View Full Version : Interesting article on AskMen.com
Jones
12-01-2003, 08:47 PM
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
AskMen.com, an awesome site for men (if you ask me)
came out with an article on a pheromone product today. I checked out the products website and it really doesn\'t
say what is in it... but it is an odorless spray. I am not endorsing this product at all... just thought it would
be interesting for us to read.
[Link Deleted]
Josh
<hr /></blockquote><font
class=\"post\">
Its a good thing dis-allowing freedom of speech, or the freedome to post articles, is
good for business.
jimhoff
12-01-2003, 08:57 PM
I
did not/do not think that Pherx is a good deal. In fact, I too thought it was a joke, but was simply trying to
bring about some interesting info. Sorry for posting the link. I did not intend for it to be a conflict.
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif
The Newbie....
J
Pancho1188
12-01-2003, 10:40 PM
One comment on here didn\'t sit well with me...
First of all, Bruce can do whatever he wants. It\'s his
forum, he pays the bill so we can educate each other on pheromones or in this case discuss every option available to
us, he can do whatever the hell he feels like doing. I\'m surprised he puts up with what he does sometimes.
He\'s never taken down a posting that said, \"This stuff is snake oil and doesn\'t work. Bye.\" Yes, there
have been a couple of those (not so exaggerated), and to my knowledge they\'re still there.
Secondly, freedom
of speech is a government thing and in my opinion not complete by any means. If I said I wanted to commit a
horrible crime or perform a violent act on a high-profile figure, I\'d be arrested. If that person was high
enough, I\'d be in serious trouble. In other words, freedom of speech is only \'guaranteed\' by the
government, and even then it has its limits.
Thirdly, if I owned a site, I wouldn\'t want to be advertising my
competition. To hell with them, let them fend for themselves. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
Many businessmen do list alternative stores if they don\'t have what you need, but they never tell you just to go
check competitors\' products. On top of this, Love-scent seems to be the best all-around, anyway, concerning
guarantees, prices, and quality. If you want to find something better, it\'s called a SEARCH ENGINE. Type in
\'pheromones\' and see what you get. That\'ll get you plenty of other sites as well, and you don\'t need
links on this forum to competitors to make it worse.
Finally, I do agree that this link in particular was to an
article and NOT to a competitor\'s site, but the article was reviewing a competitor\'s product and giving
favorable remarks. That\'s a grey area, and I think I might actually side with the poster that it was an article
and not a competitor\'s site, but since the article reviewed a competitor\'s product and had nothing to do with
Bruce\'s products, I can see why the moderator made such a decision.
So there you have it. TMI on how Bruce
has every right to do whatever the hell he wants but is pretty fair overall despite this fact.
I don\'t know
why I felt the need to write this, but I get the itch to preach occasionally...
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif
belgareth
12-01-2003, 10:51 PM
Pancho1188:
Your statement about sums it up. I am glad to see that some of the forum members understand about
both forum policy and the so-called freedom of speech. Thanks for posting it.
tounge
12-01-2003, 11:06 PM
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
One comment on here didn\'t sit well with
me...
Secondly, freedom of speech is a government thing and in my opinion not complete by any means. If I
said I wanted to commit a horrible crime or perform a violent act on a high-profile figure, I\'d be arrested. If
that person was high enough, I\'d be in serious trouble. In other words, freedom of speech is only
\'guaranteed\' by the government, and even then it has its limits.
Pancho, I agree with most of
what you said. However, the goverment of the United States does not guarantee freedom of speech. It is a
Constitutional right. Part of the 1st amendment. As with all rights, it bears with it, certain
resposibilities.
I don\'t mean to nit pick, but the understanding of civics in the US today is apalling.
Jones
12-02-2003, 01:47 AM
Censorship is the issue. I am not interesting in debating the interworkings of certain goverment laws on our
freedoms; it is simply fact that the people\'s liberties are only taken away to the extent which the people allow
it to be done.
If bruce feels that this product was inferior, then the link would have posed no risk.
The is a message board, supoorted by someone, yes. So is the New York Times, but we hope they do not censor stories
at there disgression.
Removing a link to an article because it had a favorable review of another product
is laughable; the only logical conclusion is that the censor must really have something to fear
. You cant have it both ways.
belgareth
12-02-2003, 04:15 AM
You don\'t think the New York Times censors what it prints? That\'s pretty simplistic.
Actually, this is
a discussion board. What you think you should have the right to do is similar to visiting a club and handing out
fliers describing a competitor\'s product, then complaining when they won\'t let you. It\'s fine to mention a
competitor or even discuss them but the moment you started handing out fliers, you stepped over the line of
reasonable behavoir. No business would allow that.
Pancho1188
12-02-2003, 06:30 AM
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font
class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
One comment on here didn\'t sit well with me...
Secondly, freedom of
speech is a government thing and in my opinion not complete by any means. If I said I wanted to commit a horrible
crime or perform a violent act on a high-profile figure, I\'d be arrested. If that person was high enough, I\'d
be in serious trouble. In other words, freedom of speech is only \'guaranteed\' by the government, and even
then it has its limits.
Pancho, I agree with most of what you said. However, the goverment of the
United States does not guarantee freedom of speech. It is a Constitutional right. Part of the 1st amendment. As
with all rights, it bears with it, certain resposibilities.
I don\'t mean to nit pick, but the understanding of
civics in the US today is apalling.
<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">
I know what you mean.
That\'s why the word \'guaranteed\' was in quotes because I was being a little sarcastic there. It is a basic
right that does require responsibility on the citizen\'s part. Many extremists think that it protects them from
everything, when all it does is stop the government from holding your bad opinion of the president or your preaching
of a certain viewpoint against you. Also, I understand you being nitpicky, but I was not referring to the US
government but any government that protects the rights of the people. There are too many countries represented here
to be ignorant and assume everybody loves and follows the USA... Although I love the US, I know we\'re not the
best at everything and also know Franki would kick my behind if I said otherwise.
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
Grrr... I have to stop being defensive... It\'s a character
flaw. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif
franki
12-02-2003, 06:39 AM
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
I know we\'re not the best at everything and
also know Franki would kick my behind if I said otherwise. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Holmes
12-02-2003, 07:20 AM
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
when all it does is stop the government from
holding your bad opinion of the president or your preaching of a certain viewpoint against you.
<hr
/></blockquote><font class=\"post\">
...though this administration would change that pesky detail if it could.
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif
Holmes
tounge
12-02-2003, 10:36 AM
I
hear ya Holmes. Hillery\'s administration did their damndest to try.
CptKipling
12-02-2003, 10:45 AM
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
One comment on here didn\'t sit well with
me...
First of all, Bruce can do whatever he wants. It\'s his forum, he pays the bill so we can educate each
other on pheromones or in this case discuss every option available to us, he can do whatever the hell he feels like
doing. I\'m surprised he puts up with what he does sometimes. He\'s never taken down a posting that said,
\"This stuff is snake oil and doesn\'t work. Bye.\" Yes, there have been a couple of those (not so
exaggerated), and to my knowledge they\'re still there.
Secondly, freedom of speech is a government thing and
in my opinion not complete by any means. If I said I wanted to commit a horrible crime or perform a violent act on
a high-profile figure, I\'d be arrested. If that person was high enough, I\'d be in serious trouble. In other
words, freedom of speech is only \'guaranteed\' by the government, and even then it has its limits.
Thirdly,
if I owned a site, I wouldn\'t want to be advertising my competition. To hell with them, let them fend for
themselves. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif Many businessmen do list alternative stores if they
don\'t have what you need, but they never tell you just to go check competitors\' products. On top of this,
Love-scent seems to be the best all-around, anyway, concerning guarantees, prices, and quality. If you want to find
something better, it\'s called a SEARCH ENGINE. Type in \'pheromones\' and see what you get. That\'ll get
you plenty of other sites as well, and you don\'t need links on this forum to competitors to make it
worse.
Finally, I do agree that this link in particular was to an article and NOT to a competitor\'s site, but
the article was reviewing a competitor\'s product and giving favorable remarks. That\'s a grey area, and I
think I might actually side with the poster that it was an article and not a competitor\'s site, but since the
article reviewed a competitor\'s product and had nothing to do with Bruce\'s products, I can see why the
moderator made such a decision.
So there you have it. TMI on how Bruce has every right to do whatever the hell
he wants but is pretty fair overall despite this fact.
I don\'t know why I felt the need to write this, but I
get the itch to preach occasionally... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif
<hr
/></blockquote><font class=\"post\">
Well said.
Holmes
12-02-2003, 10:59 AM
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
I hear ya Holmes. Hillery\'s administration did
their damndest to try.
<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">
Yup, Hilary. How she wielded that Phase
plasma rifle in 40-watt range.
Holmes
oscar
12-02-2003, 01:04 PM
To
those who believe that the link that I deleted was to an \"article\", please check the fine print.
If you go to
askmen.com and do a search for \"pheromones\" you\'ll find a list of links to so-called articles \"reviewing\"
products.
Strangely it seems all of the most recently published articles on pheromones are about PherX, who just
so happens to be an askmen advertising client.
If you took the time to read everything including the fine print,
you\'ll see that every review that mentions PherX favorably has a disclaimer line at the top or bottom (or both)
that states, \"This article is brought to you in part by Pherx.com\".
If one goes further to examine
askmen\'s policy on sponsored \"articles\", one finds that the article that is ostensibly being presented as an
unbiased review is in fact COMMISSIONED by the ADVERTISER.
Thus the link that I deleted was one that led to an
ADVERTISEMENT, NOT an ARTICLE in the sense that I see it being argued above.
I stand by my decision.
Oscar
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Pancho1188
12-02-2003, 02:54 PM
Good call. I hate those fake \'articles\' that are really advertisements. One sleazy trick after another...
Way to exploit those mofos... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
jimhoff
12-02-2003, 03:16 PM
Ok. Since I am the source of this thread, I am going to talk about how I feel now.
First of all, I did not
intend to promote or endorse the Pherx product. Since I am a newbie, I did not know that it would be frowned upon
to do such a thing. It was an innocent post.
Now, Love-Scent.com is a top of the line resource for anyone who is
interested in, or curious about any form of pheromone information. Both the information on this site, and the
products offered for sale are superior to most, if not all others offered on the web. This is the conclusion that I
have come to through my limited research during the past few weeks. In fact, I stumbled upon this site rather
quickly when I first became interested in mones. As an individual who is both new to pheromones, and inquisitive by
nature, I though I would just start posting with my questions and random information that I found on the web. I
thought that it might be beneficial to both other new members and seasoned ones to do so. I am a firm believer that
you can never learn enough. So, I do not regret posting the thread or the link.
With that being said, we all
know that Love-Scent is a top notch site, with top shelf products and so the owners/creators should not be so upset
to welcome a post which is simply attempting to show that there was an interesting article on another site...
actually promoting the use of pheromones. I was excited to see that and is why I initially posted the link. On the
other hand, if I were a business owner, I would not allow solicitation of other businesses around my customers, if
that were the intention of the individuals. It depends on how you look at it. One, if you are so confident in your
products, you should welcome the promotions of other \"inferior\" products. This will in the end be beneficial
for business because word of mouth will spread that the competitor is crap and they should come to you for the real
deal. No this won\'t immediately impact sales, but will in the long run. Second, to the best of my knowledge,
most people out there either aren\'t familliar with or have no idea about pheromones. I would be encouraged that
the market were to be getting more exposure, and with word of mouth being that my product was the best around, I
would be confident that people will be eventually be led to my arena.
I could go on and on, but I am kind of
rambling....
Peace,
Josh
belgareth
12-02-2003, 03:22 PM
Josh
I don\'t think anybody is upset with you about posting that link. You did it unknowingly and who can be
angry about that? It may or may not benefit Bruce in the long run to allow the posting of other sites here. It has
caused him problems in the past. So he decided it would not be a good idea to allow it. It falls under the once
burned philosophy. I hope you can understand his point of view.
Belgareth
jimhoff
12-02-2003, 05:24 PM
I
understand completely. Thanks!!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Pancho1188
12-02-2003, 05:53 PM
Yeah, man. You\'ve got it right. Educate yourself and others. Search for answers and for what\'s best for
you. Kudos for being a go-getter (I just wanted to say \'Kudos\').
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif Hope you post more and keep searching for what works for you.
jimhoff
12-02-2003, 06:39 PM
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
jvkohl
12-02-2003, 08:03 PM
Minimally, the -rone -none question makes it clear that the writer\'s knowledge is questionable, which reaks of
mindless advertising. I\'ve also seen other articles mention -rone when they clearly are writing about -none, and
even one conference abstract at an Association for Chemosensory Sciences meeting. Went to speak with the presenter
about her -rone findings and found out she had worked with -none. Was also dissapointed to learn that -rone and
-none are so close in interpretation that people who speak German are very likely to use either one for the other
(which the presenter explained was her problem).
No wonder scientific progress is sometimes slow; not all of us
speak the same language when it comes to pheromones. This being the case, Love-Scent.com continues to be the best
source for factual information about products (not journalists, and not advertisers--and sometimes, not even
researchers).
At least we have a Forum to help clarify some issues.
Sagacious1420
12-03-2003, 03:29 AM
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
To those who believe that the link that
I deleted was to an \"article\", please check the fine print.
If you go to askmen.com and do a search for
\"pheromones\" you\'ll find a list of links to so-called articles \"reviewing\" products.
Strangely it
seems all of the most recently published articles on pheromones are about PherX, who just so happens to be an askmen
advertising client.
If you took the time to read everything including the fine print, you\'ll see that every
review that mentions PherX favorably has a disclaimer line at the top or bottom (or both) that states, \"This
article is brought to you in part by Pherx.com\".
If one goes further to examine askmen\'s policy on
sponsored \"articles\", one finds that the article that is ostensibly being presented as an unbiased review is in
fact COMMISSIONED by the ADVERTISER.
Thus the link that I deleted was one that led to an ADVERTISEMENT, NOT an
ARTICLE in the sense that I see it being argued above.
I stand by my decision.
Oscar
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
<hr /></blockquote><font
class=\"post\">
INDEED!
Lucky
12-04-2003, 11:31 AM
Josh,
Welcome to the board! I understand completely about the blueberries.
jimhoff
12-04-2003, 02:35 PM
HA! Thanks my friend.
J /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.