Bashing companies & negative Reviews against the law?

Content Boss,
where is all of the hostility coming from.
Don't talk to me like I'm an idiot. I'm trying to have a conversation and simply talk about solutions and different ways around this project.

If you can't handle it, go screw yourself.

Go cry to your mother with your nasty unhappy talk.

there's a few insults. Do you normally walk around the street and are that nasty to everyone. I've never met you in person so I suppose this is some sort of inner-web E-dog tough guy bully thing.

Why don't you take your little sneering mutant worm-like comments and go stick them up your ass.

 

I have read this post a few times and have been avoiding posting something. Having said that, slamming business A. to forward a position for business B. is so completely f**ked up I really don't know what to say. The likely end result of this is here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

I am not necessarily trying to slam the OP here. I get asked to do all sorts of stupid shit; but I refuse to do it. Making statements against another business, albeit true or otherwise, is not a business model and will only backfire wildly.

Nigel

 

You are acting like this is something that is rare and I'm doing something so awful. I don't get it. Have you been online before?
IMDB - mass reviews of movies. Look at the negative stuff on there.
youtube - http://www.youtube.com/results?sear...965l6540l0l6696l5l4l0l0l0l0l257l623l0.1.2l3l0 (and simple search the term on youtube "Suck" and you'll find that the state of California & Justin Bieber are douche bags......)
http://www.cracked.com/funny-2631-why-facebook-sucks/
http://www.gamerevolution.com/features/worst_game_names
I could go on forever probably.

Anyway, so if they are doing it obviously doesn't mean that I should.

Obviously you have a morale issue with the whole business deal of this network. The thing is where do you draw the line between right and wrong. You are claiming that its wrong to publicly talk about something really horrible that another company does, so therefore in a way you are feeling bad that people will find out what the wrong doing business is secretly doing. Protecting the bad people? It just makes no sense to me.

I cannot figure out why so many people in digitalpoint are so bothered to the fact that my team wants to dedicate a site to talk bad about people/systems/products/companies that deserve it.
In digitalpoint:
-There are hundreds of people selling their scam ebooks. An ebook is just a giant waste of money. DP has a whole forum just for idiots who are stupid enough to buy them.
-In the adsense topic people are trying to get others to click on their ads, and trying to TRICK their way into more income.
-In the directory solicitation section its gotten to the point that people say I have a fake pr on my new directory because its so common.
-The dmoz forum is like a gang alley of dmoz editors that all jump on anyone who enters that isn't part of their circle. They are rude, stupid, and the half of them sell dmoz listings.
-In the auctions we got the word "potential" slapped on 3/4 site for sale topics. We all know potential means "new site that isn't work jack!" so they are lying.

I can go on forever but the whole reason I list these things is I cannot figure out why when I made this topic I get such a negative response. Its almost as if everyone is offended that I would do such a horrible thing like help make bad reviews.

Am I missing something? Mayby I worded it wrongly? Why are there so many people in shock?
After the 16 private messages I cannot figure out why the heck everyone thinks I'm so evil for this. This forum is packed full of scammers, BS, and trickery.
Please help me to understand. All I did was ask if there's a way to hide in the gaps from being targeted by an unhappy reviewed thing and offered a few different ways.

Excellent. All of those sites were either forced to delete the bad review/information which costs nothing and the other half are billionaires like twitter. If I make as much as twitter then go ahead and sue me. Someone else will be in court and someone else will handle it

The reason I'm really trying to accept this invitation to this team is because I just so happen to have seen several skeletons in closets and I'm think I would be a good choice to hire. Beyond this project I'm totally out of ideas and I have a deadline for success online here. I've been online for the better part of a decade and I'm out of time. By the end of this year if I don't make my monthly revenue goal then its over. If I have to be the bad person by giving my finger to jerk scamming, Nazi companies then whatever. Its the legal part I care about.

 

Heh, probably. Even I find myself confused by what you've been asking.

Are you going to write (and be paid for?) those reviews yourself? Or, will you create a site where people can write reviews?

Edit: saw your subsequent added response. So basically you want to create a platform where people can talk just about anything, even if it'll potentially create liability
for you, then how to manage that risk?

 

I am part owner with 3 other angry and annoyed consumers and people that were of the workforce enviroment in the past who are ready to write the reviews. Of course there's some proof reading for spelling and grammar as its not my best skill. There will be guest reviews but typically on a 1/10 ratio so mainly its us. We also will be taking information and looking around for evidence to be able to have images and evidence attached to the articles so there may be a few interviews around as well.
Either way the 4 of us are responsible for the site legally. Its just a news/type of blog. Offensive, rude, and negative.

 

Keep looking, this idea is a loser.

It doesn't seem particularly interesting or original and based on the way you've described it, it doesn't look to be a big revenue generator.

 

what's more interest than a secret drug coverup? lol
10yrs and keep looking huh. I suppose that's fairly good advice.

 

As far as the phone example, Blackberry runs on their own servers. Who knows what servers you are using for a Google search? With Facebook, you are already logged onto the net and they have their own search results they will give you. That is why Facebook exists and makes money. They give all your search data to their sponsors. Then we can start talking about cookies and load speed. You better know what you are talking about when you start bashing big companies. Could spell big trouble.

 

You're obviously not the kind of person who can rationally take advice. In fact, you have a rep on the forum as a bit of an ahole, and it's a miracle Shawn hasn't banned you yet.

What you are proposing to do is yet another ahole thing - blacken a corporation's reputation for personal gain.

If you have a personal problem with any of the companies involved, try doing the 'grown up' thing and resolve it like a big girl, why don't ya.

You persist in this dumbf*ck of an idea, and by some miracle you manage to get enough traffic to it to attract the attention of the companies you are slagging off, you will get sued.

And you will deserve it.

 

lol, now who said that this is a loser project that isn't interesting?
This guy is coming in the topic to debate the example!
Of course my team will know what they are talking about. It was only sent as an example. To debate further even though its not the point its a general review on the efficiency towards a certain version of a blackberry cell "released in this year" and the fact that loading google search takes 22 seconds and 1/3 times they crash you you have to start over compared to a Motorola that was released in 2007 which loads in 5 seconds without errors. There's not much to learn about for that. Its a timed video review. Afterwards there is things to research as for the reason WHY 5 technologies later its simply not as good. Either way the conclusion is the same. Its a total rip off to make you have to upgrade quickly to the best blackberry.
This is yet another NOT researched example. Don't bother judging it. Its just an example of one of the 5 category types of articles that will be there.

Your information was far from rational straight off from the first sentence. Here's a re-cap: "Gosh, what a wonderful project. You really can come out with them, can't you, lacegirl?" -Think about it. That's not rational. Whatever you were trying to imply was just trolling.
Shawn does not ban people because they are criminals, scammers, or rude. In the words of an 11yr old schoolgirl: "You started it!".

Its not for profit. Its for closure but if if there's a few dollars in it then I'll take it. There's no point into getting all high. I find it very creepy that you are saying I'm such a mean person for saying bad stuff about companies, and your current job is to steal articles, put them in a program that switches words and grammar, then resells it. Personally I don't have a problem with it myself because it doesn't affect me but this does make you a major hypocrite. The only difference between my project and what you do is you take articles from random unknown people and I say bad things about people and products that deserve it.

70% of the companies, products, things, etc are not a personal grudge. The review is meant to say what people refuse to mention. Walmarts low grade products and where they are made, etc. I don't want to personally tell the owner of walmart that he needs to change. Without Walmart and the rest we wouldn't have anything to review.

Its shocking to see that you are so emotional about a negative review site......no wait, its not shocking. You are actually just a mouthy troll on the internet. Anyway, I promise I will not put "article spinning" on the list of BONEHEAD scams that I can review and make sure to not mention "ContentstealBoss".com. So relax, no reason to be so defensive.

And a final word:

Nobody said anything about Canada and fathers. Where are you from?

 

I still have an inbox full of crap from you, Laceytw*t.

You have a natural ability to irritate people. Anyone fancy a bit of a giggle, just search the forum for the word 'laceygirl' and witness what happens when a teenager gets free access to the internet and a bottle of mommy's gin.

Now I'm done with you, for real. You go right ahead and try your latest dumb idea. You WILL blow yourself up at some point. And then no doubt you'll insist on wasting yet more DP bandwidth telling everyone how unfair the world is to you.

Jeez. What a moosesh*gger.

 

Whatever you say, inner-web E-thug. I can buy and sell you any day on the revenue from some of my networks.

Edit: just checked you out:
In some random topic I'm not even in you mentioned my name. Nobody knows what you were talking about over there.
http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=2403684&p=17342397#post17342397
I'm thinking you are some type of internet stalker or something.
Everyone is a tough big man on the internet when they are from albeq.

 

That's called 'humor', laceygirl, and one would have assumed that you would be used to being the brunt of jokes by now.

It's no secret that I don't particularly like you, but then again no one else seems to either. One of the reasons for this is that you don't listen.

I've told you several times what the flaw in your 'argument' is, and you haven't even had the decency to respond, except to pump out yet more of your whiny complaints about how unfair the world is. I'm feeling in a generous mood, so, for one last time I'll try to help you understand your problem:-

1) It doesn't matter what steps you take to try and protect yourself from the consequences of your antisocial activity.

2) If it generates enough traffic to work, your project will attract the attention of the victims, who will sue you.

3) If you aren't rich enough to defend yourself in court, you will lose even if technically you are in the right

4) you will be bankrupted and possibly do jail time because you've made it very clear on this PUBLIC forum (jeez, in PUBLIC) that your intentions from the start were malicious and incentivized by personal greed.

Although how they would bankrupt someone like you who survives on pocket money from Daddy, I have no idea.

CONCLUSION - as you have no money, either the project won't work, or it will, and you'll go to jail. See how that might be just a teensy weensy smidgeon bit of a problemo?

Final comment - it's obvious that you are the kind of needy little whiner who wants someone (Daddy?) to come on here and say 'Its OK, LG, it will work, and everything will be fine!'

That's not going to happen because everyone else can see the flaw in your 'plan', and no one else is mean enough to encourage you into jail, whether or not they think you deserve it.

 

Not gonna call any names, but one of the most largest ***rip off report *** sites on the internet..... If not the largest, was put in court by my ex co-worker for slander. And remember, they're not the ones who even put the content there. I think what pissed him off is they charge a fee to remove the report. How stupid is that. ANYONE can put false information against an individual or business on there, yet you charge a fee to remove it???

 

Did he win?

Or is it still going through the courts?

 

Defamation is illegal... But that has to be on the grounds it is NOT true. Many times there is a hint of truth in it which makes it pointless to even take to court. Not to mention, there is also the the case of "judgement proof".. In other words, if you were to sue these people for their defamation, what do you think there net worth is? Are you willing to spend all the money to hunt down who they are, get into the discovery process only to find out there net worth is $50, and your not very likely to get anything out of them?

 

Which is why she'll only get sued if it generates enough traffic to attract the attention of the people she is bad-mouthing. Unlikely though it may seem from reading Laceyperson's posts, you never know when Google will suddenly pump some page up the rankings for a valuable keyphrase. And if, for example, you were Apple, and Frillygirl managed to rank on page 1 for 'iPod' with a shitty negative diatribe, make a wild guess what the Followers Of Jobs would do.

In reality, of course, she most likely won't make a success of it, so the problem will evaporate.

 

Ok, yet again another list:

What if there is:
a proper DMCA notice so I am not liable for visitors or guest article writers
that doesn't apply to protect me because it will be administrators that are writing the bad stuff, not guests.
a Policy that allows company owners to request removal of the article (No fee)
Many of you are saying that doesn't work because a lot of companies charge money and do it only for the purpose to charge money. I wouldn't charge so this doesn't apply to me, however....I still don't think it'll help very much to secure me because someone can just sue for the time the article was there in the past.
Divide the line where you are not discriminated a company/product such as accusing them of stuff & just speak out of pure opinion.
The interesting part about the project is we have unspoken info and want to talk about it. It'll destroy the whole point and chance for popularity of the project. So this doesn't work.
Change the names and locations but make it obvious who I'm talking about
Microsoft sued a guy who owned Mikerosoft.com was back in the day and basically took his soul on the legal suit so the big guys can and will sue anyway. Its all a matter of who makes the most money.
on top the link Nigel provided: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect.
So this doesn't work.

Through the whole topic all of these were brought by me while everyone just said "no, no, and no" so I suppose no one has any more ideas.
Here's a final idea:
Obviously without large popularity its not going to be a problem but with popularity someone will sue. The ultimate question is when popular sites get sued does the owner really care. My bet is the owner is sleeping in some resort in hawaii and then some busboy gives him mail, which is a newsletter from someone in his company and in the letter it says "our stats are....blah.........and in other news we are being sued for an article!". Then the owner says "hmm, interesting, takes a sip from his drink with one of those little umbrella's in it, and goes sleepy from the sunrise".
That's a far fetch from my life, but do popular site owners really care? Maybe its just an added expense?

So when all else fails and there is no solution I wonder if there is a time where I will just do the project and just accept the fate and future. I've been following the rules for 10yrs+ watching most successful people scam, lie, and manipulate. Maybe I need a little wrong to make it.
Nope, I probably won't do this project.

 

This person is an idiot. So, take his advice very carefully.

Sorry to everyone else for using this thread to deal with contentboss but he asked me to do this.

 

You'll go really far on this board.

What you won't do is find any investors. No one wants to invest with a 'loose cannon'. Just saying, is all.