Q Talk

[Nightowlz]

These threads from the OP are getting a little ridiculous. Get a Life. I don't think anyone cares what LR is doing nor what she could do for Q. She's no different then any of the other hosts. Certainly not worth 5-10 million not even 1. What a joke. JMO. Everyone else please stop replying & it will go away. 

[seaBreeze]

LR's star power might provide entertainment value--however, sales are lacking on many home shopping networks due to pricing and "bad experiences" with product/ returns/ etc.  

A good quote I recently read was: ..... "If you need a thing, you don't turn on your television," Kirn said. "You go online or to a store. Period."

[dooBdoo]

---

@Sheilaray wrote:

@charvale, Jonnysbro is entitled to her opinion. Once again, it was explained by the mods that we can express our opinions, however, we cannot be unkind or fight. In either case, posts and/or threads will be deleted.

I don't think for one nanosecond that QVC is protecting anyone, especially Lisa. In fact, they might have a vested interest in reading the reviews of Lisa and her so-called business. Keep in mind that QVC doesn't spend time and money on these boards merely for our fun and entertainment. The boards provide information that QVC can use to guage their customer base.

---

          I wanted to add another thought in regard to your post, @Sheilaray.   This was discussed at length on a thread in the past, but I'm not sure what's posted on the forums is especially helpful in gauging customer base.   When we post anonymously, there's no way to know what our motives might be.   In the past 24 hours I've seen 2 representatives of businesses create nicknames and post glowing recommendations for their products.   And they, at least, identified themselves.   How do we know they don't return under other nicknames to post recommendations or to discredit competitors?   That's a common practice online these days.   Just my opinion, but I'm not sure these forums are a reliable representative sample of the Q customer... or, if it is, I'm not sure anyone is listening.   If we think about it...  how many of the complaints about the shows, products, hosts, prices, shipping, etc., on these forums do we see resulting in actual change?  How many of the suggestions posted here have been implemented?

[Sheilaray]

This is where we differ. I am not the least bit incited by Jonnysbro posts. Nor am I baited by them. I find them amusing and quite like the fact that they provide me with a forum to express my personal opinions.  I do feel that you have a choice in how you interpret and respond to threads like these.

As far as the mods decisions to delete, why question? It is what it is and move on. The general ground rules have been laid out and made quite clear. Don't take it personally and learn for next time.

[KathyPet]

---

@dooBdoo wrote:

---

@Sheilaray wrote:

@charvale, Jonnysbro is entitled to her opinion. Once again, it was explained by the mods that we can express our opinions, however, we cannot be unkind or fight. In either case, posts and/or threads will be deleted.

I don't think for one nanosecond that QVC is protecting anyone, especially Lisa. In fact, they might have a vested interest in reading the reviews of Lisa and her so-called business. Keep in mind that QVC doesn't spend time and money on these boards merely for our fun and entertainment. The boards provide information that QVC can use to guage their customer base.

---

          I wanted to add another thought in regard to your post, @Sheilaray.   This was discussed at length on a thread in the past, but I'm not sure what's posted on the forums is especially helpful in gauging customer base.   When we post anonymously, there's no way to know what our motives might be.   In the past 24 hours I've seen 2 representatives of businesses create nicknames and post glowing recommendations for their products.   And they, at least, identified themselves.   How do we know they don't return under other nicknames to post recommendations or to discredit competitors?   That's a common practice online these days.   Just my opinion, but I'm not sure these forums are a reliable representative sample of the Q customer... or, if it is, I'm not sure anyone is listening.   If we think about it...  how many of the complaints about the shows, products, hosts, prices, shipping, etc., on these forums do we see resulting in actual change?  How many of the suggestions posted here have been implemented?

---

I do not know what,product reps you are referring to but I can assure you that it is against all QVC rules for a representative of a product to post a review of their product whether they identify themselves or not.  PRoducts have been dropped from QVC because of vendors breaking these rules.  IF you have seen this occur you need to contact the QVC Social Team and provide the details.

[MercysMom]

Lisa (aka Johnnysbro), if you want your job back, just call QVC and ask them. 

[cherry]

---

@JONNYSBRO wrote:

Perfect example Joan Rivers when she launched in 1990 had an ok debut she didnt set sales records and it was wowing numbers. Then they paired her with Kathy Levine numbers started skyrocketing to the point her sales were up like 400 percent after a couple years. These ladies would have shows with sell out after sell out. Joan said years later i dont know if my line ever would have taken off without Kathy Levine. When Joan died the ceo said she hit 1 billion dollars in sales at QVC. A host and chemistry with vendor can result in increased sales. Some hosts are ill fit for certaib hours. LR said never put her on a cooking show.

---

For that to happen you need a quality product , to start with.

[dooBdoo]

---

@Sheilaray wrote:

This is where we differ. I am not the least bit incited by Jonnysbro posts. Nor am I baited by them. I find them amusing and quite like the fact that they provide me with a forum to express my personal opinions.  I do feel that you have a choice in how you interpret and respond to threads like these.

As far as the mods decisions to delete, why question? It is what it is and move on. The general ground rules have been laid out and made quite clear. Don't take it personally and learn for next time.

---

            @Sheilaray, Not sure which poster or post this is a response to, but I think most of us really don't take it personally.    We're all still here to post another day on another topic.   (Or on this topic, each time it comes back around again! )   My point was that the tone and the repetitive pattern are soundly established, and, as a result, the outcome is always the same.   Over time, that gives the impression of intent to provoke.   I've always said I consider my posts to be ephemeral and it's okay with me if they stay or even if they don't.  

[Moonchilde]

---

@dooBdoo wrote:

---

@Caaareful Shopper wrote:

---

@Sheilaray wrote:

@charvale, Jonnysbro is entitled to her opinion. Once again, it was explained by the mods that we can express our opinions, however, we cannot be unkind or fight. In either case, posts and/or threads will be deleted.

I don't think for one nanosecond that QVC is protecting anyone, especially Lisa. In fact, they might have a vested interest in reading the reviews of Lisa and her so-called business. Keep in mind that QVC doesn't spend time and money on these boards merely for our fun and entertainment. The boards provide information that QVC can use to guage their customer base.

---

I agree with @Sheilaray.  The OP is indeed entitled to her opinion.  Even though I feel her opinions are always written in a manner to incite, they are still her opinion. 

A post response of mine was also removed, but that's cool. I apparently rolled my eyes too far back in my head and my written word expressed it a little too much. 

There's nothing in the guidelines prohibiting talking about former hosts.     

---

            Thanks for articulating the point I placed in red, @Caaareful Shopper.   I think they're written that way, too.   Based on my experience here, inciting or disrupting actually is considered to be against the published standards.   At the very least, if we start certain topics and know what the outcome has always been...  that looks a lot like bait to me.   I'm not a person who normally questions moderation, and I hope that's not O/T to mention, just a passing comment about the reason I think some of us have raised the issue.   It is, after all, related to the pattern these threads have established.   The best we can do, I suppose, is try to go with the flow though possibly a little head-scratching confusion comes into play at this point.

---

While I totally agree with your incitement feelings, @dooBdoo, as you and I have discussed before, I think that the moderators' hands are tied in several ways. If you ban consistently baiting posters - those who don't actually participate in forum discussions but post 90%+ simply to bait - then you'd have to ban several long-time posters, and add "baiting" to the reason a post gets reported. I rarely see a moderator give that as a reason, though it goes on all the time.

I think there are certain 'against standards' issues that some moderators aren't comfortable with making decisions about, and certain things moderators have been told they cannot and/or should not do, and they consistently err in favor of trolls and baiters. Pot-stirrers are completely welcomed with open arms and always have been. I think the moderators have been advised to deal with squeaky wheels in general, but let the trolls and baiters be when possible. WHY, I no longer have a clue.

[dooBdoo]

---

@KathyPet wrote:

---

@dooBdoo wrote:

---

@Sheilaray wrote:

@charvale, Jonnysbro is entitled to her opinion. Once again, it was explained by the mods that we can express our opinions, however, we cannot be unkind or fight. In either case, posts and/or threads will be deleted.

I don't think for one nanosecond that QVC is protecting anyone, especially Lisa. In fact, they might have a vested interest in reading the reviews of Lisa and her so-called business. Keep in mind that QVC doesn't spend time and money on these boards merely for our fun and entertainment. The boards provide information that QVC can use to guage their customer base.

---

          I wanted to add another thought in regard to your post, @Sheilaray.   This was discussed at length on a thread in the past, but I'm not sure what's posted on the forums is especially helpful in gauging customer base.   When we post anonymously, there's no way to know what our motives might be.   In the past 24 hours I've seen 2 representatives of businesses create nicknames and post glowing recommendations for their products.   And they, at least, identified themselves.   How do we know they don't return under other nicknames to post recommendations or to discredit competitors?   That's a common practice online these days.   Just my opinion, but I'm not sure these forums are a reliable representative sample of the Q customer... or, if it is, I'm not sure anyone is listening.   If we think about it...  how many of the complaints about the shows, products, hosts, prices, shipping, etc., on these forums do we see resulting in actual change?  How many of the suggestions posted here have been implemented?

---

I do not know what,product reps you are referring to but I can assure you that it is against all QVC rules for a representative of a product to post a review of their product whether they identify themselves or not.  PRoducts have been dropped from QVC because of vendors breaking these rules.  IF you have seen this occur you need to contact the QVC Social Team and provide the details.

---

          Hi, @KathyPet.   Certainly.   Both were removed, one of them returned again after several hours and now that one is gone, too.   They weren't QVC vendors.   But as I said, how do we know they won't create new accounts, blend in with us, and promote or disparage products to benefit their businesses?   We really don't, and neither does QVC.