And once again Saints Web Ltd shows its corporate immaturity wrt their customers

[1976_Child]

Saint's Web Ltd have once again shown that they are an aspiring, yet immature, company. They have closed a perfectly decent thread about abusive actions towards women - or given by women towards men. A thread which was - in a not unexpected fashion - shining a light upon the very pertinent, prevalent and persistent fact that women do beat men and not all domestic violence is perpetrated by the man.

 

Once again the directors of Saints Web Ltd (A FOR PROFIT LIMITED COMPANY WHICH HAS TAKEN MY MONEY) and their employees have shut me out of a PRODUCT (the forum thread) with out even given their CUSTOMERS an explanation.

 

I am not happy; I want to know that Saints Web Ltd have received my complaint. I am a paying customer. I want to know who the Mods are (a list of handles, not names) prominently displayed on the site. I want a Customers' Charter, detailing how Saints Web Ltd will deal with us customers and how much power the Mods have over our threads. Do certain Mods have more power than others? At the very least, as a paying customer, I expect that when a thread is closed by a Mod, that an explanation is given as to why. The explanation should reference the Customers' Charter and the Company's Usage Policy. If any transgression of either was made in this case then we should know. We use your product, we pay to use your company's product.

 

We are customers. You are trading as a for profit Ltd company. A bit more professionalism is required.

[Deppo]

Crikey!

[Spudders]

At the very least.......I expect that when a thread is closed by a Mod, that an explanation is given as to why.

 

I've thought this before! Seems perfectly reasonable, regardless of if people pay or not. Fair play to Son of Bob recently, he did exactly that and although I didn't agree with the thread being closed, I could at least understand why he had, due to his closing note.

[Dave Benson Phillips]

I find it amusing that a thread is alive, with the owner of the website contributing to it, then one of the appointed moderators decide to lock it.

 

Inconsistancy at its best!

[Micky]

If you had a similar complaint with any other company, or shopping outlet for example, would your first recourse be to stand in the middle of the shop, ensure you had an audience and then shout the odds about your complaint. Or would you perhaps politely and discretly ask to speak to the manager personally - just a thought.

[for_heaven's_Saint]

I have to say I agree with you 1976_child. It's annoying to see threads closed for no apparent reason and would be good to at least have a reason if not some sort of charter to reference.

[OttawaSaint]

I find it amusing that a thread is alive, with the owner of the website contributing to it, then one of the appointed moderators decide to lock it.

 

Inconsistancy at its best!

 

Yeah didn't get to let you know that I knew what "claret" meant in the context you used it. I am an expat so fully up on slang. I was actually saluting you, the internet persona you have created is bloody genius in my eyes...

[CB Saint]

Well perhaps as a paying customer, if you don't like the service, do what others would do and find an alternative. Or give up your time and become a mod yourself and that way you can influence what happens on here. Just my opinion.

 

Also whilst saints web is incorporated as a for profit organisation, I would be surprised if it makes any money especially if you take the time required to run this site into account.

[GenevaSaint]

We are customers. You are trading as a for profit Ltd company. A bit more professionalism is required.

 

A for profit company? I'd be very suprised if the fees cover the costs of running the site and paying for Steve's time.

[Essruu]

Yeah didn't get to let you know that I knew what "claret" meant in the context you used it. I am an expat so fully up on slang. I was actually saluting you, the internet persona you have created is bloody genius in my eyes...

 

It's not a persona - he's a **** in real life too ;-)

[Dog]

Sorry to all concerned.

[Johnny Bognor]

Once again the directors of Saints Web Ltd (A FOR PROFIT LIMITED COMPANY WHICH HAS TAKEN MY MONEY) and their employees have shut me out of a PRODUCT (the forum thread) with out even given their CUSTOMERS an explanation.

 

We are customers. You are trading as a for profit Ltd company. A bit more professionalism is required.

 

To be fair, they only made £659 profit in the year ending 30/06/09.

 

More of a "NOT FOR VERY MUCH PROFIT" company and considering the work they put in, it isn't far off being a charity.

[JustMike]

Saint's Web Ltd have once again shown that they are an aspiring, yet immature, company. They have closed a perfectly decent thread about abusive actions towards women - or given by women towards men. A thread which was - in a not unexpected fashion - shining a light upon the very pertinent, prevalent and persistent fact that women do beat men and not all domestic violence is perpetrated by the man.

 

Once again the directors of Saints Web Ltd (A FOR PROFIT LIMITED COMPANY WHICH HAS TAKEN MY MONEY) and their employees have shut me out of a PRODUCT (the forum thread) with out even given their CUSTOMERS an explanation.

 

I am not happy; I want to know that Saints Web Ltd have received my complaint. I am a paying customer. I want to know who the Mods are (a list of handles, not names) prominently displayed on the site. I want a Customers' Charter, detailing how Saints Web Ltd will deal with us customers and how much power the Mods have over our threads. Do certain Mods have more power than others? At the very least, as a paying customer, I expect that when a thread is closed by a Mod, that an explanation is given as to why. The explanation should reference the Customers' Charter and the Company's Usage Policy. If any transgression of either was made in this case then we should know. We use your product, we pay to use your company's product.

 

We are customers. You are trading as a for profit Ltd company. A bit more professionalism is required.

 

i think someone needs to get out more ;-)

[Draino76]

Glad that thread was closed, as it descended into a bunch of tards trying to be humorous about slapping women. Pretty unnecessary from the 'tuff guys' IMO.

[Dave Benson Phillips]

It's not a persona - he's a **** in real life too ;-)

 

I try to tell everyone that, but nobody seems to believe me.

[Pancake]

They have closed a perfectly decent thread about abusive actions towards women - or given by women towards men. A thread which was - in a not unexpected fashion - shining a light upon the very pertinent, prevalent and persistent fact that women do beat men and not all domestic violence is perpetrated by the man.

 

I would go back and have a second read of the "perfectly decent thread" before I spouted off if I were you. It may well have had 3 or 4 decent posta at the start but is ended up like most threads on here, pointless "jokes" and posturing.

[saint_stevo]

Saint's Web Ltd have once again shown that they are an aspiring, yet immature, company. They have closed a perfectly decent thread about abusive actions towards women - or given by women towards men. A thread which was - in a not unexpected fashion - shining a light upon the very pertinent, prevalent and persistent fact that women do beat men and not all domestic violence is perpetrated by the man.

 

Once again the directors of Saints Web Ltd (A FOR PROFIT LIMITED COMPANY WHICH HAS TAKEN MY MONEY) and their employees have shut me out of a PRODUCT (the forum thread) with out even given their CUSTOMERS an explanation.

 

I am not happy; I want to know that Saints Web Ltd have received my complaint. I am a paying customer. I want to know who the Mods are (a list of handles, not names) prominently displayed on the site. I want a Customers' Charter, detailing how Saints Web Ltd will deal with us customers and how much power the Mods have over our threads. Do certain Mods have more power than others? At the very least, as a paying customer, I expect that when a thread is closed by a Mod, that an explanation is given as to why. The explanation should reference the Customers' Charter and the Company's Usage Policy. If any transgression of either was made in this case then we should know. We use your product, we pay to use your company's product.

 

We are customers. You are trading as a for profit Ltd company. A bit more professionalism is required.

 

Shut up and go away.

 

Don't like it? Find somewhere else to talk about hitting women and the possibility of Craig Bellamy signing for Southampton.

 

You wouldn't be missed

[thesaint sfc]

It is a bit sh*t on here nowadays. All went down hill after I stopped being a mod. I think you're barking up the wrong tree whinging about spending a fiver on the place though - I'd just voice my opinion on it now being a boring, confrontational, and generally rubbish place.

[Fowllyd]

Saint's Web Ltd have once again shown that they are an aspiring, yet immature, company. They have closed a perfectly decent thread about abusive actions towards women - or given by women towards men. A thread which was - in a not unexpected fashion - shining a light upon the very pertinent, prevalent and persistent fact that women do beat men and not all domestic violence is perpetrated by the man.

 

Once again the directors of Saints Web Ltd (A FOR PROFIT LIMITED COMPANY WHICH HAS TAKEN MY MONEY) and their employees have shut me out of a PRODUCT (the forum thread) with out even given their CUSTOMERS an explanation.

 

I am not happy; I want to know that Saints Web Ltd have received my complaint. I am a paying customer. I want to know who the Mods are (a list of handles, not names) prominently displayed on the site. I want a Customers' Charter, detailing how Saints Web Ltd will deal with us customers and how much power the Mods have over our threads. Do certain Mods have more power than others? At the very least, as a paying customer, I expect that when a thread is closed by a Mod, that an explanation is given as to why. The explanation should reference the Customers' Charter and the Company's Usage Policy. If any transgression of either was made in this case then we should know. We use your product, we pay to use your company's product.

 

We are customers. You are trading as a for profit Ltd company. A bit more professionalism is required.

 

Right on brother! You're sticking it to The Man there, no messing.

[Wade Garrett]

Saint's Web Ltd have once again shown that they are an aspiring, yet immature, company. They have closed a perfectly decent thread about abusive actions towards women - or given by women towards men. A thread which was - in a not unexpected fashion - shining a light upon the very pertinent, prevalent and persistent fact that women do beat men and not all domestic violence is perpetrated by the man.

 

Once again the directors of Saints Web Ltd (A FOR PROFIT LIMITED COMPANY WHICH HAS TAKEN MY MONEY) and their employees have shut me out of a PRODUCT (the forum thread) with out even given their CUSTOMERS an explanation.

 

I am not happy; I want to know that Saints Web Ltd have received my complaint. I am a paying customer. I want to know who the Mods are (a list of handles, not names) prominently displayed on the site. I want a Customers' Charter, detailing how Saints Web Ltd will deal with us customers and how much power the Mods have over our threads. Do certain Mods have more power than others? At the very least, as a paying customer, I expect that when a thread is closed by a Mod, that an explanation is given as to why. The explanation should reference the Customers' Charter and the Company's Usage Policy. If any transgression of either was made in this case then we should know. We use your product, we pay to use your company's product.

 

We are customers. You are trading as a for profit Ltd company. A bit more professionalism is required.

 

Your just angry because it's nearly the end of your school holidays.

[Deppo]

All went down hill after I stopped being a mod.

 

I agree

[Hatch]

I'm only gonna pay £3.76 next year. That'll learn them.

[Deppo]

If you are going to rail against something, this is definitely the best thing to rail against. At least on the internet, people are forced to listen to you. Or, at the very least, you can't see them laughing at you.

Edited 20 August, 2010 by Deppo

[fish fingers]

It is a bit sh*t on here nowadays. All went down hill after I stopped being a mod. I think you're barking up the wrong tree whinging about spending a fiver on the place though - I'd just voice my opinion on it now being a boring, confrontational, and generally rubbish place.

 

on which you've gone to the effort of posting 5,912 times.

[scott_saints]

No one should be stupid enough to pay a fiver to speak on an average internet forum anyway. I am one of these people, for some reason.

[Torres]

You gotta fight, for your right, to paaaaaarty!

 

Keep strong man, keep fighting the good fight. In no way should you probably find a better use for your energy and don't anyone tell you differently.

[Channon's Sideburns]

Surely the best form of protest is to make your subscriptions over the well used 'Pompey Method'?

 

It's simple, spread your £5 over 4 years.

[Saint-scooby]

I dont really care xx

[Durleyfos]

lol at 1976_Child for taking the innernet WAY too seriously.

[Joey-deacons-left-nut]

I think you'l find that you agree to a whole raft of rules when you join this forum, so unfortunatly you have no grounds for recourse.

[Clapham Saint]

Rather than pay £5. Sign up to pay £5 but then call in AA and pay just £1 spread over 4 years at 25p per year.

 

Bargain

[SuperMikey]

Marmite is f*cking horrible

[Mao Cap]

Make a nailbomb, strap it to yourself and infiiltrate SaintsWeb's Fortress of Darkness. Say that if they don't return your fiver back in ten minutes...KABOOM!

[Baj]

1976_Child again makes some good points actually (even if it is a little... trantrum..ish.. if thats a word).

 

All threads, when locked SHOULD be followed by a single post by whichever moderator locked the thread explaining why, even if that's "locking thread for obvious reasons". Ill raise this again with all the mods and ensure its stuck to.

 

Customer charter: To be quite honest, given how much spare time myself and steve put into this (unpaid I might add, before you try to link the "profit making business" lining our own pockets... it doesnt), I wouldnt expect this any time soon, if ever. If we had a list of priorities (for example, I've spent the last 12 hours working on a new feature for the website) the charter can wait.

 

Mods: If, after so many posts, you don't know who the mods are then I'd be shocked. We wont be displaying these on the website because, quite frankly, I've got better things to do. I'm sure there's probably a way of finding out this information from the forum if it's absolutely required.

 

Lastly, as others have pointed out, if you want us to take your complaint seriously, speak to us directly. You know who we are and standing on a soapbox shouting "look at me" isn't really going to endear us into providing you with a quick reply. (I've been looking at this thread all day thinking... meh.. better things to do).

[Saintandy666]

http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/showgroups.php

 

There is a link to this on the forum front page, shows all the admins and mods and stuff.

[scotty]

A for profit company? I'd be very suprised if the fees cover the costs of running the site and paying for Steve's time.

 

well, having seen his mansion and country estate I can confirm that. The profits he rakes in here wouldn't cover the cost of more than an hour for one of his many footmen, let alone his own wages. I imagine he burns more in petrol than he makes in a year on here during a ten minute drive in his Bentley. (the white one, not the blue one......)

[dune]

Some people need to lighten up.

[Deano6]

1976_Child again makes some good points actually (even if it is a little... trantrum..ish.. if thats a word).

 

All threads, when locked SHOULD be followed by a single post by whichever moderator locked the thread explaining why, even if that's "locking thread for obvious reasons". Ill raise this again with all the mods and ensure its stuck to.

 

Customer charter: To be quite honest, given how much spare time myself and steve put into this (unpaid I might add, before you try to link the "profit making business" lining our own pockets... it doesnt), I wouldnt expect this any time soon, if ever. If we had a list of priorities (for example, I've spent the last 12 hours working on a new feature for the website) the charter can wait.

 

Mods: If, after so many posts, you don't know who the mods are then I'd be shocked. We wont be displaying these on the website because, quite frankly, I've got better things to do. I'm sure there's probably a way of finding out this information from the forum if it's absolutely required.

 

Lastly, as others have pointed out, if you want us to take your complaint seriously, speak to us directly. You know who we are and standing on a soapbox shouting "look at me" isn't really going to endear us into providing you with a quick reply. (I've been looking at this thread all day thinking... meh.. better things to do).

 

I'm never sure what's the best way to get the attention of the admins, so it's useful to hear your feedback that starting threads about complaints gets you thinking about it all day. I'm always worried that PMs end up getting "lost in the system", especially the ones which go to a 'catch all' account like reported posts do (I can't PM directly so end up having to report a DBP post - 2 birds one stone), so it's a relief to hear starting such threads is indeed the way to go.

[OldNick]

I assume Granty etc have to make sure these things don't get out of hand, especially a subject like men hitting women.

[buctootim]

I've got no views on closing the thread, although I can see why it was done. To add my tuppence worth to the issue. My ex had often blown up at me, including threatening me with a knife. Always in private and I never responded.

 

One day she laid into to me outside of my house in front of the kids. I just blocked her punches. The next door neighbours told her to stop (not unreasonably) to which she proceeded to threaten them. They then called the police. Tbh it was the best thing that ever happened to me. Previously she had been a total nightmare over care of the kids. One successful prosecution for assault and threatening behaviour later (despite her brief trying to claim me holding her arms to stop her punches was me assaulting her) has meant she is totally changed over access and care. She wouldn't have a leg to stand on in a custody case. If I had hit her back, I'm damn sure it would have been me in the dock and her with sole care.