My replies/thoughts after sleeping on the issue one night...
Which begs the question....Peter, are there more aliases than those that were already exposed that are a part of your ruse?
silenx PM'd to say that there are no other aliases involved.
Site moderators, would it be possible to append an announcement in the .sig line for *all* the various aliases in question (as has been done for digitalix)? If so, a link to this thread would also be appreciated.
BIG TIME AGREED. It is not apparent from the flagging of only the digitalix user's sig that he is interacting with himself as sammy, etc.
I believe a similar announcement should be indelibly appended to silentx alias.
Sort of agree. I guess that would allow silenx to contribute to the efforts here while still identifying him with his bias and deceit. Is there some point where silenx will be able to demonstrate good will to have his scarlet letter removed? It seems there should be room for repentance (which to me means more than just saying
you're sorry), but the repentance should be more notorious than the notoriety received for egregious deceit. And that, my friends, takes a lot of time.
al bundy wrote:
Perhaps an "Important Update" at the end of your review (including a direct hyperlink to this specific thread) would also be extremely useful to, and appreciated by, your main site readers - especially for the many who would not normally choose to enter the forums after reading the review...
Agreed. This, an interesting suggestion from one who has purchased, reviewed and reacted to the silenx product in this thread
. @wussboy, you may want to check out this thread since al bundy gives a non-pimped (hey I made up a word
Ralf Hutter wrote:
If people want to buy their stuff, fine but I wouldn't let them promote it around here anymore.
You have to ask, if silenx (the company) continues to exist and promote quiet products, and therefore, people interested in quiet PCs will be interested in their products, what do you do when inquiries about said products end up here, in the forums, even if we ban their reps? Do we just point them to this thread? Do we gain anything by having the designer of the product able to interact with questions, reviews, etc of the product (assuming Peter can do so in a civilized and up front manner and with all the appropriate caveats about the trustworthiness of the retailer)? I guess I'm echoing Justin_R here, sorry.
And man, marc999...very articulate and boy, did you make me think about this. I guess in the absence of fines or other judicial enforcements, a ban and/or boycott is our only means of retaliation and communication that we do not tolerate this kind of behavior. I do think that this fiasco will hurt silenx financially ban/boycott or no.
I lean strongly toward your opinion with the following questions: Ralf Hutter already mentioned Worldcom. Analogously, at what point do we go ahead with using Worldcom/MCI long distance or buying Worldcom stock again? Is there room for us to accept reform at silenx? I'm not sure what it looks like to verify that silenx has reformed other than my remark above about the notoriety of repentance (in word AND deed). I, for one, in both his posts and PMs (is it acceptable to refer to that correspondence here?) get a sense of blame-shifting (it is Ahanix's fault) than acceptance of responsibility for the deception...and I have yet to read a good justification for why they thought this method would help "only to make a clear distinction our product was not to be confused with exotic's and to preserve our rights of the brand" (silenx's description of his motive for the ruse--written above). So, I'd say we still have a long road to recovery, reform, and reinstatement of goodwill--if we choose to take that road at all.
My $.02 + $.02 + $.02 + $.02 + $.02 + $.02 (Man, I'm almost up to a quarter in this thread
...some of you are nodding in agreement.