White Knights are bad news for hobbyists and professional, reliable providers

[jbravo_123]

Originally Posted by Malcolm1357

I basically agree with that joesmo. But the guys I take issue with are the ones who come to the defense of the most despicable behavior of providers in the forums and then when you look at their reviews they're all positive. Some of these guys even go as far as writing a lot of very sketchy things about the provider in the review and then giving a "yes" recommendation. This is misleading in two ways. One, the provider, from my understanding, can not see the ROS, so she just sees the "yes" recommendation and she assumes everything is good. Two, a lot of hobbyists will look at the review page(s) without actually reading the reviews because they don't have premium access or they are just to lazy to read them if they do have premium access, and all they see is a bunch of "yes" recommendations and they base their decisions off that.

If a hobbyist is too lazy to do research and read reviews, it's their own damn fault, imo.

Second, if they're too cheap to pay $20 to get premium access so they can read the ROS parts, they probably shouldn't be hobbying.

[Malcolm1357]

Originally Posted by jbravo_123

If a hobbyist is too lazy to do research and read reviews, it's their own damn fault, imo.

Second, if they're too cheap to pay $20 to get premium access so they can read the ROS parts, they probably shouldn't be hobbying.

All true, 100% agree. If these guys are too cheap/lazy then it is their bad. Still, this does not excuse the fact that these white knights distort the truth when a legitimate issue arises.

My definition of a white knight is someone who will defend a provider even in the most absurd circumstances.

Those people who have nice things to say about a provider, who has earned the right to have good things said about her, are not white knights, they are good, solid ECCIE contributors.

To defend a white knight is no better than actually being a white knight.

[jbravo_123]

Originally Posted by Malcolm1357

All true, 100% agree. If these guys are too cheap/lazy then it is their bad. Still, this does not excuse the fact that these white knights distort the truth when a legitimate issue arises.

My definition of a white knight is someone who will defend a provider even in the most absurd circumstances.

Those people who have nice things to say about a provider, who has earned the right to have good things said about her, are not white knights, they are good, solid ECCIE contributors.

To defend a white knight is no better than actually being a white knight.

I just don't think white knights are a particularly virulent plague upon ECCIE. Just as you get people who will trash providers no matter what or get untrustworthy providers, you just need to do your research carefully and form your own opinion.

[Cpalmson]

I guess I'm one of the White Knights b/c I defended the provider's decision to post the information as described in the Creepy Asshole thread. But wait, I can't be a White Knight b/c I've never seen the provider in question. Let alone write 10 positive reviews on her. As a matter of fact, the provider in question is only a semi touring lady who comes the FL Panhandle on rare occasions.

Malcom, I'm not trying to bust your balls or anything b/c your initial point is very valid. White Knights do a huge dis-service to clients and providers. I just think it was a little unfair of you to throw anyone who disagreed with your POV under the bus by calling them a White Knight. Heck, the thread in question really doesn't even rise to the level of calling anyone out as a White Knight. Usually White Knights rush to the defense of their "provider" when a bad review has been made. At least that is how I define a White Knight. Anyway, my point is that you should probably be a little more careful when you use the White knight label. Yes, I know you didn't name any names, but still just be careful. BTW for the most part enjoy what you post.

[Malcolm1357]

Originally Posted by Cpalmson

I guess I'm one of the White Knights b/c I defended the provider's decision to post the information as described in the Creepy Asshole thread. But wait, I can't be a White Knight b/c I've never seen the provider in question. Let alone write 10 positive reviews on her. As a matter of fact, the provider in question is only a semi touring lady who comes the FL Panhandle on rare occasions.

Malcom, I'm not trying to bust your balls or anything b/c your initial point is very valid. White Knights do a huge dis-service to clients and providers. I just think it was a little unfair of you to throw anyone who disagreed with your POV under the bus by calling them a White Knight. Heck, the thread in question really doesn't even rise to the level of calling anyone out as a White Knight. Usually White Knights rush to the defense of their "provider" when a bad review has been made. At least that is how I define a White Knight. Anyway, my point is that you should probably be a little more careful when you use the White knight label. Yes, I know you didn't name any names, but still just be careful. BTW for the most part enjoy what you post.

CPalm, The Creepy Asshole thread was started by a post that was so wrong, by ECCIE standards, and ethical standards that in my opinion anyone who defended her actions was a white knight, at least in that situation. Of course, no one has ten reviews on the same provider. I'm talking about people who continually come to the defense of a provider when what the provider did is indefensible. IMHO, what she did was way, way out of line. And I agree what the dude did in not showing up at the last moment was wrong, completely wrong. However, there are a lot of people on this board who post nothing but positive reviews and constantly rush to the defense of any and all providers. I've read some of your reviews and I've seen you've been fair in reporting the good and the bad about providers. I'm not busting your balls either, I'm just pointing out that there is a problem with people defending the actions, at least in this instance of the "Creepy Asshole" thread, of a provider doing something so blatantly wrong that it should not be ignored. Like I've said before, there are a helluva lot of professional and respectable providers on this board. There are also some who are flat out dangerous and completely unprofessional. These are the ones that either directly, or indirectly, cause problems for the reliable and professional providers. It is just like the creepy hobbyists have made the hobby more complicated for the respectable hobbyists. When I have a great experience with a provider I am more than happy to help her out and share that info with ECCIE. On the flip side if someone does me wrong i'll share that as well, either in the form of a review, post or PM. But when I saw what the OP posted in that thread with revealing real life info and then others basically agreeing that it was acceptable to violate somebody's privacy like that it set me off. I make no apologies for that and I do not feel any regret for calling her, or her supporters in this matter out.

[New Orleans Natalie]

And then there are the guys who stalk providers and have to keep changing their message board handles. What color knights are those?