Q Talk

[dooBdoo]

I'm pretty sure I hit "enter" at each comment section without problem (using Firefox).

For anyone who wasn't able to complete the survey:

Either open a different browser (Firefox, Chrome, Safari, IE, etc.) and try again or delete all cookies and relaunch the browser and start again.

I hope that's helpful!

[Chi-town girl]

On 7/14/2014 imaclotheshog said:

Exactly wildcatfan. I agree. If you change the forums too much to be sugary and sweet, it will not be a balanced forum. Why post here if you know all that is here is glowing rah-rah posts from Q cheerleaders? Ridiculous. In order to have a balanced forum, there have to be posts from both sides permitted.

ALL comments should be permitted, unless they use profanity or other language that is deemed widely offensive.

If this is not a place that posters feel free to comment on anything-- positive or negative-- then the forum is pointless.

We are not children, I think most of us are adults and can move on from discussions we don't like.

Censoring the forums to the point where we can't post anything negative is just wrong. Life is full of positive and negative, I think we are all able to do just fine.

I do think that ANY THREAD whose start date is over 90 days should be deleted. The long threads from years ago need to be deleted. All of them. There is no reason why threads that are YEARS old are still on the boards. Clean up the boards Q!

Thanks for the notice about the survey. It's a delicate balance. Like to have open dialog, and we should be able to post criticism and negative experiences as well as opinions about QVC, brands, products. However, hostility is not acceptable. Nor bashing or opinions with the intent to embarass or attack vendors, hosts, other community members. There is a small group of active posters that start negative threads almost every day or continually post on other threads just to create negativity or hostility. That needs to tighten up. I don't see any reason why there should be a time limit for threads; let them run and be a reference source. Look forward to new and positive changes! Thanks QVC!!!

[Buck-i-Nana]

I was glad to see the survey, but found that they lumped some things together in some areas and didn't catch the distinction in others such as age of threads.

I used the additional comments area to clarify. For example - I don't have a problem with people posting negatively about a brand, I do have a problem with them posting negatively about the vendor.

In the question regarding super long threads and appropriate posting period of time, I think they missed the mark. The problem, as I see it is in old threads that haven't had activity on them for months being dredged up. I made a point to state that the threads should be closed to comments after 90 days of inactivity, not 90 days from initial posting.

[Chi-town girl]

On 7/14/2014 Buck-i-Nana said:

I was glad to see the survey, but found that they lumped some things together in some areas and didn't catch the distinction in others such as age of threads.

I used the additional comments area to clarify. For example - I don't have a problem with people posting negatively about a brand, I do have a problem with them posting negatively about the vendor.

In the question regarding super long threads and appropriate posting period of time, I think they missed the mark. The problem, as I see it is in old threads that haven't had activity on them for months being dredged up. I made a point to state that the threads should be closed to comments after 90 days of inactivity, not 90 days from initial posting.

Good point about old threads. Seems like everytime joan rivers is scheduled on qvc, someone restarts an old bashing thread.

[Buck-i-Nana]

On 7/14/2014 Chi-town girl said:

On 7/14/2014 Buck-i-Nana said:

I was glad to see the survey, but found that they lumped some things together in some areas and didn't catch the distinction in others such as age of threads.

I used the additional comments area to clarify. For example - I don't have a problem with people posting negatively about a brand, I do have a problem with them posting negatively about the vendor.

In the question regarding super long threads and appropriate posting period of time, I think they missed the mark. The problem, as I see it is in old threads that haven't had activity on them for months being dredged up. I made a point to state that the threads should be closed to comments after 90 days of inactivity, not 90 days from initial posting.

Good point about old threads. Seems like everytime joan rivers is scheduled on qvc, someone restarts an old bashing thread.

Yup. We also have the regular troll visitors who dredge up 100s of old old old threads adding just a "." or one word just to mess with the forums.

[WaJa61]

Thank you, Buck-i-Nana; I tried to make some of the same points.

--Lockdown only inactive threads after 90 days.

--Enforce the standards by deleting inappropriate comments within a thread. Don't delete an entire thread unless the OP itself is inappropriate (bashing, baiting, etc.).

--Give violators 3 strikes and they're out. Warn them by email before banning their IP with an explanation of their violation.

--Constructive criticism of programming, products, customer service, pricing -- including shipping -- is beneficial to any business and should be a customer's right on an open forum.

Above all else I hope the technical issues, including mobile device compatibility is implemented.

Thank you for the thread, dBd.

[Chi-town girl]

On 7/14/2014 WaJa61 said:

Thank you, Buck-i-Nana; I tried to make some of the same points.

--Lockdown only inactive threads after 90 days.

--Enforce the standards by deleting inappropriate comments within a thread. Don't delete an entire thread unless the OP itself is inappropriate (bashing, baiting, etc.).

--Give violators 3 strikes and they're out. Warn them by email before banning their IP with an explanation of their violation.

--Constructive criticism of programming, products, customer service, pricing -- including shipping -- is beneficial to any business and should be a customer's right on an open forum.

Above all else I hope the technical issues, including mobile device compatibility is implemented.

Thank you for the thread, dBd.

Excellent suggestion about the 3 strikes, you're out rule. Agree with all your points-same as what I submitted.

[dooBdoo]

On 7/14/2014 WaJa61 said:

Thank you, Buck-i-Nana; I tried to make some of the same points.

--Lockdown only inactive threads after 90 days.

--Enforce the standards by deleting inappropriate comments within a thread. Don't delete an entire thread unless the OP itself is inappropriate (bashing, baiting, etc.).

--Give violators 3 strikes and they're out. Warn them by email before banning their IP with an explanation of their violation.

--Constructive criticism of programming, products, customer service, pricing -- including shipping -- is beneficial to any business and should be a customer's right on an open forum.

Above all else I hope the technical issues, including mobile device compatibility is implemented.

Thank you for the thread, dBd.

Hi, WaJa61! You're welcome! Those are great suggestions.

[dooBdoo]

I wanted to add: I think they made a mistake in not making the first survey known to as many posters as possible. (For example, if they had posted it at the top of each forum, as they do when they really want our attention, I think they would've had more than 101 responses.)

As a result, some of us (many of us?) find this new survey to be rather narrowly-focused.

Even so, I hope they'll receive more responses this time and perhaps it will be helpful. I'll try to think positively about this.

[faeriemoon]

I think the survey should have been less about monitoring and censoring, and more about the actual structure and technicalities of the forums.