The Splosh UK Forum

Hi

It is a constant battle on the forum trying to keep the balance between discussion posts, amateur fun posts and professional posts about right. At the moment, there are more than enough people submitting professional posts purely to promote the goods they sell to make money. We are not in the main complaining about those as they provide a useful source of pictures and information for members. However, starting a separate thread to advertise the virtues of a site that already promotes itself heavily (ie a "Shout Out" or "Tribute") adds absolutely no value to the forum whatsoever. Since the site already advertises here people already know about it and it provides no entertainment value whatsoever. We therefore ask you nicely to refrain from doing so as it merely adds needlessly to the number of promotional posts.

If you wish to express your appreciation of a site's work, feel free to add your remarks to one of their promotional threads, DO NOT start a new one.

Bill

PS Tributes to sites that no longer exist or don't choose to promote here are okay.

Just to state the fact that I had no involvement in the creation of Carmans post, this is obviously about that thread which I see has been deleted. It is of no concern to me at the end of the day, but it was however lovely to read such positive comments. Posting in this forum really does nothing for sales for my sites, I post here because there are peopole here who don't use other furums such as UMD or EC Gunge. My pictures are an offering to the community with no obligation to pay to see anything they don't want to.
I do feel a little victimised here, maybe it's just PMS, but I feel the whole thing has been blown out of proportion to some extent.

Jessie xxx
www.messy-jessie.com
www.jessiespiedgirls.com
www.jessiesundressedmess.com

Nobody has suggested at any point that you are in any way responsible for anyone's else's posts, and nobody is being victimised. Every so often we have to impose rules to try and maintain the balance of material on the forum, otherwise it would just be a series of adverts. We are not blowing anything out of proportion merely laying down some rules to prevent any further disagreement.

Wow, so on a splosh forum, we cant talk about splosh websites we have purchased. This is a shame. I have read what i put over and over, and put deep thought into it, and at no point in the post could i see that i gave negative comments any website or anyone at all.

In a professional manner, To someone on a low income i find it absolutely disgusting that no one can give feed back to a website they are very happy with to give people a view of a who only have enough income for one membership every few months, and giving a view of the website so they can read will help there decision.

From other peoples perspective im sure they will want to see a "inside" review of a website, as many can afford multiple memberships to websites, they will STILL want to know what its like from a happy customer.

And from a model/producers view, this new rule will upset 90% of them simple because making and selling content is one thing...but why on earth wouldn't they want to hear great feedback from a customer? I simply cant understand why they wouldn't want to hear it...

And the fact we cant give reviews to websites, but people can upload movies with "info and pictures" just doesn't add up.

I will always disagree...and im sure 90% of people will...But you are Bill..and you are a big name in wam..So im sure people will just suck up to you and take the piss out of the small people on this forum.

But i know one day someone who doesn't have alot of income will finally have some spare money after saving for weeks..months and buy a website they will not be happy with..not because its poor..but it just doesn't match what they are looking for..and i can firmly say that they will be wishing this "new" rule didn't ever exist and would want to read reviews in the future....but if they cant....They will be unsure....therefore will not buy a membership.....therefore websites income will lower.

Now who ever read that...will probably disagree, because im a "small guy" on this site...so don't be sarcastic, try to be funny, and even just act "hard" in front of who ever will be reading.

As I said, views on websites are welcome on relevant threads. All we have asked is to put them in the appropriate place, namely any existing thread about that site. Praise for websites that do not publicise their goods here is also welcome. There is absolutely no difference from before except we're asking you to put any praise in the right threads. Nobody is preventing feedback from customers, we are just asking you put it in a suitable place.

Carsman, could I suggest you re-read, carefully, what Bill wrote?

carsman wrote:Wow, so on a splosh forum, we cant talk about splosh websites we have purchased. This is a shame. I have read what i put over and over, and put deep thought into it, and at no point in the post could i see that i gave negative comments any website or anyone at all.

Bill did not suggest that you had.

carsman wrote:In a professional manner, To someone on a low income i find it absolutely disgusting that no one can give feed back to a website they are very happy with to give people a view of a who only have enough income for one membership every few months, and giving a view of the website so they can read will help there decision.

As you will see, if you re-read the instructions, Bill is not suggesting that you can't give feedback - indeed, I'm sure he'll agree that any feedback (especially constructive feedback) is very welcome and useful. He merely asks people not to start a *new* thread specifically about a producer when that producer already has threads on the site. You could, for example, have added your post to an existing thread started by Jessie, which would have been fine and, arguably, more relevant anyway as it keeps things 'grouped together' neatly.

One of the things I love about the Splosh site is that, unlike UMD for example, many threads here are just general chit-chat rather than commercial adverts. UMD is almost entirely the opposite, with the vast majority of threads little more than announcements and adverts. Bill's new rule appears to seek to maintain the existing balance on the Splosh site.

Carsman - if you don't like this forum or its rules, "other forums are available"

We all have our preferences in wam (in my case, I like the older stuff from Bill, Aquadisiac, Brian Grove, etc). You prefer Jessie's efforts. Fair enough.

But there's no need to be rude to Bill....yes, he is Bill and, yes, is "a big name in wam"....one of the first publishers/producers from many years ago and always 100% reliable. And he has always provided this forum and all the resources and pictures in this site totally for free, you don't have to buy anything or even sign up for a mailing list. In my book, this give him the right to set his very reasonable rules as he sees fit. Most regulars here have never met him, certainly have no need to suck up to him or anyone else, or to take this piss out of anyone. Why should they?

And so the sucking up begins....Bill asked everyone to post in existing threads...Im asking people not to argue with my point....So yet another point that people will suck up has been proven. I gave my view, and people jump on the bandwagon.

SimonW wrote:Carsman - if you don't like this forum or its rules, "other forums are available"

We all have our preferences in wam (in my case, I like the older stuff from Bill, Aquadisiac, Brian Grove, etc). You prefer Jessie's efforts. Fair enough.

But there's no need to be rude to Bill....yes, he is Bill and, yes, is "a big name in wam"....one of the first publishers/producers from many years ago and always 100% reliable. And he has always provided this forum and all the resources and pictures in this site totally for free, you don't have to buy anything or even sign up for a mailing list. In my book, this give him the right to set his very reasonable rules as he sees fit. Most regulars here have never met him, certainly have no need to suck up to him or anyone else, or to take this piss out of anyone. Why should they?

You know when you are at work, and your boss says a joke, and you find it funny and suck up to him, you said it with "other forums are available" Point proven.
I will give my view like Bill has, but people WILL go on his side. I could say that world poverty should end..and bill might say it shouldn't.....someone somewhere will agree with bill just because hes bill. So im not being rude to him, at all, i respect him, and always will, but it doesn't stop mygiving my view of disappointment to a decision.

Claymore_wam wrote:Carsman, could I suggest you re-read, carefully, what Bill wrote?

carsman wrote:Wow, so on a splosh forum, we cant talk about splosh websites we have purchased. This is a shame. I have read what i put over and over, and put deep thought into it, and at no point in the post could i see that i gave negative comments any website or anyone at all.

Bill did not suggest that you had.

carsman wrote:In a professional manner, To someone on a low income i find it absolutely disgusting that no one can give feed back to a website they are very happy with to give people a view of a who only have enough income for one membership every few months, and giving a view of the website so they can read will help there decision.

As you will see, if you re-read the instructions, Bill is not suggesting that you can't give feedback - indeed, I'm sure he'll agree that any feedback (especially constructive feedback) is very welcome and useful. He merely asks people not to start a *new* thread specifically about a producer when that producer already has threads on the site. You could, for example, have added your post to an existing thread started by Jessie, which would have been fine and, arguably, more relevant anyway as it keeps things 'grouped together' neatly.

One of the things I love about the Splosh site is that, unlike UMD for example, many threads here are just general chit-chat rather than commercial adverts. UMD is almost entirely the opposite, with the vast majority of threads little more than announcements and adverts. Bill's new rule appears to seek to maintain the existing balance on the Splosh site.

Be totally honest with yourself..If a guy had enough money to join just one website...and he wants to know what its like from a customers view..is he really going to search though all the users post just to see by chance someone has left a review of the site...Really? If he does....he will have to look though 100s of posts.

I gave a review simply because
It shows appreciation to the website/creator
It gives a clear and honest view from a customer of the website
It will boost sales for the website

If its under a existing post...No one will see it unless they are on a page. If there is a post started just t give a review, its certain more people will look at it.

BillShipton wrote:As I said, views on websites are welcome on relevant threads. All we have asked is to put them in the appropriate place, namely any existing thread about that site. Praise for websites that do not publicise their goods here is also welcome. There is absolutely no difference from before except we're asking you to put any praise in the right threads. Nobody is preventing feedback from customers, we are just asking you put it in a suitable place.

Well can you please point me to a place 100% dedicated to reviews please on this site?

Being self-employed, I don't have a boss. Or am I the boss? Should I suck up to myself? Or laugh at my own jokes? Do I think that world poverty should end? Or should I say it shouldn't? Shall I agree with myself just because I'm me? Am I being rude to me? Do I respect myself? Do I respect Bill? Am I being rude to me? Am I disappointed or shall I give my view? I'm puzzled? My head hurts. I want to go home. I want a wee. I want my Mum!

SimonW wrote:Being self-employed, I don't have a boss. Or am I the boss? Should I suck up to myself? Or laugh at my own jokes? Do I think that world poverty should end? Or should I say it shouldn't? Shall I agree with myself just because I'm me? Am I being rude to me? Do I respect myself? Do I respect Bill? Am I being rude to me? Am I disappointed or shall I give my view? I'm puzzled? My head hurts. I want to go home. I want a wee. I want my Mum!

Thanks for taking this off topic.
And golden showers are not aloud on this forum.

carsman wrote:Thanks for taking this off topic.
And golden showers are not aloud on this forum.

I think they would make a gentle sprinkling sound but you probably meant 'allowed'.
To get back on topic; Jessie is a lovely person (so is Bill!) and she might well be somewhat embarassed by this thread.
Surely we can put all this behind us now, we all know the rules and should abide by them.

Richard wrote:

carsman wrote:Thanks for taking this off topic.
And golden showers are not aloud on this forum.

I think they would make a gentle sprinkling sound but you probably meant 'allowed'.
To get back on topic; Jessie is a lovely person (so is Bill!) and she might well be somewhat embarrassed by this thread.
Surely we can put all this behind us now, we all know the rules and should abide by them.

I have dyslexia, so thanks, no i cant spell, mr clever.
And Jess was very pleased by it, and even she said it would be nice as this site does not help her with sales at all.