don't know what I'd do with my free time without it.

 

[elnero]

I don't see why people are ripping on Jude over this. Maybe I'm missing something but it appears to me that the guidelines Jude has alluded to will be an attempt to keep the playing field level for all whether they be sponsors or not.

As things stand now no commercial entity is allowed to advertise in threads unless they are paid for via Mall-Fi or the Sponsored Threads section or Sponsored Forums. Members of the industry and retail entities like Tyll, Sugarfried, Jan, Ray, Mikhail, etc. have all had to tread lightly when posting especially in regards to their products lest it be construed as promotion. This model, while maybe not perfect, does seem to weed out potential overly commercial postings. It wouldn't be fair to those who have tried to follow the rules for other commercial entities to come in under aliases to either promote their product or institute group buys. It stands to reason that guidelines be drawn up in attempt to safegaurd against this type of behavior.

With regards to group buys, I don't see what would be wrong with giving some sort of preferential treatment to the sponsors, afterall they're the ones supporting and keeping the community alive into the future. If we all abandoned them to the point where it didn't make sense for them to carry on sponsorship that would only hurt the community in the end.

Just my 2 cents worth, and remember, I'm Canadian so my 2 cents ain't worth all that much.

 

[kugino]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jude My biggest responsibility to you or any member here is not to save you eight bucks on earphones. My biggest responsibility to the community, as I see it, is to keep the site going, and able to grow as needed, for the long-term (I think a lot further out than you guys might have to with regard to anything Head-Fi-related, because the commitment just keeps growing). One of the key goals of the policy is to prevent the undermining of the sponsorship and ad structure which is necessary for this site to continue (as opposed to protecting the sponsors themselves), and to do this while allowing group buys, and the savings that can result, to be offered to the community.Thank you.

this sounds right. head-fi isn't simply a place to visit to buy stuff and get the best deals, but a community in which to learn, share, etc. i think everything will work out okay...

 

[kyrie]

Also, let's remember not to take head-fi for granted - without Jude to start, manage, and maintain this website, we wouldn't be posting or discussing right now, right here. We can all enjoy ourselves here, but it's a priviledge and not a right.

 

[BRBJackson]

I can't guess at what other forums the rest of you visit on a regular basis, but I've yet to frequent one with a more lenient/lax policy on ad-hoc vs. sponsor-organized group buys and product offerings in general. A number of my regular daily stops are completely transparent about their need for sponsorship, the consequences of losing same, and the measures they must take to keep that from happening. As a result, it's a fairly normal event on these sites to have entire threads pulled simply b/c they discussed a non-sponser's offering of a product line when the same was also carried by a supporting dealer (price be DAMNED). I think Jude is simply looking at the long view here, and unless someone is itching to stand up and commit to financing this site, I'm of a mind to see how he accomplishes the goals already set out in his posts.

Also, my comments in no way mean that I suspect rahul/earphonesolutions/PtheD/Tyll/anyone of having anything but above-board motives. Sponsers gotta eat, the board must remain healthy (with or without new supporting members...), and we all want cool stuff at stupid prices. That a new policy is being put in place will hopefully be divorced from the triggering events in short time, and we can all get back to the critical task of keeping our wallets on constant life-support