Posts: 1,513
Threads: 18
Joined: Oct 2014
An "online reputation services" company called KwikChex, acting on behalf of more than 1,000 hoteliers, says it estimates there are at least 27,000 legally defamatory comments on TripAdvisor, "allegations that are false and should, if necessary, be tested in court". Chris Emmins, who runs Kwikchex, is in the process of contacting TripAdvisor about some of these specific comments, with "a notification saying: 'We regard these reviews as suspect, this user may now be open to legal action, please inform them.' We're hoping that people will reconsider their comments, particularly if they are a competitor, and remove the material they've posted . . . In virtually every country, when it comes to defamation, the judge will ask what opportunity the defendant has been given to correct the situation, so we're going this route to say, legally, we've done everything we can." After that, Emmins suggests, they'll take further legal action against the defamatory reviews that haven't been taken down.
One of the hoteliers involved in the KwikChex action is Frank McCready, who owns the Old Brewery guest house in North Yorkshire, and runs a website called I Hate TripAdvisor. He thought TripAdvisor was a brilliant idea at first, but soon changed his mind. "A lot of small businesses are being damaged," he says. "Some of the reviews that are put up there are malicious; you have competitors trying to denigrate other hotels in the area, and properties achieving reviews that seem impossible. As a hotelier in a small town in Yorkshire, I know all the other properties, and every town has a place that people know locally as somewhere you wipe your feet on the way out of. We ended up being rated lower than them, despite the fact that we've got three stars."
McCready would "like changes in the law that meant people who posted reviews had to be visible and accountable – if you publish something you have to use reasonable restraint, make sure your facts are right. I'm angry at the moment that it's not transparent, it's not honest, it's not straight. It's seriously damaging people's livelihoods."
http://www.theguardian.com/travel/2011/j...-bannatyne
Posts: 11,300
Threads: 767
Joined: Sep 2012
did not know my comments could be read elsewhere
gypsy69 -
That is the difference. Your comments about Kapoho on Punaweb are perfectly acceptable because as you said it's your opinion. All of us have been to the tide pools and know that water quality changes from time to time and take that into account when we read your post.
But then transfer those comments to TripAdvisor and it has a completely different effect. Those readers just assume the tide pools are a 24/7/365 tidal cesspool.
I never had the impression Kathy was employed by Mitch Roth, I assumed from her posts they were acquaintances. I would strongly discourage anyone from calling him or his office about her posts on a couple of websites. I think he has plenty of other fish to fry. Not to mention it's just bad form.
"I'm at that stage in life where I stay out of discussions. Even if you say 1+1=5, you're right - have fun." - Keanu Reeves
Posts: 239
Threads: 32
Joined: Jun 2009
quote:
Originally posted by Punatic007
An "online reputation services" company called KwikChex, acting on behalf of more than 1,000 hoteliers, says it estimates there are at least 27,000 legally defamatory comments on TripAdvisor, "allegations that are false and should, if necessary, be tested in court". Chris Emmins, who runs Kwikchex, is in the process of contacting TripAdvisor about some of these specific comments, with "a notification saying: 'We regard these reviews as suspect, this user may now be open to legal action, please inform them.' We're hoping that people will reconsider their comments, particularly if they are a competitor, and remove the material they've posted . . . In virtually every country, when it comes to defamation, the judge will ask what opportunity the defendant has been given to correct the situation, so we're going this route to say, legally, we've done everything we can." After that, Emmins suggests, they'll take further legal action against the defamatory reviews that haven't been taken down.
One of the hoteliers involved in the KwikChex action is Frank McCready, who owns the Old Brewery guest house in North Yorkshire, and runs a website called I Hate TripAdvisor. He thought TripAdvisor was a brilliant idea at first, but soon changed his mind. "A lot of small businesses are being damaged," he says. "Some of the reviews that are put up there are malicious; you have competitors trying to denigrate other hotels in the area, and properties achieving reviews that seem impossible. As a hotelier in a small town in Yorkshire, I know all the other properties, and every town has a place that people know locally as somewhere you wipe your feet on the way out of. We ended up being rated lower than them, despite the fact that we've got three stars."
McCready would "like changes in the law that meant people who posted reviews had to be visible and accountable – if you publish something you have to use reasonable restraint, make sure your facts are right. I'm angry at the moment that it's not transparent, it's not honest, it's not straight. It's seriously damaging people's livelihoods."
http://www.theguardian.com/travel/2011/j...-bannatyne
The difference here and why this would not apply is they are not posting reviews. They are using tripadvisors public forum to post comments not reviews so I do not think the above would apply. Wish it did though.
Posts: 1,513
Threads: 18
Joined: Oct 2014
quote:
Originally posted by HereOnThePrimalEdge
did not know my comments could be read elsewhere
gypsy69 -
That is the difference. Your comments about Kapoho on Punaweb are perfectly acceptable because as you said it's your opinion. All of us have been to the tide pools and know that water quality changes from time to time and take that into account when we read your post.
But then transfer those comments to TripAdvisor and it has a completely different effect. Those readers just assume the tide pools are a 24/7/365 tidal cesspool.
I never had the impression Kathy was employed by Mitch Roth, I assumed from her posts they were acquaintances. I would strongly discourage anyone from calling him or his office about her posts on a couple of websites. I think he has plenty of other fish to fry. Not to mention it's just bad form.
Hopefully she doesn't work for him however addressing your comment about "bad form"....
From working with Mitch Roth on community issues I can say with strong certainty that he would want to know if an employee were engaged in questionable or illegal activities. As would most anyone of integrous character. If someone I know knows I have an employee and is aware of their questionable behavior they had better tell me pronto, as I would do for them.
Apparently ethics are subjective.....?
Posts: 11,300
Threads: 767
Joined: Sep 2012
Punatic007 -
My comment was based on the assumption that Kathy did not work for Mitch Roth.
If she did work for him, it would be a different situation.
Not a difference in ethics, a difference in circumstances.
"I'm at that stage in life where I stay out of discussions. Even if you say 1+1=5, you're right - have fun." - Keanu Reeves
Posts: 2,389
Threads: 126
Joined: Jun 2009
According to the guidelines set forth in the questions answers forum, it is not a discussion forum nor is it an advisory forum. When posting a topic it is presented by a button that says "Ask a question" it does not mean post an advisory or start a discussion topic. It means ask A question, not Ask some questions.
Furthermore the guidelines state that answers to questions must be objective and to the point. The point being the question asked not some aspect of the question fabricated in the mid of the person answering.
Thus one question may be asked and answers to the point of the question may be given but no more questions may be asked in that thread. A poster must start a new question according to the guidelines.
If for example a question is asked such as. Where does one find drinking water in the Pahoa area? The answers are to be on point and should consist of locations only. The answers should not contain additional information such as, the water contains chlorine or the station is often messy, etc.
I have seen KamaainaK and SheaG break the guidelines in nearly every answer they have given and furthermore they have asked questions within the answers section which are not answers. Furthermore, KamaainaK has taken it upon herself to post Advisories under the Ask a question button further demonstrating her incapacity to comprehend the TA guidelines or the meaning within the button that states Ask A Question.
Keep the above in mind when you read through their replies on TA.
They seldom if ever stay on point and typically engage in a flagrant steer and smear campaign.
They have no business being DE on TA as they can't even comprehend the guidelines of TA.
Posts: 4,531
Threads: 241
Joined: Jan 2006
quote:
Originally posted by HereOnThePrimalEdge
I never had the impression Kathy was employed by Mitch Roth, I assumed from her posts they were acquaintances. I would strongly discourage anyone from calling him or his office about her posts on a couple of websites. I think he has plenty of other fish to fry. Not to mention it's just bad form.
I believe Kathy Hancock met Mitch Roth when TEH, KathyH and Mitch Roth were working on the "bullying bill". I think that started right after a cartoonist started drawing cartoons based on his experience with one, and then both of them and the legal battle that ensued. << I am not saying his work was acceptable >> just that is when the Bullying bill was in process. I dont know if it ever passed.
Posts: 325
Threads: 18
Joined: Dec 2011
I think somebody from Puna stole Kathy's computer, and router. Shame on those guys from Puna, so dirty, so smelly, such druggies and flashers!
Bad people..
punalvr
punalvr
Posts: 2,389
Threads: 126
Joined: Jun 2009
The reasons for the question answer guidelines are explicitly formed to reduce and discourage exactly what KamaaimaK and SheaG have done within that section of TA. When those guidelines are not adhered to, we see exactly the sort of nonsense it produces in the questions answers forum.
Report each post they have made that violates the guidelines. One question - on point answers only. If the answer is not objective and on point, then it's in the wrong forum and becomes a discussion. Thank-you's are allowed as a reply also. But the guidelines are very clear. Also, there is no allowance for undermining another members answer.
Simply click on -
Report inappropriate content.
Not travel related/WRONG FORUM.
Also report them for using the question answers forum inappropriately.
Posts: 5,638
Threads: 101
Joined: Dec 2008
I suggested a friend join TripAdvisor and head for the Island of Hawaii forum. She lasted about 4 hours before her topics were closed, account disabled and posts deleted. She dared disagree with the Destination Experts. Who said something about bullying?
|
