PCGS forum deletes member accounts

This has nothing to do with anything other than the fact that PCGS can run its site exactly as it pleases. Our alternative is to quit participating. Period. End of story. Debate over.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

He said, unironically, on an Internet forum thread.

 

But Ms. Boyd was asserting that slander and defamation were the problem. So that's a huge part of the issue. If they claim that falsely, then they are the dishonest parties.

"Anyone making libelous remarks concerning any individual, any company, or any other entity will no longer be allowed to post. No more warnings.

"--I have closed a number of posts doing this recently. It is also the reason for the banning of some recent "popular" members. Post your rants on facebook, this is not the place for them." https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1008297/lets-talk-about-the-rules/p1

Some of the members kicked out were speaking the truth, not lies, so what's the problem? Of course they can act totally arbitrarily in their perceived interest. I wonder why all the controversy on their forum where so few others I have been a member of have been so dictatorial.

 

What exactly are you trying to accomplish?

First and foremost most of the banned even ones that shouldn’t have been are back already. What is the issue?

It’s been pointed out many times in this thread, They don’t need a reason or a justification. It’s their website, their money, their rules period.

This making a mountain out of a molehill stuff is getting old.

Company forums are FAR more dictatorial as you put it than the CU one has been. It’s not their job to pay for and host a website for people to trash them and cry and complain constantly. They should have never let it get as lax as they did in that regard from a business standpoint but what’s done is done

 

This banning was different. They removed almost 6000 post the member had made. That made it more than a molehill. Heather knew that and fixed it because so many other members spoke up.

 

Sigh

 

If I had my account deleted like they did with Roger and Insider, and then later on they say, by the way, you can come back now, doesn't change what they did. Who can trust them after numerous deletions?

As for their being totally corporate owned and defensible as such that argument is getting old. Since members generously contribute valuable numismatic content, many of them having the equivalent of advanced degrees in these subjects makes the contributors valuable assets of the company and of this field also. There is a big difference between legalistic rights and privileges that exist for the propagation of knowledge and honest commerce.

 

No, no it doesnt at all not even close. Members "generously contribute" are you serious?

No one is an asset of the company solely for posting on their site, quite a few of them are actually the exact opposite.

This entitlement culture wears me out. Start a new forum out of your own pocket then you can propagate all the honest commerce you want

 

For a defamation lawsuit to be successful, the plaintif undeniably must prove 3 things:

1. The statements are untrue
2. The statements were known to be untrue by the person who said them
3. The statements were said with the intention of doing harm

Most cases are thrown out because at least one aspect cannot be undeniably proven.

 

I would say: “the damage has been done. I will no longer post here.” And let the forum deal with the fallout.

 

That’s actually not the requirements and number 3 isn’t a defense at all.

 

PCGS obviously responded positively to member concerns by reinstating the members and their posts.

 

Members post information and knowledge onto a company's forum. People join the forum because they are getting something out of visiting it. Advertisers see the number of members on the forum and pay for the right to advertise or have access to the information related to the members on it. Fees increase (or decrease) accordingly - the more things are posted, the better. Ergo, these members that post are an asset to the company. Nothing "entitled" about it.

 

Forums cost money and man power hours to run. Most coin advertisers are going to be other coin stores or auction houses, if they're lucky they cover the cost of the forum possibly make a small profit. If you allow them to run wild saying whatever they want like some people are arguing for, they would lose more customer revenue than they make in forum revenue. There's simply no asset if not a negative one if a company allows anything to be said like what was happening for a while

 

And I thought a like from Doug was something I'd never see...!

 

He doesn't have any damages to his reputation for it. In fact it's even plausible to maintain it's an honor to be banned from there.

 

Read it again, as though you were hearing it spoken, with the emphasis on like.