Identities of sponsored forum owners

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
JHC,

I am going to ask you a serious question. Why do advertisers use celelbrities or the company owners in their ads?

[/ QUOTE ]

To give you aa false sense of security regarding their product.

[/ QUOTE ]


So regardless of whether a prospective customer should place credence in same, the fact that a seller is totally anonymous would logically lead to customers being even less trusting wouldn't it?


And BTW, I asked you why you don't put your former account name in your location bar. You're just another retread of a banned tard aren't you?

[J. Henry Christ]

[ QUOTE ]
JHC,

I don't understand your attitude at all.

At first, I thought the forum was silly and was poking fun at it.

That was before I visited the VehicleChooser.com site.

Then I realized that 2+2 was hosting a forum sponsored by and promoting a site that was likely engaging in copyright violation against major corporations, potentially exposing 2+2 to major liability.

At that point, I felt it important to highlight that specific point.

[/ QUOTE ]

And at what point does this lead to BluffThis and you making unsupported assertions that VC is a scam artist? See, that's the point where I become interested. You left that part out of your little recap.

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
BT,

I have a strong suspicion that VC.com is indeed BusterStacks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey, if you and BluffThis have such fears about VC's identity, here's an idea: Don't act on any of his advice, assuming he even gives advice. Problem solved. Now let the rest of the forum decide for itself. Anyway, I don't see how VC's identity is really that big an issue. You want some form of background check on his previous posts, but if he was AN ANONYMOUS POSTER ON AN INTERNET FORUM WITH NO HISTORY AT TWO PLUS TWO *then* you'd trust him just fine and no worries? Yeah, that makes LOADS of sense.

[/ QUOTE ]
No.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. Nobody implicitly trusts anybody on an anonymous internet forum. So this whole witch hunt is moot.

[/ QUOTE ]
From OP:
"I believe users starting sponsored forums to promote their businesses within 2+2 should be required to state their existing 2+2 identities."

That sounds more like a suggestion to the admins of 2+2. Your posts are aggressive attempts to stop posters from expressing their opinions. That's not the same thing.

[J. Henry Christ]

[ QUOTE ]
This whole situation is extremely suspect, IMHO.

By allowing this forum here, the owners of 2p2 have essentially endorsed this product. One can hope that they've done due dilligence in this case, but people pull scams all the time. Most people here view Malmuth/Sklansky as trusted sources for things other than poker knowledge. I just would not like to see something bad happen to 2p2 or MM/DS because of inclusion of a forum that really has nothing to do with the general theme of 2p2.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are rake bake offers all over the site. Are you holding these to the same standard?

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
JHC,

I don't understand your attitude at all.

At first, I thought the forum was silly and was poking fun at it.

That was before I visited the VehicleChooser.com site.

Then I realized that 2+2 was hosting a forum sponsored by and promoting a site that was likely engaging in copyright violation against major corporations, potentially exposing 2+2 to major liability.

At that point, I felt it important to highlight that specific point.

[/ QUOTE ]

And at what point does this lead to BluffThis and you making unsupported assertions that VC is a scam artist? See, that's the point where I become interested. You left that part out of your little recap.

[/ QUOTE ]
I find when people use little in this sense (places where it bears almost no meaning other than an attempt to diminish) they are typically bursting emotionally, or on the verge of bursting emotionally. Anyone agree?

[J. Henry Christ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Most people here view Malmuth/Sklansky as trusted sources for things other than poker knowledge.

[/ QUOTE ]
Really?

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure, Evan. When there are links out of this site, I think people generally assume these are advertisers that 2p2 deems reputable. In that sense, I think people are trusting MM/DS for things other than poker knowledge. Likewise for sponsored forums. Do you disagree?

[/ QUOTE ]
What links do Sklansky and Malmuth provide that are not poker-related?

This is a serious question, I honestly am not sure what you're talking about.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think we're having a semantics discussion here. I see a link to a rakeback affiliate, etc., and I don't consider that "poker knowledge" in the same sense as "never limp in on the button when it's folded to you". If you're grouping rakeback/affiliate advertisers with "poker knowledge", I think we agree.

[/ QUOTE ]
Oh, yea I was thinking "poker knowledge" was more like "knowledge about poker stuff." Fair point, although I wouldn't trust a rakeback affiliate just because he had an ad here. I've never used an affiliate I didn't know personally and I never would.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. If OTB thinks that the presence of a rakeback ad means that he can trust that 2+2 owners have certified them as legit, then why wouldn't OTB have the same trust in the VC forum? Why the double standard?

[El Diablo]

JHC,

The BusterStacks line was a (imo, obvious) joke referencing fnord's post in this thread. I am, however, suspicious about the fact that VC claims to be an established poster, yet won't reveal his identity.

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
If OTB thinks that the presence of a rakeback ad means that he can trust that 2+2 owners have certified them as legit, then why wouldn't OTB have the same trust in the VC forum? Why the double standard?

[/ QUOTE ]
I have no idea.

[PottyMouth]

[ QUOTE ]
JHC,

I don't understand your attitude at all.

At first, I thought the forum was silly and was poking fun at it.

That was before I visited the VehicleChooser.com site.

Then I realized that 2+2 was hosting a forum sponsored by and promoting a site that was likely engaging in copyright violation against major corporations, potentially exposing 2+2 to major liability.

At that point, I felt it important to highlight that specific point.

[/ QUOTE ]


ROFL!

These copyright violations.... we're talking about price, number of seats, body style, engine size, that sort of thing, right?

Yeah, Ford would hate for people to be repeating those. I can't wait for them to start suing all the people placing used car ads and stating engine size without permission.


What a load of mudslinging crap.

[J. Henry Christ]

[ QUOTE ]
You're just another retread of a banned tard aren't you?

[/ QUOTE ]

See how a little knowledge of a poster can lead you to make biased assumptions. You've just provided evidence why VC chose anonymity.