SimpleSi (1st May 2010)
SimpleSi (1st May 2010)
Well basically, Marketing is the study of Markets..
The people that ask you questions in the street are Marketeers, they ask questions, to find out what people are interested in buying, so they can work out who they are able to sell to, based upon what wants they have.
It's not be confused (like this) with Advertising.. which is trying to apply all the lessons learnt by the Marketing people to persuade people to buy (which is where the sales people come in).
Hmm, I thought as much now i am curious as to what plans we have de-railed is that what you will be saying on Tuesday?
I do agree with what was said in the link he sent through, and i would guess that the report that was published quoting posts from edugeek was from people who came here for help and advice because they either found out they were being taken for a ride and being over charged, or/ they were just curious and came here for advice on what to do. I would say that most of the people that came on here because of this found more "reliable" "trustworthy" suppliers to deal with so that they dont get ripped of by those companys who wish to take advantage.
It's one thing that has always annoyed me! i understand there is a cost to things but not for companys to put quite a high mark up on things because they know the school will pay it what ever it is. I have spoken to many schools myself (just local) and this has happend to them and it makes me angry to see companys do this to people after all they put alot of trust in them it's just that some companys take advantage of it.
Be interested to here what get's sayed tuesday, and to also hear what plans we have supposed to of messed up. and i think i can see what posts may of been quoted
All I'm interested in is having a play on that Fender Esquire in his background. That looks nice!
Being fair though ... this site is used for the promotion of particular companies and some members (myself included) can come across as one-sided in our recommendations ... I know that I have recommended smoothwall a heck of a lot, and frequently without explicit justifications ... usually because I have made my justifications in previous post and can't be bothered to type them yet again. If someone finds a thread on here about a product which is basically having a go at a product with no-one else giving a balanced view or with lots of people shouting down that balanced view (which we have all seen happen) then it will give the wrong impression of the site as well particular products.
Ok, it is a generalisation but possibly with justification.
The NCSL article is good and in spite of people having good use of 'home APs' it is more frequently the case of it not working well from my experience, far more frequent to find it a mess than enterprise level wi-fi solutions being a mess. More often than not it is the implementation which is at fault, not the equipment when it comes to enterprise solutions.
Personally I don't like the slander and marketeer bit, but would like to open up the discussion a bit more. Is it a case that opinion not backed up with fact is causing a problem?
The internet *is* opinion - and anyone coming to what is primarily a community will be looking very hard amongst the field of opinion to find industry backed facts. Anyone thinking otherwise is plain daft, and moreover anyone thinking an opinion by one of more participants of such a community constitutes slander or anything of a similar ilk has absolutely no idea what they're talking about. Funnily enough though, generally you'll get a better idea of a products capabilities, pro's and cons via the people using them; not the people reviewing them professionally who are in many cases receiving money from one or more parties to put a particular slant on any product. Thinking otherwise is naive and silly. This fellow's blog post is little more than an opinion of his own and he's welcome to express that obviously, and also would like to see him pop over in this direction and put his opinions to others here. Good examples of people "slanting" their reviews include Toms Hardware (we all remember that nasty fakery), The Inquirer, Ars Technica, Hexus - the list goes on and on.
I'll bet that he's already here and reading every word of thisnd also would like to see him pop over in this direction
I would disagree with his opinion fully.
Dos_box and the rest of the mods work very hard to make sure any posts that could be classed as slander are dealt with approraitely.
Yes marketing, to some degree, does happen on this site but it help keeps the site going? Anyway in most cases the poster asks for help and the relevant companies just offer their services.
Its his opinion and he is entitled to it, even though his comments about this site are misleading.
Funnily enough could his comments be treated as slanderous?
Sweet $deity folks ... what is this? A witch hunt ...
Yes, he is a member. Yes, he has obviously found some stuff on here that he does not like and has expressed it. It seems that he has found the use of quotes from EG not helpful in that report. I think he use of words was not the best but I would rather he was given a chance to talk with Chris and co about it then what I can see so far. It is the bank holiday weekend folk ... some people might want to not bother looking at the site because *THEY HAVE A LIFE* (unlike me ....)
How about giving this a break until some time on tuesday afternoon?
Probably more along the lines of a natural defence of something the members here hold dear. After all, there is *no* other single place to find this level of educational IT based expertise, and when many people feel that may be threatened they (I included) will be very quick to jump to it's defence. But yeah, interested to see what the fella has to say, either himself or via Dox_Box; there could well be constructive criticism we need to bear in mind.
However, I think I'd be one of the first people to lament any major changes, from most of our points of view it's an internet forum, a community of which we are a part. A business can not survive without advertising or sponsorship, a community can not survive without members having their own opinions, bias and suggestions, therefore I wonder what changes could actually be made?
Waiting with interest.
Hmm. Fair comment? I wouldn't say "fair", as this site is much more diverse than simply being "full" of marketeers and slanderers.
Reasonable comment? I would be more inclined to say yes.
When a site as diverse and popular as this allows areas like "Behind the red door" for the more unprofessional and emotive postings, you are opening yourself for comments like this - whether it is from individuals like this or companies themselves.
The fact (which has been discussed over and over again) that there is no AUP/List of member rules on this site only adds to the problem.
That is the controversial stuff over with which will probably just be glossed over again, but as with everything there is a plus side....
What Paul Hiscox might not see is that due to the very nature of this site, you will always get a difference of opinions. If person A posts a slanderous comment you can almost certainly bank on the fact that a person B and C will come along to argue against it.
In the rare event of a comment going un-challenged, you can only go on to think that the potentially slanderous comment is more than likely true!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)