It's been a cruel, cruel summer...

[Argie's Wife]

Several restaurant owners have taken a beating lately on this forum with posts about "problems" that posters have had with a visit to their restaurant.

However, when these business owners come on to post their side of the story, bringing into light "the rest of the story" it's a totally different matter and we learn there's not really a problem like we were lead to believe.

I, for one, am tired of feeling "duped" by these posters. I think to myself, "Man, I'll never go to that restaurant!" Only to have the owner come onboard and explain what really happened!

I have noticed that these posters often have less than ten posts on the forums before they decide to nail up a thread about a restaurant because they were too lame to figure out they'd ordered an appetizer for their meal or because their kid got sick (but they never bothered to bring the kid to the ER to have them checked out).

I'm suggesting we don't allow new threads or posts in this section of the forum by posters who have less than 25 posts. If they have 25 or more posts, then they can post in the Restaurant Information and Review forum. Otherwise, they need to prove they can play nice with others before we let them ruin someone's livelihood. Posters should show they have integrity because this whole forum won't be taken seriously before much longer if it keeps up like this.

It's been a cruel, cruel summer.

[Pineedles]

Well, that means that we won't hear from the Phantom Gourmond in this section until he posts another 12 posts in other areas. He only has 13 so far. I'm sure you're going to be hearing his opinion about this soon.

[krm]

I agree with your intent that people need to moderate them selves when speaking poorly of a biz. I am not sure that post count is the best way, I have seen this suggested on other forums. One problem is someone with 1000 post is not any more intelligent/honest(not sure that is the right word) than some one with one. All posters started with one post at one point.
Def in these economic times we all need to cautious of our word, what effect one person effects all.
Maybe the poster should have to have been to the restaurant a few times before they can post, or know several people that have had bad experiences.
But I def like your train of thought!

[Newbiesaukee]

Although I understand the sentiment, I don't think that this is the way to go. The Forum, while it does have some printed standards, is not, or should not be, rigid or "exclusive." Having to deal with dishonest posters just goes with the terrritory. Most of us can tell the difference, and, yes, I am read more critically, if the poster is new. But new posters have to start somewhere. Another red flag for me is the new poster raving about a new restaurant or an old one which has not had good review threads in the past. The results to the restaurant are certainly not devastating as a negative review....but it is still dishonest.

[sa meredith]

Wait a minute, now. There has been 3 or 4 threads that got a ton of action this summer, and although a lot of negative stuff was mentioned, I believe the only restaurant that might have been treated unfairly was Lobster Pound, and only that one...no need to re-hash it, we all know what was said.
The Woodshed took a few shots, but they turned to be accurate, and it seems things have gotten better.
Tammarack got hit pretty good last summer and this summer, and much turned out to be true, and then the thread turned to the kid who was fired...by the way, to the best of my knowledge, that thread has just dis-apppeared...the whole thing, gone. What gives?
Zachey's Pizza came into focus for a while..a ton of negative...all proving accurate.
And of course, Waldo Peppers took a small hit, the forum exploded, and alas, the post proved true.
So I would ask...you would suggest limiting reviews to "seasoned" members, because they are negative? I mean, if the post proves true, there should be no problem.
Jusy my two cents...You may actaully have a good idea, who knows...

[Argie's Wife]

There's some good input here and sa meredith makes some good points. I certainly don't expect everyone to agree with me (or even anyone) but thought I'd run this idea up the flagpole to see if anyone else agreed or had other suggestions.

The restaurant section of the forum is a great resource, in my opinion, as I use it as a guide on where to go and what's good. I've made recommendations to friends/family based on the input in the forum even when I haven't actually visited the restaurant myself.

Although some of the comments about some restaurants have seemed to have come out in the wash, with the owners posting their take on things, I've just noted that many of the negative (and untrue) posts are from people who haven't been around that long.

Yes, I do take into account they're new and the posts have less merit with me, as newbiesaukee wrote, but I feel that this forum could cause damage just the same. Maybe it's just a couple of recent threads that have me concerned but some people have been less than kind.

[GWC...]

Since this is the election season, my vote for Webmaster (the person who makes the rules and deals with the legal ramifications) is for Don.

[phoenix]

I would hate to put an artificial number limit on posters. I also have to say that I look a little differently when a new poster gives a bad or great review but this is a freedom of speech country( and the live free or die state) and i think we always have Don as the fail safe when a poster gets out of hand. there are a lot of restaurants in the lakes region and i use the remarks to decide to try or not try for the first time , after that i use my own experience.

[Pineedles]

The Phantom Gourmand hasn't responded yet. Perhaps The Webmaster has already put this proposal in effect? Just kidding TPG.

It is a perplexing problem, Argie's Wife. I believe Don put a challenge in asking for substantiation about the suggestion of a "gun" in the Diamond Island accident. This type of monitoring is his job. We can, IMHO moderate the restaraunt section so that people who want to rely on the Winn Dot Com opinions for where to go to eat, can look past the initial post and see a more diverse opinion if the initial post was spurious. It will remain a question though as to who will defend the restauraunt first. The owners response has been particulary effective, but it is Winnie dot com members that post that have the greater effect. Besides, these owners are working fron 5AM to 1AM to maintain their business, so it is not unreasonable to expect that their response coud be delayed a day or two.

It is a nice idea of defending your favorite, but I was the stupid idiot that questioned the post of someone who tore Waldo Peppers (a beloved person, and resteraunt, prior to my post) apart, with their first 1st or 2nd post. The poster was proven to be correct, and I apologized. I have learned to "tune down" my response, but the fact still remains, if you see something that you think is wrong , defend it!

So, in the end I am not in favor of a ban on the first 25 posts until you are allowed to post on the restaraunt thread. Gun shy? Perhaps. Still a staunce defender of what I believe is right, YES!

[Rose]

Originally Posted by Argie's Wife

Although some of the comments about some restaurants have seemed to have come out in the wash, with the owners posting their take on things, I've just noted that many of the negative (and untrue) posts are from people who haven't been around that long.

And how do you determine that the original post is untrue...just because the owner comes on and repudiates it? Who's to say he/she is being truthful. Like I said before, the truth probably lies somewhere in between the two.

Maybe it's just my personal experience, but I don't like business owners/managers who get into pissing contests with customers. I think Pepper handled negative comments on here about her establishment perfectly. But when an owner/manager starts making negative comments about customers, my red flag goes up. That should never, ever be aired in public.

[Argie's Wife]

Rose - I determine that a posters comments are untrue when they are so perfectly contradicted by the owner/manager of an establishment and then that person does not return to say, "No, that's NOT how it happened..."

I agree that pissing contests are unsightly but I also think that making potentially harmful statements about an establishment on a forum like this and then not r-e-a-l-l-y being a member of it is also bad. I also agree with you that Pepper's situation was handled gracefully and in a professional manner - she earned more respect from me (if that was possible) in that situation.

But back to my point....

I think there's been some "hit and runs" here in the restaurant forum area. I think Don does a wonderful job of monitoring things here and I'm sure it's not easy. I'm just thinking out loud on how we can maybe (maybe!) improve things....

[Mr. Moyer]

This is silly. We are now censoring who can say what and when. This is ridiculous. This is supposed to be an open forum. As for someone giving a bad review, that is their opinion, and will only minimally effect my decision to eat at a restaurant, if at all. If 6 others chime in and say they have had the same experience, or refute the review as garbage, that may make my decision. All in all, any censorship or restrictions are ludicris.

[KellyG]

I have to say that I think it is silly to require a certain number of posts. Let's say you had to have a minimum of 25 posts, what is stopping the person from just posting random things in the other parts of the forum, just to get to that minimum? I do not have many posts, but I have been reading this forum for about 1 1/2 years. It is a great source of information. Everyone also has to remember that there are 3 sides to every story: your side, my side, and the truth. I personally do not decide not to go to a restaurant because one person said they were sick after eating there. These restaurants serve hundreds and thousands of people, one person claiming they were sick from eating there, or one person stating that they had really bad service, will not stop me from going to a restaurant. By having a minimum number of posts to make a post in a certain section, new people may not want to come on this forum. Also, someone could have just come back from vacation and wants to post a nice review about a restaurant, but can't because they have under the minimum number of posts. That is unfair to the restaurant.

[jetskier]

Hi all,

We went to the Lobster Pound a couple of weeks back and the place was full. I am quite sure that the comments on this board have not materially affected their business. I believe that we all should weigh comments based upon our own metrics. As such, let anyone post who feels the urge. We are all big boys and girls here.

Personally, I gave the Lobster Pound a try independent of the comments here. My impression is purely based upon my experience with them.

In the long run, good restaurants will survive and poor ones will not. Word of mouth is stronger viral marketing than these boards. I would hate to start censoring on the basis of seniority.

Jetskier

[RI Swamp Yankee]

I think Argie's Wife brings up a good point but the solution is elusive. I remember a few years back when several people had comments about a local business that had gone downhill. Someone chimed in about how great it was and the negative comments were not true. Shortly afterward Don commented that the post had come from the network of the business mentioned. It is easy for someone with an axe to grind to say something good/bad and those comments are read by many people that may not even be members here, just browsing the forum. I think the equalizer here is the responses of the good members of this forum. They make it a point to contradict or reinforce what may be a totaly onesided opinion.

If I may take exception to Mr. Moyer, and with all due respect for his opinion, I think a certain amount of censorship or restrictions is ok. That is how Don has kept this forum from degerating to posts containing material unsuitable for family consumtion as some other forum have done.

[redc5]

Argies Wife, I guess if you want censorship and this is YOUR forum you can do what you want. I will probably leave and stop reading though. If I want censoring, I can move to China.

[livingonwinni]

I agree with REdc5 and KellyG, Just cause you don't post on every single little thing doesn't change your experince. And it's all about perspective just cause an owner defend his postion doesn't make the incident any less valid. It seems to me that people with only a few posts pick and choose what they comment on . I'm new to this fourm, but I have been reading it for a long time. Because I don't post all the time means I shouldn't have an opinion??

[Lakepilot]

I read this forum every day. I think it's great. I don't post often because I only post when I think I can make a contribution that others haven't or aren't likely to make. I don't talk just to hear myself talk either.

Censorship doesn't work. I will stop leaving to when moderation turns to censorship, because I won't know what is being censored or how much is being censored. I'm capable (usually) of filtering other peoples posts.

[Argie's Wife]

To those of you who wrote that you have read this forum for years but only have a handful of posts.... well, that's how I started out here, too. I understand what you're saying and respect your opinion. My history is very similar. This forum is a great resource for sharing information - it's part of my "daily news".

On one of the Lobster Pound threads, the owner, Mike, mentions the integrity of this forum and questions how it will be taken seriously if people post inaccurate information. I've paraphrased his comment here, but you get the idea of what he's saying.... And he's got a good point, in my opinion. (Have you ever read the "Rants and Raves" section of Craig's List? Good grief! That's the last thing I'd want to see here!)

I also put myself in the shoes of the business owner who is trying to defend his livelihood because a customer went off half-cocked and then decided to go public with accusations of food poisoning, bad customer service, etc. but have no other history here on the forums anywhere. The mad customer is just using the forum for their own agenda - to get back at the restaurant manager/owner who didn't give in to them.

Is that really fair? It's certainly not ethical.

What I'm suggesting isn't necessarily censorship, as it's more of a "quota" or even a verification method (which some forums - yes, open forums) require for membership. And when did "open forum" mean you can simply spew garbage from your keyboard anytime you wish? I'd like to think this forum has way more class than that (and it does!)

Sometimes censorship is necessary for the protection of the other members of the board - I've seen posts and even whole threads removed from this forum in the past - but it was because someone(s) weren't following the rules. Is that reason to leave - because others can't play nicely? I think not...

Like I've said - I don't expect people to agree or for this to be popular but maybe some safeguard should be in place... who knows? But integrity here is important.

[KellyG]

I have a suggestion. I read the trip advisor forums, and I have hundreds of posts on there, and on that site there is a button on every post that states "report inappropriate post." You click this button when you find something to be inappropriate, giving a reason why it is inappropriate, and then the moderator takes care of removing it. I find that on that forum, someone will sign up and on their first or second post they talk very negative about an establishment. The people that are regular posters, or people that read the forum often, can usually tell that it is someone that just signed up to post negitively. There are others that have read that forum for a long time to get information on their trip and they will sign up to talk about their trip to give back to the boards.

Every person on every forum was new at one point. Does this mean that the person that has a great deal of knowledge about a place should not be able to post because they just found the forum? It kind of reminds me of switching careers. The employer wants someone with experience, but how can the person switching careers get experience if no one will hire them because they have no experience?

[Mr. Moyer]

RI Swap yankee,

You are absolutely correct, we have a difference in opinion. I absolutely feel there is no place for censorship, especially on this forum. I can't imagine that if you feel differently that you will be able to change my mind. I feel the freedom to express one's self is at the core of our nation"s strength. As for the webmaster, removing whole or partial posts, I would disagree with that practice as well.

[Skip]

Originally Posted by Mr. Moyer

...I absolutely feel there is no place for censorship, especially on this forum...I feel the freedom to express one's self is at the core of our nation"s strength. As for the webmaster, removing whole or partial posts, I would disagree with that practice as well...

People need to remember, there are no first ammendment rights guaranteed, implied or granted by the owner of this website.

This website is a private domain, the exclusive property of the "Don". The only individual that has the right to free and total expression, as guaranteed by both the NH and Federal Constitutions is the owner of this property...the "Don".

Anyone that wishes to express their first ammendment rights is free to do so, simply by creating a website of their own.

However, whenever we peruse or post to this particular website we do so clearly as guests of the owner, and are subject completely and only to those thoughts and expressions that the owner wishes to convey through his property.

I like being one of Don's guests, and when I am visiting in his "house", I obey his rules. If I don't like his rules, then I am simply and utterly free to leave his house anytime I wish, just as he is free to show me the door when my welcome has worn out.

It's as simple as that....

Oh, thanks for letting me visit again today, Don!

[Mr. Moyer]

Skip,

I usually find your posts very informative. I never said that my rights were being infringed upon due to 1st amendmant protection. I simply said that this is where our nation derives it's strength. I also try to instill this in my open family discussions, as well as in my business. I feel that this is why I have been successful and have been open to quaility feedback, solicited and unsolicited. I realize that the webmaster Don, can do whatever he would like since it is his forum, but I am also free to disagree with it as well. We have no protection here as we don't on many website and forums. I just personally feel to stifle any discussion (whether it is through censorship or not), is in poor judgement and will leave this forum weaker in the long run.

[Woodsy]

Originally Posted by sa meredith

Tammarack got hit pretty good last summer and this summer, and much turned out to be true, and then the thread turned to the kid who was fired...by the way, to the best of my knowledge, that thread has just dis-apppeared...the whole thing, gone. What gives?

SA...

The Tamarack post was deleted... Don decided it was time for that thread to die quietly, and I have absolutely no problem with that. I was very dissapointed at the way they treated an employee and I outed them on it. I stated the facts, clearly made my point and as far as I am concerned it is ancient history. Whenever anybody asks me about the Tamarack, (and I get asked quite a bit) I give them my opinion and point them in the direction of Waldo Pepper's, Sawyers, Boston Seafood, Lobster Pound, essentially anyplace but the Tamarack.

I think restaurant (and business) reviews both pro & con are necessary to help a person to decide a course of action. I think its great that the owners sometimes respond to posts here. It shows that they do care about what is being said and it certainly showcases the power of this forum.

Many, many thanks to Don for supplying us with this wonderful place to meet new friends and discuss and debate issues....

Woodsy

[sa meredith]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

SA...

I was very dissapointed at the way they treated an employee and I outed them on it. I stated the facts, clearly made my point and as far as I am concerned it is ancient history. Whenever anybody asks me about the Tamarack, (and I get asked quite a bit) I give them my opinion and point them in the direction of Waldo Pepper's, Sawyers, Boston Seafood, Lobster Pound, essentially anyplace but the Tamarack.

"...essentially anyplace but the Tamarack"
Doesn't quite seem like it is ancient history.

They probably deserve 2nd, 3rd, 4th chances just like Lobster Pound, and Waldo Peppers, and The Woodshed, and ...on and on it goes.

I understand you have an issue with them (and that's fine...it's perfectly normal), but let's not be vindictive.

[jrc]

Originally Posted by sa meredith

...I understand you have an issue with them (and that's fine...it's perfectly normal), but let's not be vindictive.

My wife got into an argument with a high school age clerk at Shibley's ice cream 7-8 years ago. To this day she will not buy there. I tell her that the girl is long gone, probably married with kids by now. I should buy the ice cream there and tell here I went to Pop's.

The point is that bad experiences stick with a business for a long time. Every business has mistakes, it's how they handle it that counts. One bad review doesn't steer me away from a business but trends do.

[twoplustwo]

Those who join to bash and scram are fairly apparent although your intentions are pure and the sentiment is appreciated, Argie's Wife. When posts completely cross the line, they are removed, and that's a good thing. It's level-headed moderation and not at all Chinese or rap and hip-hop (sorry, the ludicrous/ludicris thing has me chuckling).

Don's moderation is practical, fair, and mostly thankless. He's the iron fist in a silk glove. Argie's Wife is not a newbie- or lurker-hater, just someone looking to solve a problem that probably has no palatable solution. Let's get that twist out of the knickers. And post more.

[twoplustwo]

Holy smokes. There are no words...

[SIKSUKR]

WOW!!!! Kind of sounds like the Lobster Pound rant by a member and then the owner chimes in tells the rest of the story.WOW!!!I didn't know Don put up with this kind of crap.

[sa meredith]

770 Nazi's....770!
That's a lot.
You don't deserve a time out...more like a game misconduct.
What bothered me more, was the "your site sucks". That's just wrong.
On some forums, it is truly difficult just to become a member, and harder to become one that can post without moderation. Try becoming a member of "sons of sam horn" (if you don't know what that is, no biggie, but those who do, know what I mean). It took me almost a full year just to prove myself as a legit memeber, so I could post freely.
But here, Don gives everyone a shot.
Anyway kthy66, shame shame.