New Gayle Bradley...disappointed

[Fancier]

Burger Quality Control: The quality control you can afford at minimum wage may be limited to listening to customer feedback.
Sharp out of the box: Jack, have you ever bought a machete? All they do on them is the primary grind, it is assumed that you will sharpen it to your preference. In your terms the gas tank is empty on arrival.

[Blerv]

Again, when you attempt to exert pressure to censor negative comments you are saying that you do not believe that Spyderco makes a product which can complete under objective evaluations and that evaluations have to be censored because of poor performance of the product. It is one of the strongest slurs you can make against the products of a company to say that they can not complete without misrepresentation. I certainly do not believe this is the case.

Nobody can control the Internet. The best thing you can do is try to make people feel welcome and validate their experience even if pointing out a few details. If they focus on the few instead of the greater whole, the bad instead of the good, it's a shame. If they can't bounce back after the dust settles and the president extends a personal welcome it's even a bigger bummer.

Luckily Paddy B isn't one of these people :) .

[xceptnl]

.. So far my Spydie collection (addiction) has allowed me to get by for over 4 years now without needing to sharpen a knife yet!

When you finally get around to it, better mark off some time on your calendar. I anticipate you are going to be a busy man!

[Kev-Man]

Hey Paddy B,

Too bad about the first knife you got. Hope the replacement you ordered is a good one. Been carrying my GB for a while now and seems like a pretty tough knife. The CF doesn't seem too easy to scratch, only a couple of small chips where it sticks out of the pocket. Hope you like the knife when you get it.

Kev.

[Cliff Stamp]

Nobody can control the Internet.

It isn't about control, even if I had the ability to stop all shills from posting I would not do it. It simply about pointing out misinformation.

If someone is going to claim that Spyderco makes inferior products to such an extent that in an objective comparison they will be so badly outperformed vs other knives that you have to misrepresent their product, censor criticism and provide biased commentary for them to be able to sell - well then I am going to argue that is completely false.

In fact I would argue that in fair and objective comparisons Spyderco is in general above average, and in fact they dominate in several respects.

[Cliff Stamp]

So, should we ...

What you or anyone else should do is up to them to decide, however if someone wants to make an argument which misrepresents Spyderco's product and ability to produce then I am going to correct it if I see/hear it on a discussion form which is about Spyderco's product.

[wrdwrght]

What you or anyone else should do is up to them to decide, however if someone wants to make an argument which misrepresents Spyderco's product and ability to produce then I am going to correct it if I see/hear it on a discussion form which is about Spyderco's product.

BS needs to be called out. No question.

But BS is specific and your criticism was general.

If you're going to come in from on high but refrain from calling out a specific offender, you paint all participants in the thread with disapproval (that's condescension) and encourage people to ask who's at fault (that's a witch-hunt). After all, it's the respected metallurgist Cliff Stamp who disapproves.

Idathunk anyone so precise in blade-testing would see the need to be similarly precise in his other disapprovals.

[opusxpn]

What Cliff said, yeah I agree

[FCM415]

"I am...BATMAN!!!"

[Cliff Stamp]

But BS is specific and your criticism was general.

I was very specific, anyone who attempts to suppress criticism in any form, anyone who has a different standard for accepting evidence based on the conclusions drawn from it, these are making the argument and acting from the viewpoint that Spyderco can not compete under a fair and objective evaluation. I do not see that as a valid argument.

In fact I would hold to the opposite, that the more objective, the more demanding, the more critical an analysis of the product when comparing Spyderco to another manufacturer the MORE it would fall in Spyderco's favor (in general). There is absolutely no need to misrepresent Spyderco, they do not need artificial inflation then do not need to censor discussion of any kind.

These are clear standards, I have specifically pointed out when it was done in the past to the individual. I made the general comment here because there was a bulk of such posts, it is obvious who is doing what. Here is an example of it : http://www.spyderco.com/forums/showthre ... post939399 . Note that this argument would not hold if the post was positive, it is only used because it is a complaint.

[Strong-Dog]

I was very specific, anyone who attempts to suppress criticism in any form, anyone who has a different standard for accepting evidence based on the conclusions drawn from it, these are making the argument and acting from the viewpoint that Spyderco can not compete under a fair and objective evaluation. I do not see that as a valid argument.

In fact I would hold to the opposite, that the more objective, the more demanding, the more critical an analysis of the product when comparing Spyderco to another manufacturer the MORE it would fall in Spyderco's favor (in general). There is absolutely no need to misrepresent Spyderco, they do not need artificial inflation then do not need to censor discussion of any kind.

These are clear standards, I have specifically pointed out when it was done in the past to the individual. I made the general comment here because there was a bulk of such posts, it is obvious who is doing what. Here is an example of it : http://www.spyderco.com/forums/showthre ... post939399 . Note that this argument would not hold if the post was positive, it is only used because it is a complaint.

I completely agree with Cliff.

On BF, I usually have nothing but great things to say about Spyderco. Nobody bothers to mind it, because it's the "norm" (unless they are calling me a fanboy). But when I say that my Tuff had massive lock-slip and would fail with me pushing on the spine with minimal effort, I immediately get flamed and called a troll.

[senorsquare]

Yep, that is me and this is the post:

Another recommendation might be to give the manufacturer and/or dealer an opportunity to rectify the problem before disparaging their product in a public forum.

My post above is one that Cliff quoted when making a shill accusation. I was not trying to insinuate that spyderco or any other mfr. and/or service provider should be above criticism or complaint, nor should they shun criticism when warranted. I will admit that it was a snarky comment and may have been best left unsaid. It also may or may not have been relevant to the thread, but I think this is a valid personal opinion and I stand by it. Perhaps I should try to clarify my intent.

I did not intend to say that criticism should not be allowed or expressed. I was simply trying to say that sometimes complaints on public forums can have real and negative impact on peoples incomes and livelihoods and we as consumers should give them a fair chance at reparation before condemning their work and potentially hurting their business. I don't think this would be much of an issue for a larger company with a stable customer base. But, for a small maker that depends on each and every sale to get by then a hasty complaint could have devastating consequences for their business. Consequences that could be avoided by just contacting the maker and giving them a chance to make things right.

If you receive a product or service that you feel is not satisfactory then I feel that it should be a common courtesy to give the mfr./dealer/service provider at least one opportunity to fix the problem before posting a rant on a public forum. Send it in. In most cases the mfr./provider will do their best to make things right and then everybody is happy. If the mfr. refuses to replace, repair or refund the item then by all means public complaints should be made, criticisms aired and public shaming for the perpetrators all around.

[Cliff Stamp]

But when I say that my Tuff had massive lock-slip and would fail with me pushing on the spine with minimal effort, I immediately get flamed and called a troll.

To illustrate the difference between how Spyderco the company responds to this vs shills :

I bought a Military many years ago for a few reasons, among them was that the handle/hole was designed to be worn with gloves. I liked many aspects of the knife, but the lock was instable, as soon as I tightened my grip I would cause the liner to release. This set off the usual storm of this was abuse, proper use of a folder doesn't require a lot of grip force, etc. .

Sal contacted me directly and asked to have the knife returned, they adjusted it and returned it. It was improved, but it was still instable, and I noted exactly that. This set off another storm of how this was unjustified, Spyderco was even trying to fix "abuses" etc. .

Sal contacted me again to see if they could adjust it again.

Over the years I have used other liner locks, from Spyderco and others and integrals. I still have that issue and it is a combination of the shape of my hand, the way the face/release is set and the ergonomics which position the hand on the grip. It isn't a direct negative on the knife that it releases for me, it might not release for anyone else, I just can use it.

This is why I carry the Paramilitary vs the Military even though I prefer the Military for everything else aside from the lock issues.

--

Now what is important to me isn't that the knife had a problem, all products will have problems for some people when they have people influenced performance. What was critical to me, which has always been one of the reasons I support Spyderco is that at no time, not even once did Sal every mention, ask, request or even hint that he would prefer me not to make a post which described my negative experience. He was never interested in censoring of any kind, he was just interested to know if the problem could be resolved.

Anyone who talked to Sal for any length of time would immediately realize that the best way to help Spyderco resolve negative feedback would be to simply bring it to Sal's attention, because in order to actually do any better than him and not just make the situation worse would take some pretty hefty customer service skills, and you better put your big boy pants on if you think you can trump Sal in that area.

[Cliff Stamp]

I was simply trying to say that sometimes complaints on public forums can have real and negative impact on peoples incomes and livelihoods ...

Yes they do, the solution to that is to fix the problems not exert pressure to stop people from describing them.

Here is the reality of the out come of your post - it will not stop people from making those posts, it will simply act to put pressure on them to post in another area where Spyderco can not see it, is not aware of it and can not respond. You have thus acted to lower their ability to provide customer service. In addition it makes those people feel that Spyderco does not want to hear about problems, that they want to cover them up and this will increase their level of dissatisfaction so when they complain elsewhere it will be louder, more vocal and more emotional.

However the points remains as simple as this - would you say that if the comment was positive, would you ask them not to post here but just send it directly to Spyderco. Because if you do not, if you don't make the same posts when people praise Spyderco then you have shown that you have one level of what you deem is acceptable for feedback if it is negative and another is positive. This is the issue, and Spyderco's doesn't need that. Other manufacturers do, many of them can not compete without selective information content they need shills because they can not compete without them.

Spyderco is the OG of objective data, they were releasing failure points of products (lock breaking, corrosion, dulling) before people even knew those standards could be used. They don't need to hide the performance of their product, the more clear, the more objective, the higher they will stand.

[senorsquare]

Yes they do, the solution to that is to fix the problems not exert pressure to stop people from describing them.

Indeed. Hence, the second part of my statement:

I was simply trying to say that sometimes complaints on public forums can have real and negative impact on peoples incomes and livelihoods and we as consumers should give them a fair chance at reparation before condemning their work and potentially hurting their business.

You say this somehow damages spyderco's reputation but I don't see it that way. This is simply a courtesy that I think should be extended to any manufacturer or provider of any service or product.

[Strong-Dog]

I was simply trying to say that sometimes complaints on public forums can have real and negative impact on peoples incomes and livelihoods and we as consumers should give them a fair chance at reparation before condemning their work and potentially hurting their business.

If complaints have an impact, that is a good thing. It is balanced out by all of the nice things said about the knives, and there are a whole lot more "good" things said then "bad" things. If nice things said about the knives are "good", then why are complaints or issues about the knives "bad"? As long as everything is honest, both sides work to educate people and further the industry.

[wrdwrght]

Cliff, sorry not to have quoted your post #110. And sorry to have kept my reply window open long enough to let others, senorsquare not least, get in before finally replying...but his comments do support what I am getting at.

Your link (presumably to a sentiment that Spyderco should have a chance to correct the problem through published practices) illustrates why stating a standard in lieu of a direct criticism is objectionable, at least to me.

In past threads here, there have been whinging rants evidently intent on embarrassing Spyderco for its imperfections rather than on getting the imperfections resolved. Was Paddy B ranting? I think not (he's new to the Forum and seemed unsure if his problem warranted correction and, if so, how). Was senorsquare shilling for Spyderco? Given past whinging, I think not. Had you accused him in particular of shilling, instead of trotting out a general standard against shilling, I think you would have found it necessary to put actual skin in the game and explain yourself. Instead, you hid behind a standard and I, for one, am none the wiser as to the "bulk of such posts" departing from this standard, which, on the face of it, is a standard I can endorse.

[Cliff Stamp]

This is simply a courtesy that I think should be extended to any manufacturer or provider of any service or product.

Yes, it is not uncommon that people will attempt to censor criticism while promoting praise, and that feedback in general should be censored such that positive statements should be made public (and encouraged) but negative should be kept private and pressure should be applied to produce such a result.

To me, saying that Spyderco's products are inferior to such an extent that you should not provide unbiased and objective commentary is about the worst slur than you could make about a company and it makes little sense when the company itself does not request it and in fact openly promotes the opposite.

I would argue the opposite and say that the more fair and objective the commentary, the more it would be in Spyderco's favor because of their commitment to quality on all levels.

[Cliff Stamp]

... and explain yourself.

As noted, I provided the background as to what makes an argument shill based, I provided an example of such. As noted in the past when there was one I noted it, this thread was pages long before I commented hence, and again, the general response that any activity of that type was addressed. Your argument as to I was unwilling to point out examples makes little sense when I have done so in the past and provided one when you requested. If you really can't sort out differential standards and want to know who is using them then ask and I will note that, it isn't as if it is any way difficult to note when someone accepts praise but condemns criticism based on the nature of the conclusion and not the nature of the argument.

[senorsquare]

Yes, it is not uncommon that people will attempt to censor criticism while promoting praise, and that feedback in general should be censored such that positive statements should be made public (and encouraged) but negative should be kept private and pressure should be applied to produce such a result.

To me, saying that Spyderco's products are inferior to such an extent that you should not provide unbiased and objective commentary is about the worst slur than you could make about a company and it makes little sense when the company itself does not request it and in fact openly promotes the opposite.

That was not my intent, but it appears that it was taken as such. If I have offended or impugned the integrity of this fine organization then I do apologize.

I believe the horse we are beating is now thoroughly deceased.