At what point does dishonesty become acceptable?

[MobileTechie]

Your call. The reason I haven't posted by website URLs here is because I can't foresee recruiting any business from Technibble members as I operate in a small small localised geographic area, also to protects against the risks of plagiarism and malicious activity against my business interests. Many members choose not to post their business details, this does not reflect on their integrity. I have nothing to hide in my business activities and most of my growth has been through word-of-mouth, I take great pride in my honesty and business conduct and believe this has been important for my own business success - I will not put that at risk.

I raised this thread to open an intelligent debate on a matter that clearly is important to many techs on here. If you don't wish to partake at this level, please keep your malice for elsewhere.

I don't know where the "malice" in that statement is to be honest. I also haven't questioned your integrity. But it just does not feel right to me to have members investigating other members and making accusations which can damage their public reputation and business interests whilst not being open to the same scrutiny themselves. That's all I'm saying. That's why I think it's a relevant point to make in this discussion.

If you have the integrity, honesty and success you say you have, and I've no reason to doubt you do, then telling people who you are shouldn't hurt you at all. Rather it should spread your good reputation further. Plus the backlinks are pretty handy too. Clearly it's up to you given the rules of this particular forum but that's what I think.

I've also found that anonymity in forums often has the the effect of making perfectly nice people act more rudely and agressively than they would in real life because they know what they say and do will never affect them personally.

 

[Martyn]

I don't know where the "malice" in that statement is to be honest. I also haven't questioned your integrity. But it just does not feel right to me to have members investigating other members and making accusations which can damage their public reputation and business interests whilst not being open to the same scrutiny themselves. That's all I'm saying. That's why I think it's a relevant point to make in this discussion.

If you have the integrity, honesty and success you say you have, and I've no reason to doubt you do, then telling people who you are shouldn't hurt you at all. Rather it should spread your good reputation further. Plus the backlinks are pretty handy too. Clearly it's up to you given the rules of this particular forum but that's what I think.

I've also found that anonymity in forums often has the the effect of making perfectly nice people act more rudely and agressively than they would in real life because they know what they say and do will never affect them personally.

100% agree with that.

 

[Cambridge PC Support]

go on iptech, pop it in the Tech Eyes Only forum - we'll still love you even if it's crap!

 

[iptech]

I don't know where the "malice" in that statement is to be honest. I also haven't questioned your integrity. But it just does not feel right to me to have members investigating other members and making accusations which can damage their public reputation and business interests whilst not being open to the same scrutiny themselves. That's all I'm saying. That's why I think it's a relevant point to make in this discussion.

If you have the integrity, honesty and success you say you have, and I've no reason to doubt you do, then telling people who you are shouldn't hurt you at all. Rather it should spread your good reputation further. Plus the backlinks are pretty handy too. Clearly it's up to you given the rules of this particular forum but that's what I think.

I've also found that anonymity in forums often has the the effect of making perfectly nice people act more rudely and agressively than they would in real life because they know what they say and do will never affect them personally.

I can't think why people who are Microsoft Certified Partners shouldn't want to be listed in the Microsoft Solutions Directory, but a lot here seem not to want to do that, and yes, my business is listed. I've never used any SEO on my website, but many of my customers say they find my business via Google searches.

If you look at the two threads I posted links to in the thread opening post, I think you'll see the aggressive posts are from those who choose to crow about their own success.

I truly hope that what I have said in this thread does affect me personally, I believe this industry is long overdue for a cleanup and a recognisable, industry-led code of good conduct.

 

[iptech]

go on iptech, pop it in the Tech Eyes Only forum - we'll still love you even if it's crap!

Have you not heard the idiom "Never wash your dirty laundry in public" or do you believe flaming is the best way to debate a genuine subject?

 

[Cambridge PC Support]

Have you not heard the idiom "Never wash your dirty laundry in public" or do you believe flaming is the best way to debate a genuine subject?

Yes, I have. What's your point?

No, I don't believe flaming is the best way, etc. I wasn't flaming, re-read my post, and try smiling just a little bit.

Don't worry about it iptech, it's obviously totally up to you if you want to hide your website from us. You have your reasons, and I respect your choice.

 

[154Tech]

I think the use of "We" for a single employee business is perfectly acceptable and in some cases actually more correct than "I". If your business name is "John Smith-Computer Technician" then "I" would be appropriate. If your intent is to never have a second employee, then "I" is appropriate. If you are, for some reason, dealing with customers who prefer to deal with individuals as vendors instead of companies, "I" would be appropriate. Other than that, "We" would actually be more proper.

What if after 2 years of hard work to build a customer base and always referring to the business as "I", you decided to add an additional tech? He goes to the customer(or they come into the shop as the case may be) and the first question from the customer is, "Where's John?" Because now the trust that has been built has been between the customer and John and not the customer and the company. What if you don't need to hire another tech, but due to the volume of calls you receive, you decide to hire an answering service? Nope. The customer only wants to talk to John and you're stuck having to answer all of your own calls and schedule all of your own appointments. What if your customer wants to give you a HUGE job that would bring in lots of money, but you'd want to bring in a sub-contractor to do some of the work? "Wait a minute John, I thought we were paying YOU to do this work!"

By using "We" you turn the situation around completely. That trust you built with the customer? Steve gains that same trust the moment you hire him and put a company shirt on him. Customer doesn't care if you or Steve show up to do the job. When the service answers the phone and says, "Trustworthy Tech, how may I help you?", the customer is at ease and books their appointment through the service and you save valuable time. And that big job? Not a problem. You show up with the sub-contractors and the customer welcomes them as part of your team.

I used to be a customer service trainer and one of the hardest things to get a new rep to do was stop referring to the company in the 3rd person and use "We". It took some of them quite a while to realize that they were part of the company and to convey that in the way they spoke. In the case of the single person business, by using "We" you can actually separate "yourself" from "the business". Which can be a good thing. What if you're a jerk? What if you hate puppies? What if you have a different political affiliation than that of your customer? It doesn't matter. Because the customer is receiving service from the company not the asshat puppy hater who votes straight ticket communist.

 

[Skyhooker]

one that seems to be threatening to tear Technibble apart

Other issues aside, isn't that overstating things a bit?

 

[NeutronTech]

The business of I versus we is a difficult one and I don't think it comes under the umbrella of directly misleading by claiming membership. It's a marketing ploy and I was advised to use it. You could claim that you family take calls for you and therefore are part of the 'we'

Oh, I completely agree with you. I have always been told that too and have done it from day one. I have family answer the phones once in a while too.
But mostly, I look at it as "me" + "my company" = "us / we".

 

[NeutronTech]

I notice a lot of people talking about licensing and being licensed. I'm in Michigan and opening up a business requires no licensing at all, depending on the field. If I work under my name, and sell no parts, then that is all I need. If I'm using another name, then I have to get a DBA, which is only $10. If I plan to sell anything, I need a sales tax license, which is free.

Of course if your doing construction, high voltage work, etc, then you need a state license. Low voltage wiring does not require any type of licensing here. I know this varies greatly by state too. When I lived in Tennessee, they wanted me to get a business license to do anything. Maybe I'm just lucky to have opened up shop where I'm at.

Just thought I'd throw that out there in case there was anyone who thought that licensing was a national requirement.

 

[iptech]

For businesses operating in the UK the law is about to get tougher on online advertising as new laws are extended to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA). This new law not only applies to claims made on companies own websites, but also extends to social networking sites and sites (profit or non-profit) who provide links to offending sites.

Ad regulations extended to websites
(UKPA) – 6 hours ago
Full advertising regulations are to be extended to retailers' own websites and online areas like Twitter and Facebook, it has been announced.
The online extension has "the protection of children and consumers at its heart" and will come into effect in March next year, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) said.
The ASA's current remit online includes ads in paid-for space and sales promotions wherever they appear.
But from next year the rules covering misleading advertising, social responsibility and the protection of children will apply in full to all online marketing by all sectors, businesses and organisations, regardless of size.
The Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP), the body responsible for writing the regulations, said it had decided to extend the ASA's powers in response to a formal recommendation from a wide cross-section of UK industry.
The rules will apply to retailers' websites and ads placed in online areas that are free of charge, such as social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter.
However, in an effort to protect freedom of speech online, the rules will focus on ads that sell products rather than journalistic and editorial content, the ASA said.
The ASA will have the ability to demand the removal of paid-for links to pages hosting a banned ad, with the agreement of search engines. It could also place its own advertisements online highlighting an advertiser's continued refusal to comply with a ruling.
The ASA urged website owners and agencies to become familiar with the new rules ahead of the March 1 deadline.
ASA chairman Lord Chris Smith said: "This significant extension of the ASA's remit has the protection of children and consumers at its heart. "We have received more than 4,500 complaints since 2008 about marketing communications on websites that we couldn't deal with, but from 1 March anyone who has a concern about a marketing communication online will be able to turn to the ASA."

Copyright © 2010 The Press Association. All rights reserved.

Original source: The Press Assocition

 

[Martyn]

Can only be good news I'm surprised they haven't done this sooner bearing in mind how long web advertising has been around.

Many years ago I used to fix the ASA's photocopier when they were based in Tottenham Court Road(maybe they still are)

 

[myPCTechs]

1. False claim for professional certification and accrediatation;
2. False & fake customer testimonials;
3. Phoney trade & busness awards;
4. Sole traders masqurading as corporates with extensive infrastructures.

I haven't read through this thread yet, so if already stated I apologize. I'd add to the list:

5. Dishonest marketing using bait & switch pricing. Advertising one price, with has a mile-long list of limitations in fine so it can never be met.

6. Computer stores pushing unecessary parts/upgrades by lying to the consumer, telling them the need to purchase xyz.

In the case of #5, there are quite a few competitors locally that are offering stupid-low prices. When you visit the website, it turns out that price is only good on a certain day, at a certain time, and there's a mile-long list of things they will NOT do. Of course this is all at the bottom of the page, most people never see it until they've been duped.

For #6 I can't tell you how many big box stores I've experienced doing this. Customers who come to me telling me they were recommended to purchase a bigger hard drive to increase performance (only lady had 15GB on a 120GB drive and they pumped her to buy a drive twice that.). In another instance I stood right next to a guy who was told by the sales staff at a store that he needed the latest $240 3D video card to speed up his computer. This was AFTER he told the sales rep that all he used his computer for was checking email and writing Word documents LOL.

Our industry isn't much different that automotive repair, and look at what's happened there. People have been ripped off for years and CONTINUE to get ripped off. Nothing is really done and nothing probably will be done. The best an honest shop can do is function like an honest shop and treat clients with respect. Do that and the word gets around.

 

[wimwauters]

For businesses operating in the UK the law is about to get tougher on online advertising as new laws are extended to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA). This new law not only applies to claims made on companies own websites, but also extends to social networking sites and sites (profit or non-profit) who provide links to offending site

Indeed.

And how about the existing rules about businesses not posting their trading address on their website? That doesn't just breach ASA rules, but also trading standards regulations which would leave one in violation of the trading standards act... oh dear, someone's in trouble...

Another breach of the law would occur when a .co.uk business website is registered with the UK registrar as:
"
The registrant is a non-trading individual
"

double trouble...

 

[iptech]

Indeed.

And how about the existing rules about businesses not posting their trading address on their website? That doesn't just breach ASA rules, but also trading standards regulations which would leave one in violation of the trading standards act... oh dear, someone's in trouble...

Another breach of the law would occur when a .co.uk business website is registered with the UK registrar as:
"
The registrant is a non-trading individual
"

double trouble...

You better report them then.

 

[NeutronTech]

Indeed.

And how about the existing rules about businesses not posting their trading address on their website? That doesn't just breach ASA rules, but also trading standards regulations which would leave one in violation of the trading standards act... oh dear, someone's in trouble...

Another breach of the law would occur when a .co.uk business website is registered with the UK registrar as:
"
The registrant is a non-trading individual
"

double trouble...

What? Your not allowed to put your address on your website? Why would that be?

 

[mjbasford]

I took it to mean they are required to display their address and failing to do so would be in violation

 

[Elemdee]

As I have said elsewhere I can see no opportunity for obtaining business from members of Technibble, therefore there is no need to post a url.

I'm just going to jump in here and quote this part of his post and remind everyone of the purpose of TN which is the sharing of Tech information, which indeed we do. He has a point in that none of us is required to link our business, it is a personal choice whether we do or not. Certainly the information we provide should stand on its own as to our credibility as professionals. So let's cut the crap and quit fighting. I've had more than enough popcorn for today. Thanks.

/end soapbox chat

 

[iptech]

Indeed.

And how about the existing rules about businesses not posting their trading address on their website? That doesn't just breach ASA rules, but also trading standards regulations which would leave one in violation of the trading standards act... oh dear, someone's in trouble...

Another breach of the law would occur when a .co.uk business website is registered with the UK registrar as:
"
The registrant is a non-trading individual
"

double trouble...

Here you go:

How do I report an incorrect opt-out?
Please contact our Registrant Services department by telephone on 01865 332244 or email nominet@nominet.org.uk and we will investigate this further. Once we have completed our investigations we will contact you to confirm the outcome.

Good luck!

 

[Martyn]

Never gave it a moments thought. I registered my domain nearly two years ago when I was an individual. I just emailed 123reg and they changed it to a sole trader.