| Msg # |
User |
Message |
Date |
1
|
badandy400 (103)
|
This may or may not pertain to this review, but I need to ask you something.
I was just looking around and for no reason clicked on your name. I noticed you had a single "NO" trust and I was curious as to what it was for. The person believed you did not join some of the sites you had reviewed. You replied saying "I joined seven of the nine sites mentioned for at least one month. No review based on a trial m'ship."
Is this statement implying that you had not joined them two of them, or simply that you joined and left before a second month. The distinction is very important. If you had not joined them how could you review them? Also, which of the nine sites DID you join? At this point I think it is just poor choice of wording, but it is unclear.
I am a little reluctant to throw out a "NO" trust on you because your more recent reviews seem much more in depth and honest. I would like some clarification on this just in case there is a misunderstanding. It was not that long ago a reviewer had all his review points removed and was semi-suspended for implying that he did not join sites he had reviewed. I do not want this to happen to you, but I (all of PU) need to know that you have actually joined all the sites you have reviewed.
|
07-11-09 12:45am
Reply To Message
|
2
|
careylowell (18)
|
REPLY TO #1 - badandy400 :
I received the 'No trust' after reviewing nine sites. I had been a member of each for at least a month. Can't recall what led me to type "..I joined seven of the nine sites mentioned..." It should of read that of the nine, I belonged to seven for just a month.
I have since rejoined two but haven't updated my reviews due to sheer laziness.
So my rating is tagged with 'No' trust. That dude could of gilded the bitter pill by either not being anonymous or writing more than two sentences to explain his decision.
I appreciate your concern, Badandy400.
|
07-11-09 06:53am
Reply To Message
|
3
|
badandy400 (103)
|
REPLY TO #2 - careylowell :
Okay, I just really wanted to be sure about this. Thanks for the reply. Do you have any idea who the "NO' trust came from. One of the things a few of us have been trying to do lately is getting people who voted no a while back to reconsider in the even the user has improved reviews since the NO trust and is still around. Anyway, you may want to add an extra reply to that trust just to make it clear.
|
07-11-09 07:14pm
Reply To Message
|
4
|
careylowell (18)
|
REPLY TO #3 - badandy400 :
I've no idea from whom that 'No' hailed from. Maybe one of you computer jedis can unscramble his anonymous ID. My gut feeling is his dark designs haunt some other site, that he's an ex-member.
|
07-11-09 08:00pm
Reply To Message
|
5
|
badandy400 (103)
|
REPLY TO #4 - careylowell :
Usually you can figure it would from looking at replies to your reviews. The person that seems hostile towards your comments is usually the person it ends up being.
Without doing some creative digging, and a lot of it, I do not think even the staff can tell you who it was. If I recall correctly I believe they said some time ago that the anonymous ID is saved in a one way encryption to protect the privacy. I believe it was the trusts they were talking about.
In any event, it does not hurt to guess who it was and send a reply to them. Even if they have not been around for a while they could still get the notice email for receiving a reply. This might bring them back, you never know and it certainly does not hurt. Besides, who wants that one bad trust thing floating around.
|
07-11-09 11:12pm
Reply To Message
|
