Review replies/rebuttal policy no policy?

[LazurusLong]

In the recent thread by Miley07, shooter6.5 posted that there is no policy about closing a review reply/rebuttal. See the last post in the thread on page 3.
http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=72030

But in these other most recent example where Lyric replied to her review,
http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=64394
SP Hunter, in post 14 when he locked it, said there is.
"Our policy is to allow both parties have their say. Everyone can make their own decisions in these disputes. This is closed."

Then we find a review reply/rebuttal from Tara Evans that is locked before ANY replies are made:
http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=51497

Addison Amy posts a review reply/rebuttal here:
http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=44909
and it is locked almost immediately and once again the policy is stated by SP Hunter that it is to close them.

Those took me but a minute to find examples where SP Hunter states it IS a policy to close them yet in the Miley reply/rebuttal shooter6.5 claims it is not policy at all and that "In this case her response led to some interesting discussion and some good advise given by folks that have been around for a while."

Can we get some clarification on this as to whether it is policy as posted by SP Hunter or whether it is best to let dog piles like just happen go on for 3 pages.

[shooter6.5]

First, there is no rule that states that a response needs to be closed. In this case her response led to some interesting discussion and some good advise given by folks that have been around for a while. It also allows the readers to get an idea why certain events take place and why. Sorry you did not agree Lazurus. but then you have not been right on much lately. If she leaves eccie then that is her choice. Several weeks ago I was the one who suggested giving her a chance, and let her past be left behind. That is what we are doing.

I left this thread open and intended to close it later, but SP did. Now we will go back to other things.

Things such as this are judgement calls. SP's answer in the past is correct and those were his decisions, and given the inflamatory nature of those threads they were the right decision.

Todays thread was informative, and she got some good advise, and folks had a chance to learn from it. After all, that is the purpose of the board. And that was my call.

[Guest030911]

Some things don't change.

[stevesanderson]

Originally Posted by shooter6.5

Todays thread was informative... and folks had a chance to learn from it.

This staff-question thread was also very informative..and I have learned a lot from it. Thanks for pointing this out, Lazarus. I feel that you have been right about much more lately.

The Miley thread turned into an ad for Loving Kayla and then a chance to point out "how it works around here". Or at least how it appears to work around here. The thread just HAD to stay open.

[guest040711-1]

We are often contacted by providers saying they dispute a review or a review is bogus, since they are forbidden from posting a reply on the review we allow them to post a rebuttal in coed. One problem is the providers that contact us are far fewer than those who just post in coed or alerts, without our prior knowledge we can't always catch these threads

The reason to close these when we are aware is to prevent the drama, as in every appointment it is he said vs. She said what happened, all other comments are pure speculation.

So LL call in the Black Helicopters back to base, there is no conspiracy here nor any agenda, it's a difference in opinion.

[LazurusLong]

SP Hunter,

I'm not saying there is any conspiracy. Not sure why that is being brought into this situation.

All this thread is asking is for a clarification as to whether your posts in the threads linked in this thread do in fact reflect a policy to lock the replies to reviews or not.

Very simple question.

shooter claims it is not policy yet you were very clear in 2 replies to reviews threads that you locked that it is.

shooter obviously "caught" that thread because he posted to it twice yet failed to close it for his reasons stated not just in that thread but also in this thread.

Consistency in how things are handled is one way to reduce drama and this appears to be very far from it for some reason.

[shooter6.5]

And as always, you simply do not listen unless it meets your agenda.

It is a judgement call. The drama is yours. You are the only one that swore on or about the thread, and it did not even have to do with you.

This matter is closed-move on. Any staff member who cares to post please feel free to.

Have a good day