Horological Meandering

Dear friends,

PuristS hold themselves to the highest standards of integrity. However there are individuals that use the influence of our forums to manipulate events to their own advantage and this is unacceptable.

Please try to resolve your service and quality issues prior to posting complaints. The moderator team is available offline to assist. It is PuristS responsibility to fairly present all sides of every situation.

People sometimes use the promise of a glowing watch review to gain access to products, discounts or gifts from watch companies and watchmakers. Your moderators agree to never accept gifts or ‘special favors’, beyond what the brands provide to general customers and members of the press and we expect our members to maintain the same standards. Please take this into consideration in all your dealings with companies or watchmakers so that we never compromise the integrity of PuristS.

In this 12th year of the forums' existence, we want to applaud the wonderful contributions by all our members. The incidents we describe are rare, but we don’t want to see this manipulation occurring on PuristS.

Regards,

The PuristSPro Team

PuristS: Pursuing Perfection in an Imperfect World

This message has been edited by AndrewD on 2013-06-04 04:57:31

Cheers,

But how can it be implemented? This message has been edited by amerix on 2013-05-28 11:45:22 This message has been edited by amerix on 2013-05-28 11:50:16 This message has been edited by amerix on 2013-05-28 11:52:07 This message has been edited by amerix on 2013-05-28 11:53:43 This message has been edited by amerix on 2013-05-28 11:57:39

I know I'm frequently called impractically idealistic, sometimes worse...

but I continue to believe the deciding factor in gray areas lie in the intentions, purely and a priori.

There IS a difference between writing something sincere, and then receiving accolades for it, and writing something glowing AFTER there is promise (or pressure) to do so, with explicit or implicit quid pro quo benefit, though over time I agree it can get increasingly gray.

And unfortunately, part of the responsibility of managing this site is that of policing it...not a job any of us relish, I'm sure.

We live in an imperfect world; the best we can do is try.

Thanks, Andrew.

 

I hope you are well.....

... including, but not limited to, "Respect" and "Courtesy".

Just want to make sure every member enjoys the healthy discussion and experience here.

Ken

and the flesh is weak.......as long as its kept to a decent level....

1. This is a very clean site and we all benefit from that.

2. This is by and large not an "evaluative" site. If you want to tell the world someone is bad (or good) there are other places to do it where your views will reach people seeking exactly that type of information. I do not perceive that as being part of the mission here.

3. Watch companies' reputations are much easier to tear down than they are for watch companies to build. Engaging in such an intrinsically unequal contest smacks of bullying; when done for personal gain, it's worse.

4. Of course, the management is the judge and jury with respect to any transgression, and we can only wish judges in the outside world were as concerned with fairness and the best interests of their society as are ours in here.

Best, Horo

No message body

No message body

or my own opinion of course.
luckily, being a vintage guy, i dont think any brand will be offering me incitements to write a good review.

without the unbiased reviews, politeness and friendship of the members i wouldnt be here so i'm glad these reminders come out occasionally so that nothing changes.

Graham

Fully agree with the spirit behind themessage and absolutely perfect.

......philosophy that distinguished this Forum from others. 

a medical conference. This message has been edited by watch-guy.com on 2013-05-31 13:53:47