Re: Is this newsgroup monitored by Chrysler?


"Frank Boettcher" <fboettcher@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:l4vqq1hs4vkdf9qfg52pv8d3agq1bi9b79@xxxxxxxxxx
> On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 21:39:25 -0800, "Ted Mittelstaedt"
> <tedm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Frank Boettcher" <fboettcher@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> >news:8qflq1hafjajqoh2b89ahvkhe1n1iar1vs@xxxxxxxxxx
> >> On Thu, 22 Dec 2005 01:00:02 +0100 (CET), Nomen Nescio
> >> <nobody@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> >If Daimler-Chrysler reads this newsgroup and has an official
responder, I
> >> >invite him to come forward and acknowledge it. You have the
opportunity
> >of
> >> >a lifetime to actively engage with people who are interested in seeing
> >you
> >> >supercede GM, Ford, and the myriad of competitors who gnaw at your
> >ankles.
> >> >
> >> >We sincerely care about the Corporation and stand ready to provide any
> >> >assistance you require to gain world domination.
> >>
> >>
> >> Probably not.
> >>
> >> I worked for a company that made a product that was prominently
> >> discussed, critiqued, recommended, and blasphemed on another group. I
> >> often wanted to clear up misinformation, but it was and is a company
> >> policy to never respond to any post on any type of unmoderated news
> >> group. Keep in mind, no one who posts to these newsgroups has to
> >> establish credibility in any manner. For a corporation to be drawn
> >> into that quagmire, debating with the malicious troll artists, sock
> >> puppets, as well as well intended enthusiasts, ususally will do them
> >> little good and may do great harm.
> >>
> >
> >Rubbish. The Nutshell Handbook people have responded officially on
> >alt.terminals, I once got a couple free books by recommending them on
> >that group.
> >
> >Cisco Systems also regularly responds to posts on the Cisco NSP mailing
> >list,
> >however they do use (and freely admit using) an alias to do so. They
also
> >often post official security notices there, at the same time they post
them
> >elsewhere.
> >
> >The biggest reason more companies do not participate in back-and-forth
> >forums such as on Usenet is that in the typical larger company, the VP of
> >Marketing is in his or her 50's and came of age in business years before
the
> >Internet
> >was any kind of force to be rekoned with. They simply do not really
> >understand
> >how to deal with it. Give it another 20 years and they will be all over
the
> >Internet's forums.
> >
> >Anyone who has grown up with these forums knows how to handle them
> >and not to get drawn into quagmires. The problem is the usual decision
> >makers have not grown up with these forums.
> >
> >Ted
>
> So let me see, what part is rubbish.

Your assertion that Usenet is a quagmire and a company shouldn't be
involved in it.

> That my (ex)company does not
> participate in unmoderated news groups. They don't, but they provide
> internet access to customers on a moderated basis from a company site.
>

I had and have nothing to say about your ex-company since you did not
name who they are.

> That marketing managers in their fifties can't/don't understand the
> internet? I'm in my late fifties, was (before retiring) a policy
> maker, and agreed with the policy of avoiding unmoderated forums. And
> the policy was presented by younger marketing people.

As I said I can't judge your ex-compamny since you didn't name it. But I
will say that in this hypothetical situation of you hypothetically being
in your 50's and the hypothetically younger ones presenting such a
policy in a hypothetical company - well if this actually happened then
the people involved in such a decision were stupid fools.

> Additionally, I
> use the internet everyday and participate in a number of newsgroups
> and fully understand the process.
>

Obviously not if you do not understand how to properly engage a company
on Usenet.

I gave 2 examples to you of real live companies that engage on online
forums, and you still insist that even in the face of companies actually
doing this, that it can't be done?

> And what do you mean handle them? When drawn into a debate with a
> troll who might be using several sockpuppets and playing loose with
> the truth, you can't win. So you have to ignore. In which case a
> good portion of the population thinks that statements are true because
> you haven't challenged.
>

Absolute bullpucky. If a troll posts you answer the question, and if
he or she comes back with "that's bullcrap, yadda yadda yadda" then
you ignore it.

If your answer WAS bullcrap, then guess what - the troll has a point, and
you better figure out how to make changes in your company so that you
don't have to give out bullcrap answers.

If your answer wasn't bullcrap, then everyone on the forum is going to
be able to see it, and you have nothing really to worry about.

> And why should a company waste time doing so?
>

Any forum that has a chance of generating sales for a company is
worth participating in.

As I have said before Usenet really isn't a hotbed of new car buyers
and people don't make logical purchasing decisions when buying
new cars, so it would very likely be a waste of time for automakers to
participate.

But MANY other products are NOT like cars, particularly products
sold to niche markets. For example it would be a very good idea for
a company like Federal Mogul to participate in the Usenet group

alt.ballbearings

if such a thing existed, and if existing, was frequented.

> Of course you don't have to believe any of this because I am not
> required to establish my credibility.
>

If your ideas are solid they will generage credibility for them, that is
what establishes your online credibility. Same for me. I don't think
your idea about Usenet being a worthless quagmire is correct and I
have posted why, and the backup for this. You probably won't change
your opinon - but I'm not writing for you I'm writing for the group.
If I was writing for you I'd e-mail you. That is why it's a discussion
group. If others on the group agree with my ideas that is all that
I care about, and in fact it makes no difference if I'm really who I
say I am. What is important is the ideas, not who said them.

Fundamentally that is what this discussion boils down to. If for
example Chrysler decided to create an official representation here
then the point of that would be to get across that the Chrysler company
does care about it's customers and wants them to buy new Chryslers.

It just amazes me that you claim to be a Usenet expert and you haven't
grasped this fundamental thing.

Take old Nomen Nesco or whatever his name is. What gets people
rolling their eyes is the stupidity of the ideas he posts, not that it is
in fact Nomen that posts them. If Nomen quit posting all his airplane
design must go into cars nonsense, and started posting something
reasonable, then in a year that userID might start coming out of
people's killfiles.

Ted


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Is this newsgroup monitored by Chrysler?
    ... >responder, I ... >>>Cisco Systems also regularly responds to posts on the Cisco NSP mailing ... >>>Internet's forums. ... >Your assertion that Usenet is a quagmire and a company shouldn't be ...
    (rec.autos.makers.chrysler)
  • Re: Usenet Brewing Groups not what they used to be
    ... Usenet or e-mail, it's just ... I've only seen a handful spam lately, so it must be an ISP issue. ... posts under different names, especially since those names will probably ... You seem set on moving readers from usenet into web forums, ...
    (rec.crafts.brewing)
  • Re: Are these forums a waste of time?
    ... The *.outlook.* heirarchy groups are some of the busiest serious ... groups on USENET. ... Behind these forums ... When someone posts a lucid question with enough information to be ...
    (microsoft.public.outlook)
  • Re: Subject changes
    ... There are several web forums, EggheadCafe being one, Vista 64x being another, that leach off the MS News servers to make it appear that the forums are busier than they really are. ... The owners of these forums make no attempt to tell their members that this is what happens, so their members have no idea that their posts appear on Usenet. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.vista.general)
  • Re: Cold
    ... consider that a sound enough reason to abandon my policy of always ... providing polite responses to posts on the Usenet. ...
    (uk.misc)
Loading