191,285 users have contributed to 42,792 threads and 257,349 posts.
In the past 24 hours, we have 3 new thread(s), 17 new post(s) and 44 new user(s).
@DG said:
Pingu, when you post on a public forum, you make the discussion public. You have no right only to solicit opinions that agree with your own.
Absolutely, which is why I'm entitled to respond to you in the same abbrasive manner that you employ in all of your posts. Dismissing your opinion seems to have rattled you rather quickly.
Have you read all my posts? I highly doubt it. [:O]
You think you "rattled me"? I highly doubt it. [:D]
DG
@tommalm said:
But when you, PaulR, start handing out insults it has gotten to a level which does not belong here at all.
@DG said:
Pingu, when you post on a public forum, you make the discussion public. You have no right only to solicit opinions that agree with your own.
Absolutely, which is why I'm entitled to respond to you in the same abbrasive manner that you employ in all of your posts. Dismissing your opinion seems to have rattled you rather quickly.
Have you read all my posts? I highly doubt it. 
You think you "rattled me"? I highly doubt it. 
DG
Sorry DG, completely used the wrong quote - I meant to grab a part of PaulR's post, and got distracted, then wrote a response to what was in my window, without spotting your name at the top.
@PaulR said:
[quote=Pingu]Bottom line is their actions are quite simply wrong, and we'd like to know why. No amount of jumping up and down and saying that other people do it is going to make their actions right.
Don't be so stupid. Right and wrong is not a matter of opinion. You are confusing them with legal and illegal; I have no doubt at all that there is no legal recourse against VSL's actions, particularly in the international market they operate in. But their actions are still wrong. Unless you believe dishonesty was declared to be ok at some point.
@PaulR said:
[quote=Pingu]Bottom line is their actions are quite simply wrong, and we'd like to know why. No amount of jumping up and down and saying that other people do it is going to make their actions right.
Don't be so stupid. Right and wrong is not a matter of opinion. You are confusing them with legal and illegal; I have no doubt at all that there is no legal recourse against VSL's actions, particularly in the international market they operate in. But their actions are still wrong. Unless you believe dishonesty was declared to be ok at some point.
@PaulR said:
Stephen - this business about promises pales into insignificance when you look at things as a whole. OK - I could concede it's a bit naughty - oh dear - can you ever forgive my type of thing. OK Steve - you win. Let's move on from that. It's business. It's Chinatown.
The company would probably like to stay in business and grow over time - yes?
We like VSL and their products - yes?
We have enjoyed over time high levels of service from them - yes?
We want them to have a future - yes?
While I couldn't agree more with what you say about VSL, its products, services and its customers' hopes for its future, I have to disagree with the idea that, in any contractual agreement - - written or implied, either party is free to change the terms of the contract whenever it suits them. (Try that with your credit card company!)
A company can be great, make great products, offer great service, have idealistic intentions at its core and still make flawed, self-defeating decisions. It isn't helpful to the survival of a company if those who perceive that it has made a poor decision, stay silent. If you were to perceive a friend engaged in what you thought to be predictably self-defeating behavior, would you not risk his or her anger, by pointing out what you perceive?
@stevesong said:
A company can be great, make great products, offer great service, have idealistic intentions at its core and still make flawed, self-defeating decisions. I
@stevesong said:
A company can be great, make great products, offer great service, have idealistic intentions at its core and still make flawed, self-defeating decisions. It isn't helpful to the survival of a company if those who perceive that it has made a poor decision, stay silent. If you were to perceive a friend engaged in what you thought to be predictably self-defeating behavior, would you not risk his or her anger, by pointing out what you perceive?
Stephen, I respect you a lot, when I consider how unlike many other posters in this thread, you have consistently helped people to get the best out of this software in this community. I also agree that if one perceives that VSL has made a mistake, one has a duty to inform them, but I believe that rather than insult them in public, one should set up a private dialogue. Anything else is more akin to the mob mentality, and is not something that I would want to be associated with.
DG
Wow, you really seem to have a hard time understanding this - No - it is not about wanting something now and not being able to afford it! That is the point! What about the sentence you do not understand?@PaulR said:
This thread - Fred - is not really about insurance or assurance. This thread is about people wanting a thing right now and not having enough money concurrent with imminent purchase. It's about 'wants' and not 'needs' - we talked on this years ago if I remember correctly.
@PaulR said:
Dishonesty? I assume you have a bank account do you? Do you go to your bank and tell them they are a bunch of assholes and totally dishonest?
Frequently!! I've taken them up on numerous counts and won on many.
I'm giving up on this argument, because you completely refuse to see my point. I don't doubt that other firms behave absolutely dreadfully. When they do so in breach of contract then yes I call them on it. When they've had the forsight (and banks fall into this category) to mention in their contract that they can alter clauses with sufficient notice, then there's not a lot you can do. Unfortunately VSL didn't mention ever changing their 'lifetime' promise - they fall into the category of firms I would usually be calling and ranting at.
And it's all very well pointing out that most firms behave with even less concern for their customers, but VSL aren't most firms, and I wouldn't want them to be. I would hate to have to think of them in the way I do British Gas or the Labour party. Which is why I'd like them to explain.
And yes I did try to open a private dialogue with them, but they ignored that too.
@Pingu said:
I'm giving up on this argument, because you completely refuse to see my point.
That's actually a very good point. On the other side, the advantage of making it public is, that everybody could read the answers of VSL at once, which actually makes it easier for everybody.@DG said:
I also agree that if one perceives that VSL has made a mistake, one has a duty to inform them, but I believe that rather than insult them in public, one should set up a private dialogue. Anything else is more akin to the mob mentality, and is not something that I would want to be associated with.
I don't think that VSL has the time and appetite to answer the same question a hundret times per eMail.
hmmm, are we supposed to all go private mails now? We are quite some users here - what is so problematic communicating with us? thanks best@herb said:
Whom and when did you try to contact, I couldn't find any emails in our records?
best
Herb
We just try to take care, that all support emails reach our desk, that's all.
May I suggest that, on such an important thread, attention should be focused on the issues at hand and avoid squabbling amongst ourselves while they watch from above? I believe that the customer's argument has been amply presented in a variety of ways, sometimes soberly, other times indignantly, but let's face it, it has been presented. VSL itself has not counter-argued or even presented a single position, an iota of thought, a modicum of explanation, not for why they need money, not for why the world of business is the way it is, not for why the upgrades are changing, but for one thing only: How they can think it would be easy and ethical to walk away from their repeated public paeans of "never pay twice..." (should be changed to "never pay more than three or four times..."), "VIP program", and the rest; pompous lures which, along with the quality of the product, constituted the edge between the VSL and its competitors.
Again, VSL's new stance could be understood if not condoned, in case the company decided to cease manufacturing the specific product, or in case the company was going under. Since neither is occurring, certain conclusions concerning the management's business practices will become foregone; we have been accorded no other information.
Lest we forget, the product itself would not have sold one tenth if it was not for the demo section, bristling with works and great mock-ups by brilliant programmers, that is how I was convinced to join the bandwagon myself in the first place. Those fantastic, visionary efforts are publicly displayed, as are all the collected sang praises to the company - "many thanks again for the wonderful products", "I love you team of the VSL" etc. I don't see a reason why valid criticisms should be privatized. The praises have seemed to be of a collective mentality, so will be the complaints.
Please, let's concentrate our efforts in getting the company to re-examine their recent coup, whether they will decide it is the right thing to do or that it is in their best business interests is a secondary consideration.
Sincerely,
Errikos.