[funding pro]

In another thread there were some posts that were taken down, and rightfully so. Just curious though on the policy of the forums. What crosses the line and what doesnt cross the line. Was the sponsorship of the "attacked" company the reason behind the take down?

I signed up for this forum to learn more, share my knowledge from years of experience and hopefully better our industry and some of the posts I have seen on here are just conversations between a handful of individuals that are using anonymity and the power of the internet to take shots at their competitors.

[Sean Cash]

That's a good question. I think it all comes down to the primary goal of why this forum exists and that's to collaborate, share, network, learn, and to create some transparency in the industry. That sometimes means discussing things that are bad but hopefully with the purpose of making things better.

There is no special protection afforded to a sponsor. In a lot of the cases where posts have been deleted, it was because the intention behind the post was to defame or attack someone else. They were either not constructive or not constructively worded. These kind of posts usually spark heated emotional responses from other parties (which might be entertaining for a few minutes) but don't do much in the way of adding any kind of value.

If you had an issue with a funder/iso/rep and you feel that you really need to handle it here on the forum, there is a right and wrong way to do this. The right way is to explain your issue and politely ask for the alleged offender to address these concerns.

The wrong way is to title your post "beware of ABC funder", rant in the body, and top it off with links to complaint websites. We all know how these types of threads are going to play out and they will be ugly and add no value.

Now if there is really a fraudster in our mix, I think those companies will be outed naturally if a large volume of constructively worded grievances are being posted and are not being responded to.

A large portion of the members here have chosen to create a username that makes their identity transparent. Anonymity is still of course allowed but it may work against you if you abuse your anonymity to attack others without hope of achieving any kind resolution.

[funding pro]

Thanks Sean

[MCAVeteran]

"transparency in the industry" - with social media, forums like these, and information on the digital highway, the amount of background on companies, people, and, situations whether good or bad is readily available. Sometimes it may be bad, sometimes good. This is the risk a forum or social media presents to anyone who is doing good or bad. It can work for or against you. I personally think it keeps companies and people accountable and like mentioned above, if its presented correctly, shouldn't be an issue.

[GoodCustomerService]

If I was a funder, I'd prefer to respond to a negative comment or accusation through an industry forum instead of through a "ripoff report" or BBB complaint. I agree that the way you present it means a lot.