He is grinding my gears!

[Lee Jones]

I note that the original poster on this thread is very conspicuous by his absence!

What is one to say, having only just caught up with the recent postings... I can't help get the feeling that now Sarah Bennett has been caught, she is "crying" in the corner whilst Steve storms off in huff to avoid the situation!

Also, could I have not made it more clear to the man that both myself and my other half HAVED IN FACT ordered from Rocks TV? (or was this just his ignorant attempt at trying to make the situation go in his favour???)

 

[PrincessRacer]

With regard to 'Tommy' if the e-mail address belongs to Sarah, then quite honestly she should know better, and I did find it a cheap advertising shot when she mentioned the 1ct stone price on a thread like this - that was, to me, very insensitive and nothing whatsoever to do with Alan! Graham - if any shopping channel staff come here incognito I think you are quite right to expose them - they should be man/woman enough to say 'Hi - It's xxxxx' before saying anyting at all! And yes, I know Sarah and Steve have their own ID's and log on's so why feel the need to have an alter ego?

I think it's important to remember that while it is Sarah's email address, it isn't definite that it's Sarah and I don't think it is fair on her to keep speaking as though it is a foregone conclusion. It's certainly fair to say that it's someone at Rocks, but maybe we should leave individual names out of it because at the end of the day, none of us REALLY know who Tommy is. It is an allegation that has been made that Sarah has strongly denied. Lets not lose sight of that.

 

[Nannylea]

I think it's important to remember that while it is Sarah's email address, it isn't definite that it's Sarah and I don't think it is fair on her to keep speaking as though it is a foregone conclusion. It's certainly fair to say that it's someone at Rocks, but maybe we should leave individual names out of it because at the end of the day, none of us REALLY know who Tommy is. It is an allegation that has been made that Sarah has strongly denied. Lets not lose sight of that.

PR I couldn't agree more x

 

[gemdreamer]

I think it's important to remember that while it is Sarah's email address, it isn't definite that it's Sarah and I don't think it is fair on her to keep speaking as though it is a foregone conclusion. It's certainly fair to say that it's someone at Rocks, but maybe we should leave individual names out of it because at the end of the day, none of us REALLY know who Tommy is. It is an allegation that has been made that Sarah has strongly denied. Lets not lose sight of that.

i see your point, but she was never going to admit it was she?! there always seems to be an excuse, denial etc from steve and sarah whenever any negative posts are written. and in this case, steve having a tantrum and storming off basically! perhaps they would have done better to be honest, they didn't even admit if was someone at rocks when clearly it must be.

 

[Cheyenne]

Nannylea, your post saddened me and i'll tell you why...

"fit in" = CLIQUE


Enough said.

 

[Nessarose]

Nannylea, your post saddened me and i'll tell you why...
"fit in" = CLIQUE
Enough said.

Funny, I didn't read it like that at all. My interpretation was that Nannylea was saddened at the apparent deliberate stirring and provoking that some posters seem to do, delighting in upset and drama. I see it all too often these days that a poster has no manners, no forum etiquette and seemingly no particular interest in the goodies the rest of us can't wait to share. I doubt I'm the only one who logs in with dread, wondering who has reluctantly decided to leave this time.

Why do we take so much interest in the presenters? I have never seen why it is any of our business how they dress, their fingernails, their personalities. Perhaps it is a testament that we watch too much if we are so easily irritated. I would never go up to a shop assistant and say their voice annoys me or that they should get a haircut/manicure/life... It's none of my business. Surely it's just common courtesy to think before you speak and weigh up how hurtful your comments may be before you press the return key.

 

[debsie]

are upset. If anyone of us has 'a go' at someone from our bank, heating supplier, staff in the supermarket etc would you expect the CEO to write to you telling you off for making a staff member cry? Much as some of us feel we are part of the Rocks TV family, at the end of the day they are a business, we are their clients and dirty laundry is best kept away from the customers. Don't misunderstand my post - I happen to be a big fan of Rocks, and have bought everything from a freshwater pearl bracelet through to a Lorique ring. I think their CS takes a lot to be beaten, as do their prices. But I do object to being taken for a bit of a fool, and sorry Steve, but I don't want you pulling on my heart strings because your wife is upset, nor do I want to read arguments between you and your advertisers, or read that you defend your staff against what was a pretty harmless comment (as I said before if you want nasty look at the Caroline thread) How about taking on board what Lee said about Alan and thanking him for the feedback - yes even something that negative! (we've done that ourselves and the person moaning has nowhere left to run then!). Yes, have a good look at what he's auctioning, but either at just the start or just the close of the auction - not both. Get the guys to have clean and tidy hands (also a bug bear of mine) He's not saying take away the personalities, just suggesting ways of possible improvement. Welcome it - you never know - it may even work!

My last point is about folks leaving the forum - I don't get that I'm afraid. Graham relies on advertising to make this place work - none of us would expect him to provide this site out of his own pocket now would they? If Graham needs or even wants to put up his charges what is it to do with us? If Graham allows posts regarding presenters from one channel then he allows them for all - and rightly so - he can't say 'mustn't allow this one incase it upsets the Bennets' when it was one of the tamest presenter complaints I've read. Whilst not agreeing with Lee entirely, it does appear that some of us are guilty of thinking of the Bennets as personal friends - and although they maybe to some, I'm sure they are not in reality to us all. Yes, I like them! Yes, I admire them, but no, they are not my buddies.

Hope that makes some sense and again I say I don't want to upset anyone or offend, I'm just expressing my own viewpoint which I know will be different than some others. Before anyone tells me off - or takes a pop, its my viewpoint and right for me, I'm not trying to say because its my point of view it also has to be yours!

 

[debsie]

Oh no - the first part of my post has gone. Help mods please! was it too long? as without that the rest doesn't make much sense!

 

[debsie]

I think it's important to remember that while it is Sarah's email address, it isn't definite that it's Sarah and I don't think it is fair on her to keep speaking as though it is a foregone conclusion. It's certainly fair to say that it's someone at Rocks, but maybe we should leave individual names out of it because at the end of the day, none of us REALLY know who Tommy is. It is an allegation that has been made that Sarah has strongly denied. Lets not lose sight of that.

PR my post does say IF it was Sarah, not that it was - the same goes for IF it was Steve, IF it was Katherine etc. So please, I am not jumping to any conclusions, just saying IF.

Just another thought though - who would create a log on using Sarah's e-mail address other than Sarah? I'm a bit confused by that I have to admit.

 

[mr jones]

Nannylea, your post saddened me and i'll tell you why...

"fit in" = CLIQUE


Enough said.

Can't say I read it as implying a clique. If there is a clique I don't know who is in it. What I do is recognise regular customers who give their opinions and I respect that. I come in here to read about peoples' views on the Channel, good and bad, but expect appraisals of the quality of goods and services expressed, to be based on fair and reasonable criticism gleaned from experience of those things. I take businesses as I find them. If I like what they sell - I buy.If I get good customer service - I buy, but if they rip me off or they don't sell what I like I leave them alone.

Criticising presenters is fair game if not done in a hurtful way. I can't stand a few presenters on Rocks (and many other channels) and haven't hesitated in the past to say so and might again but I know other folk who love them. Each to their own.

This furore is sad in that both sides have said things that were best dealt with privately and the atmosphere is sour. What I want from a Forum like this is information, tips and fun. Now all I can see is focus on personalities and not the products and service. I hope we can all be in one big clique - that is all the Members of ST getting along despite our different views and opinions and benefiting from our colleagues' views and the power of the Forum to influence Channels. to our advantage. Rant over. :mysmilie_11:

 

[Nessarose]

This furore is sad in that both sides have said things that were best dealt with privately and the atmosphere is sour. What I want from a Forum like this is information, tips and fun. Now all I can see is focus on personalities and not the products and service. I hope we can all be in one big clique - that is all the Members of ST getting along despite our different views and opinions and benefiting from our colleagues' views and the power of the Forum to influence Channels. to our advantage. Rant over. :mysmilie_11:

That just about sums it up for me too Mr Jones... :mysmilie_687:

 

[debsie]

I'm not going to quote both Nessarose and Mr Jones as I agree with them both in varying degrees about shop assistants/presenters.

Whilst agreeing with Nessa in as much as I wouldn't tell a shop assistant to get a haircut/manicure etc I would choose to buy elsewhere if a shop assistant had dirty hands etc and was touching goods I wanted to buy, or a scruffy looking assistant could and would put me off the shop altogether - I maybe very picky, I don't know, but I'd rather be served by someone that appears clean, tidy and taking pride in themselves as it me it says they take pride in what they do also. Thats why I agree with Mr Jones too in as much as presenters being 'fair game' (sorry can't think of a more appropriate saying at this time on a Saturday morning!) After leaving a shop I would say to my shopping companion, did you see the state of the assistants hands, nails etc and if I was managing that shop I'd ensure my staff were well presented, and be prepared to take some moans from customers/potential customer if my staff were in anyway not up to scratch in anyway, including appearance.

I dunno, I don't post for over a year, did lurk a lot, but am on one this morning!

 

[PrincessRacer]

Re the 'Tommy' thing, all I am saying is that people can get into trouble for stating things as fact on a public forum where they call into question the actions or character of another person, particularly when the person has issued a denial. You did indeed say 'If' but to me it read as though 'if it's Sarah's email address, then it's Sarah that did it', and Steve has already said that yes, it looks like it's Sarah's email address, but it wasn't Sarah. I would just really hate for anyone to get in trouble over it, that's all!

Besides which how stupid would Sarah have to be to create a faux profile using HER OWN email addy??? She has been dealing with ST long enough to know that your email addy is recorded and has to be verified and is therefore known by Graham right from the start of your faux profiles association. If she were going to go to the trouble of setting up a faux account, don't you think she would have also used a different email addy???

 

[Nessarose]

Re the 'Tommy' thing, all I am saying is that people can get into trouble for stating things as fact on a public forum where they call into question the actions or character of another person, particularly when the person has issued a denial.

Besides which how stupid would Sarah have to be to create a faux profile using HER OWN email addy??? She has been dealing with ST long enough to know that your email addy is recorded and has to be verified and is therefore known by Graham right from the start of your faux profiles association. If she were going to go to the trouble of setting up a faux account, don't you think she would have also used a different email addy???

I don't doubt that the account was registered to Sarah's email if Graham and Sazza say so. However I do doubt very much that a business email used by all and sundry for queries and comments would only be accessable to Sarah herself. Someone has set up the account and it really is up to Sarah herself to track them down. I imagine she's furious and I don't blame Steve for defending her, just such a shame it all had to play out in public.

 

[debsie]

Thats beyond me too PR, but why would anyone create a user ID with Sarah's e-mail? Who else would know it for one thing? Family - perhaps, friends - perhaps, colleagues - perhaps - Its going to be one of life's unanswered questions I think. I know one thing - whoever has done so has caused a heck of a lot of trouble and mistrust all round, and I truly hope they have the decency to admit their failings at some point, but I doubt it.

Please be assured though, my IF wasn't assuming Sarah, my IF was a general 'IF'!!!! Dont you just love the English Language!

 

[PrincessRacer]

ooo I just had another thought (Debsie, your 'being on a roll' must be catching!!)

Like I said in my last post, Sarah's email address and it's association with the Tommy profile would have been highlighted right from when it was registered. I don't understand why, when Tommy has been a member on the forum for almost a year and hasn't posted since September, this has all come out now?? I would really like to know how long Graham has been aware of the link to Rocks on this account, as the timing of the whole 'public outing' seems very strange to me!

 

[Sazza]

Oh no - the first part of my post has gone. Help mods please! was it too long? as without that the rest doesn't make much sense!

I don't think your post was too long Debsie. I suspect you may have accidentally deleted part of it as you went to sumbit it, have done it myself at times and unfortunately there is no way of us getting it back.

 

[Meeshoo]

Funny, I didn't read it like that at all. My interpretation was that Nannylea was saddened at the apparent deliberate stirring and provoking that some posters seem to do, delighting in upset and drama. I see it all too often these days that a poster has no manners, no forum etiquette and seemingly no particular interest in the goodies the rest of us can't wait to share. I doubt I'm the only one who logs in with dread, wondering who has reluctantly decided to leave this time.

Why do we take so much interest in the presenters? I have never seen why it is any of our business how they dress, their fingernails, their personalities. Perhaps it is a testament that we watch too much if we are so easily irritated. I would never go up to a shop assistant and say their voice annoys me or that they should get a haircut/manicure/life... It's none of my business. Surely it's just common courtesy to think before you speak and weigh up how hurtful your comments may be before you press the return key.

Absolutely agree 100%.

As for the Tommy/Sarah issue - sorry but the posts came from RocksTV. That's not in dispute. It doesn't matter if it was Sarah or another RocksTV employee. It was done. I don't think defending Sarah is the correct thing to do because it was HER email address so either (a) she did it or (b) knows who did it because it's linked to her email address. Either way, it shouldn't have happened and I doubt whether it will happen again. As I said earlier, Tommy's posts were not particularly rude or offensive BUT as an employee of RocksTV they should have declared who they were.

 

[debsie]

I don't think your post was too long Debsie. I suspect you may have accidentally deleted part of it as you went to sumbit it, have done it myself at times and unfortunately there is no way of us getting it back.

Thanks hunny! but oh poo! I had spent an age on that too! What I was saying was I don't know why Steve posted the things he did in his final post. I don't go round my customer base saying one of my staff is in tears, hoping to pull on their heartstrings, nor do I discuss with my clients when my overheads, advertising costs etc rise. Why would I do that? I certainly don't discuss any fallings out I may or may not have with my suppliers/service providers with my customers! If I went into a supermarket and upset a member of staff I wouldn't expect a telling off from the CEO! Dirty laundry best in private and all that. Much as we think we like Steve, Sarah etc how many of us really know them as people? How many of us can say they are genuinely our friend? They are business people, very admirable ones, and I hope they go from success to success but maybe we are seeing them as something they are not. I have to admit its put me off a little, as being a customer I want absolute professionalism from the companies I buy from, if I have a complaint etc I want it dealt with correctly and yes to their credit as far as my own dealings with Rocks are concerned they have always been fabulous, but what happens if I upset them oneday? Will they react in the same way as they did to this thread? They have presenters I don't like, as do all of the other channels, they have sold things I think are truly awful, as do other channels, and if I can't provide feedback without things turning nasty, what then? Sorry Steve, much as I admire and respect you in this instance I think you are very wrong.

 

[Tabs]

Wow! I've just popped back to this thread after a couple of days away from the forum.

I'm shocked, saddened and dismayed at the way this thread has panned out, YES i agree everyone has their views and are entitled to them, but surely it can be done in a "polite/courteous" way, without all the "bitching and sniping" that this thread has ended up on. They days when "friendly banter" and counter banter were the norm, seem to have been lost to the majority....such a shame.