Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 06-15-2015, 08:39 AM   #21
NuclearFart
First Line Centre
 
NuclearFart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist View Post
Doctor reviews are the worst.
These generally all fall under some variant of "made me wait too long" or "didn't spend enough time with me". Some are good for a laugh & fun to figure out which patient wrote it, and sometimes we write fake reviews of our colleagues for a joke. Apparently I have performed a DRE without putting a glove on
NuclearFart is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to NuclearFart For This Useful Post:
Old 06-17-2015, 09:07 AM   #22
Weitz
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Exp:
Default

A friend of mine showed me this article and warned all her friends about this place as their dog was abused there too.
Weitz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 09:56 AM   #23
undercoverbrother
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Sylvan Lake
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NuclearFart View Post
These generally all fall under some variant of "made me wait too long" or "didn't spend enough time with me". Some are good for a laugh & fun to figure out which patient wrote it, and sometimes we write fake reviews of our colleagues for a joke. Apparently I have performed a DRE without putting a glove on

While holding two cups of coffee?
undercoverbrother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 10:13 AM   #24
troutman
Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer
 
troutman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Winebar Kensington
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist View Post
Who can bring those complaints forward?
Any member of the public. Other lawyers.
__________________
https://www.mergenlaw.com/
http://cjsw.com/program/fossil-records/
twitter/instagram @troutman1966
troutman is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to troutman For This Useful Post:
Old 06-17-2015, 11:13 AM   #25
Winsor_Pilates
Franchise Player
 
Winsor_Pilates's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Van City - Main St.
Exp:
Default

It's about time this was a thing.
Although the bad review in the OP seems warranted, there are so many cases where people are leaving false bad reviews and really hurting small businesses.
People need to be held more accountable for the things they try to do from behind their keyboard.
Winsor_Pilates is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Winsor_Pilates For This Useful Post:
Old 06-17-2015, 12:40 PM   #26
Reaper
Franchise Player
 
Reaper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: I'm right behind you
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NuclearFart View Post
Apparently I have performed a DRE without putting a glove on
Quote:
Originally Posted by undercoverbrother View Post
While holding two cups of coffee?
Obviously not, Snoop Dogg can hold his own coffee.
__________________
Don't fear me. Trust me.
Reaper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 01:21 PM   #27
Dan02
Franchise Player
 
Dan02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates View Post
It's about time this was a thing.
Although the bad review in the OP seems warranted, there are so many cases where people are leaving false bad reviews and really hurting small businesses.
People need to be held more accountable for the things they try to do from behind their keyboard.
Indeed, looked up my company and we have a 1 star review from a person who has never done business with us, it was linked to their social media account. They 1 starred my company and 73 other competitors in the same space. I wonder if there is legal action we can take against them and crush them like the bug they are.
Dan02 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 01:40 PM   #28
WhiteTiger
Franchise Player
 
WhiteTiger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates View Post
It's about time this was a thing.
Although the bad review in the OP seems warranted, there are so many cases where people are leaving false bad reviews and really hurting small businesses.
People need to be held more accountable for the things they try to do from behind their keyboard.
This is an interesting side of it, too. The "retaliation review". I got an 'interesting' look at this (and I only say it's interesting because I didn't have to clean up after it...) with the aftermath of the Calgary Comic and Entertainment Expo.

After that group was banned, hundreds of internet sub-culture warriors 'stormed' the review boards, posting that they could never support a company with such ethics as the CCEE's...and leaving a ton of 1 star reviews (dropping the company's rating from 4.5 to 3 before reviews were shut off/removed - and Facebook reviews can't be removed by the company/page owner, FB itself has to step in) as well as starting arguments and posting all over (since on FB you can reply to a review) any review rated 3 or higher hoping to drag anyone into an argument.

Almost all of the mouth-breathers doing that haven't ever even been close to, much less attended a Calgary Expo event. The majority live in the States, and probably don't even know where Calgary is on a map. But they rushed to the call to arms, as it were.

I can fully understand leaving a bad review if you have been (or feel you have been) personally wronged by a company. But the continued growth of people rushing to slam a company online because someone in 'their group' told them about a bad experience is why I'm taking online reviews more and more with a grain of salt.
WhiteTiger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 02:12 PM   #29
CMPunk
aka Spike
 
CMPunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: The Darkest Corners of My Mind
Exp:
Default

For the record, my dog has been going there for 6 years and we've never had any problems.
CMPunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2017, 11:39 AM   #30
troutman
Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer
 
troutman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Winebar Kensington
Exp:
Default

How an Ontario mom fended off a $120K libel lawsuit over her Facebook posts

http://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/...osts-1.4175496

Ontario Superior Court Justice Thomas Lederer ruled in Mohammed's favour, citing the province's "strategic lawsuits against public participation" rules or anti-SLAPP measures.

The provincial rules came into effect in October 2015 and are designed to protect ordinary citizens from being silenced on issues of public interest by lawsuits from big companies.

"If this action is allowed to proceed, there is no way of knowing how many people interested in this issue, or for that matter any other public concern, will feel intimidated and not take part for fear of being subject to a similar lawsuit," the judge wrote.

What's more, he awarded Mohammed $7,500 in damages, to be paid by United Soils, writing: "I accept that this action unnecessarily caused Katie Mohammed stress that affected her day to day life."
__________________
https://www.mergenlaw.com/
http://cjsw.com/program/fossil-records/
twitter/instagram @troutman1966

Last edited by troutman; 07-31-2017 at 11:41 AM.
troutman is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to troutman For This Useful Post:
Old 07-31-2017, 12:31 PM   #31
GGG
Franchise Player
 
GGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Exp:
Default

If you read page 10 of the judgement it states the court didn't consider that United Soils wasn't going to Poison the children. The Judge completely ignores the operational pan for the disposal site and instead allows the heresay from a special interest group to be repeated without consequence.

I have an issue with this. People need to be more responsible for false information that they pass on.

Though I do think the judgement in general is right because the women apologized as requested in the original demand. And then the company still sued her based on her apology not being genuine.

Last edited by GGG; 07-31-2017 at 12:36 PM.
GGG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2017, 12:40 PM   #32
Knut
 
Knut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Exp:
Default

http://abovethelaw.com/2017/02/anoth...ark-complaint/

Here is an interesting case that shows the benefit of the Anti-SLAPP laws.
Knut is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Knut For This Useful Post:
Old 07-31-2017, 01:52 PM   #33
Resolute 14
In the Sin Bin
 
Resolute 14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG View Post
If you read page 10 of the judgement it states the court didn't consider that United Soils wasn't going to Poison the children. The Judge completely ignores the operational pan for the disposal site and instead allows the heresay from a special interest group to be repeated without consequence.

I have an issue with this. People need to be more responsible for false information that they pass on.

Though I do think the judgement in general is right because the women apologized as requested in the original demand. And then the company still sued her based on her apology not being genuine.
That is not at all what the court said. What it said is that it is not the courts' place to evaluate the substance of that report, and that it is inappropriate to argue that the same report defines the context around which such claims could be considered defamatory or that failure to read the report disqualified Mohammed from participating in public debate over this issue. The argument you are making would basically have given the company the ability to define truth. Instead, the court considered a wider context (described on page 11) that included comments posted to the town council's own Twitter account and a local newspaper article, both of which indicated a potential concern about the risk of contaminants. In the larger context, Mohammed's concerns would quite clearly have been made in good faith and done honestly.

That they bullied her into an apology and the sued anyway was just the icing on top of the cake.

Last edited by Resolute 14; 07-31-2017 at 01:59 PM.
Resolute 14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2017, 02:30 PM   #34
GGG
Franchise Player
 
GGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Resolute 14 View Post
That is not at all what the court said. What it said is that it is not the courts' place to evaluate the substance of that report, and that it is inappropriate to argue that the same report defines the context around which such claims could be considered defamatory or that failure to read the report disqualified Mohammed from participating in public debate over this issue. The argument you are making would basically have given the company the ability to define truth. Instead, the court considered a wider context (described on page 11) that included comments posted to the town council's own Twitter account and a local newspaper article, both of which indicated a potential concern about the risk of contaminants. In the larger context, Mohammed's concerns would quite clearly have been made in good faith and done honestly.

That they bullied her into an apology and the sued anyway was just the icing on top of the cake.
To have an opinion on an issue you should have to educate yourself on the issue. Vaccine manufacturers should be able to sue anti-vaxxers for liable.
GGG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2017, 02:37 PM   #35
Resolute 14
In the Sin Bin
 
Resolute 14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Exp:
Default

Fortunately, neither Section 2 of the Charter nor the American First Amendment restrict speech to the rather extreme level you propose.
Resolute 14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2017, 02:52 PM   #36
FlamesAddiction
Franchise Player
 
FlamesAddiction's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver
Exp:
Default

Online reviewing is a huge gear grinder of mine.

There are so many people out there who leave fake or completely unfair reviews and it really hurts the businesses. And Google gives out points to people for leaving reviews thereby encouraging this nonsense.

I was having dinner with a restaurant owner just the other day and he was telling me how difficult it is to deal with. People see Google reviews and avoid anyone with less than a 4-star rating, yet many of the reviews are fake, exaggerated, or left my disgruntled ex-employees. And there is no way to battle it. Google doesn't give a frig. They just want people using their service.

For example, a review popped up as we were there that said the place was out of "half the beer" they advertised and that "they would avoid the place at all costs". The truth is, they were out of one micro-brew because the brewery had a power outage and messed up their supply. The serving staff was telling everyone before ordering that they were out and some stupid dork thought it was such a bad experience, that it was worth 1-star. There was another reviewer who left 1-star because one of the lady's singing karaoke one night was terrible. Another left 1-star because they were fired and were not paid well (allegedly). The owner reported the reviews to Google, but they were left up.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
FlamesAddiction is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2017, 03:06 PM   #37
Sainters7
Franchise Player
 
Sainters7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: back in the 403
Exp:
Default

I didn't even realize people took online reviews so seriously. Just due to human nature (people unhappy with a service/product are much more likely to write a negative review than people happy with something writing a positive one), I just assumed the majority of reviews are negative, I barely even check online reviews for that reason.
Sainters7 is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Sainters7 For This Useful Post:
Old 07-31-2017, 03:20 PM   #38
FlamesAddiction
Franchise Player
 
FlamesAddiction's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sainters7 View Post
I didn't even realize people took online reviews so seriously. Just due to human nature (people unhappy with a service/product are much more likely to write a negative review than people happy with something writing a positive one), I just assumed the majority of reviews are negative, I barely even check online reviews for that reason.

Think about it though. If you were a tourist or someone that rarely goes out and you Googled Calgary downtown pubs and one had a a string of negative reviews, wouldn't you avoid it or look for one that didn't? It might not affect the regulars, but it certainly hurts getting new business.

There are actually reputation companies people hire to improve their online google, yelp and urban spoon ratings.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
FlamesAddiction is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2017, 03:23 PM   #39
SebC
tromboner
 
SebC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: where the lattes are
Exp:
Default

If everyone has bad reviews, nobody has bad reviews.
SebC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2017, 03:26 PM   #40
Huntingwhale
Franchise Player
 
Huntingwhale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Exp:
Default

Part of the problem with these reviews is that now whenever you go somewhere, your damn phone sends you a notification asking you if you want to ''help others out, review where you're at". No matter where I'm at now, even out of country, literally every single shopping/restaurant/entertainment location sends me that notification. Social media nerds hop all over that. All it takes is one single bad incident, and in the palm of you hand you have the ability to literally ruin a business.

In some way its kind of good your phone puts you on the spot to leave a review, because now employers know you have the power to influence their businesss by leaving a review, so they have to make sure you receive good service. On the other hand, you get a bunch of ####ty teenagers and immature pricks leaving bad reviews for the slightest inconvenience. Drinks took too long to arrive? 1 star. Waitress wouldn't give you her phone # as your creepily hit on her? 1 star. Etc.

Personally I don't like to see people get sued for a bad review. But in some cases it's deserved. Some people like to be complete asses online, and good on others for putting them in their place. The best is when managers actually comment back and explain the entire situation.

These days, we the consumer have more power then ever before to influence a business and potential cash flow heading towards it.
Huntingwhale is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:48 AM.

Calgary Flames
2023-24




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021