Lisa

xx wrote "Message: I was away for a long weekend and seem to have missed whatever happened last weekend" <BR> <BR>This raises an interesting conundrum. Look at what we miss when we travel and are away from the boards. Puts you at a disadvantage to travel. <BR> <BR>Sorry I can't answer all your questions as to what happened as I know only part of the story. But It made for very interesting reading this weekend and wondering about various participants' tenuous hold on sanity. (and I did mean participants in the plural.)

elvira

I think both Sally Fowler and Bob Brown have brought out important points. <BR> <BR>Fodor's has no obligation to us, whether to act as watchdog on this site or maintain this site at all. The forum, and we, are here by their good graces. <BR> <BR>The community on this forum is its own best censor; we ignore, chastise, berate and defend any and all posts. We can always let loose the ultimate big gun, Fodor's editors, by emailing them with a complaint and asking to have really horrible posts deleted. I doubt that the editors read every thread and every post; we need to bring to their attention any posts that are out of line. The recent fake editors' post was so far out of line that it left me speechless (which, you all know, isn't easy to do). <BR> <BR>There have been a lot more questions this week, with names new to me, that have elicited some great information (I never looked at Orvieto, but it's got a funicular, and perches on a mountain? This I gotta see); the "mother sayings" post is keeping me in stitches and tears; the tipping threads have some great insights. <BR> <BR>Every right, including free speech, carries enormous responsibilities; thankfully, most people accept them. Those who don't stand out like a sore thumb.

JLo

Fodor's is in fact generating revenue from advertisers. Note that when you sign on to their site you'll see a blip from "Doubleclick" a site which collects information about users. The dot com businesses that I've seen fail or fall short of expectations are those which tried to use the internet as their only store front and source of revenue. Those companies with established products and services that use web sites as supplements to their business seem to be fairly successful, Fodor's included. <BR> <BR>So yes, I agree that your site visitors are in fact your customers, or at the very least, your potential customers, and they should ideally be treated as such. <BR> <BR>And just as an aside about deleting posts, one person's "attack" is another person "humor" and vice versa. The vast majority of it is completely subjective. As someone on another thread pointed out, the criteria for e-mailing Fodor's and asking them to censor something is whether or not you personally dislike a certain thread, for whatever reason.

island

O.K., I am *ROFL* at the analogy about the guy who parks himself in front of your store to solicit and ultimately antagonize YOUR customers! I can just picture a certain someone (whom we all know) doing that before the advent of the internet. Probably planted himself outside a local travel agency and tried to get everyone who walked in to go on HIS tours instead. Those travel agencies probably thank God for the internet. hehehe

Linda

OK, enough already. I've been reading this kind of thread long enough. (I know, I don't have to read them, but, if you have a right to write them, I have a right to read them.) I don't know whether to agree or disagree with any of this type of post. Why? Because I don't have the FACTS. And I seriously doubt if any of you really do either. I've read and re-read Rex's posts. Nowhere do I find real EVIDENCE that he is a travel agent. Nowhere do I find real EVIDENCE that he works for Fodors. Nowhere do I find real EVIDENCE he is not a doctor. Nowhere do I find real EVIDENCE that he is all of the things you say he is! As a matter of fact, I only find snipes and parries. You're even going at it when he isn't here to read it--so why? (Could it be that you are as much attention seekers as you purport he is? Not an attack, just food for thought.) From what I read, if I were Rex, I'd give thought to seeing an attorney about the possibility of a lawsuit of slander against you. I don't know, I'm not an attorney, but from what I'm seeing, he may just have a case. But then, he can't sue most of you, can he?--because you don't use your names. <BR> <BR>Give this up, all right already. Stop attacking Rex. It doesn't dissuade him from posting (presumably your goal), and uses an awful lot of your energy--energy that could well be used for good, instead of animosity. And, there are those out there whom Rex has helped--with absolutely no chance for any recompense, other than feeling good because he has helped a fellow Fodorite. And isn't that why a lot of us come to this site to begin with? <BR> <BR>One last thought. Sometimes I feel like I'm watching my children when they were 4 and 5-years old. He hit me--But he hit me first--but he stole my ball...and the truth is something that is quite different from what it is perceived. Let's stop acting like 4 and 5-year-olds and start acting like the adults you are. If you have something to say to Rex, say it to his face (heaven knows his e-mail address is posted many times on this board), under your right name. If you don't want to send an e-mail from your correct e-mail box, then set up a temporary hot mail account and use that. But tell him who you are, stand behind what you say. And start acting like adults. PLEASE. <BR> <BR>Linda

x

He is a medical doctor. I don't think he's in the travel business -- yet. He probably is not a consultant for Fodors. He did do some of the very strange inappropriate unethical things he's accused of (impersonating others when posting). I did tell him directly "certain things" under my true name. Conscience clear. <BR> <BR>P.S. You're right that we waste too much eneergy on this.

Clarence

Well now Linda (or is it Mrs. Bickers?) feel better now? Those ludicrous cyber-lawsuit threats don't work for him and they won't work for you. Try to resist posing as Fodor's editors next, O.K.? <BR> <BR>R participates here voluntarily, as we all do. If he's so unhappy or "attacked" as you say, he's free to choose to discontinue his voluntary participation. No one is holding a gun to anyone's head here. <BR> <BR>The real EVIDENCE here is as follows: <BR> <BR>1. He poses as Fodor's editors to further his own means. <BR> <BR>2. He uses other e-mails to disguise himself yet screeches when anyone does the same. <BR> <BR>3. He is unable to handle any criticism in any form, constructive or not, and perceives every slight as an "attack." He will park here and post for hours and hours just to keep having the last word on everything. <BR> <BR>4. He commandeers post after post, always directing attention away from the original question and focusing the attention on himself. If anyone (gently or not) points this out to him, he utilizes all of the tactics above. <BR> <BR>5. He routinely puts others down, especially newcomers, yet if anyone says anything about it to him, he once again claims he's being "attacked." <BR> <BR>And finally, the piece of EVIDENCE that no one can dispute or deny is the fact that this has been a much livelier and friendlier forum this week while he's been gone! <BR> <BR>Don't get those undies in a bunch over some internet chat site.

Danny Mangin

Hello All --- <BR> <BR>Thanks for all your comments about Travel Talk. <BR> <BR>As Elvira points out, Travel Talk is a community created by our users. We're certainly involved in maintaining the forums, and we think they're a major reason people find our site so vibrant and useful. But we've always considered Travel Talk a place for our users to carry on their own dialogue about travel, and we've tried to let that dialogue flow with as little interference from us as possible. <BR> <BR>If our approach seems too hands-off, it's not because we don't care but because we consider Travel Talk the users' space---we've got the rest of the site to express ourselves. <BR> <BR>Though we have a few guidelines (keep the discussion about travel, avoid profanity and advertising), our general policy has been to let the community decide what type of discourse is acceptable and what's not. <BR> <BR>Of course it takes all kinds to make a community, which means there are pleasant folks, not-so-pleasant folks, smart ones, not-so-smart ones, sensitive types, oafs, and so on. And not all users interpret things the same way. As J Lo rightly points out (and how nice of her to take time from her busy entertainment career to weigh in on our site), one person's attack is another person's humor and vice versa. <BR> <BR>I've been out of town for the past two weeks---on a marvelous European vacation, planned in part by reading forums posts (thanks a million for the advice). When I returned, we'd received quite a few e-mails about harsher-than-usual posts. And not only were Fodors.com editors being impersonated but also other users. Truth be told, I found the latter more upsetting than the former, because we can step in and delete false posts, but users can't. <BR> <BR>Users had suggested several remedies to the problems listed above. Some wanted us to delete specific posts or threads. Others wanted us to ban people from the site (though doing the latter is not as easy as you might think). In response to these requests, Aisling, Dave, and I have been monitoring the forums around the clock in an effort to keep the focus where you've told us you want it: on travel. If we've been too diligent, let us know. (Sally: I owe you an apology for sure. I deleted that post because I thought it was a hoax. Sorry!) <BR> <BR>As always, we appreciate all the feedback and hope everyone will continue to enjoy Travel Talk. If we may toot your own horns, you've made the forums (according to Forbes' Best of the Web 2001 issue) "the best around." <BR> <BR>Yours truly, <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR>Danny Mangin <BR>Editorial Director <BR>

Jen

Well Linda you just couldn't resist, could you! lol <BR> <BR>I find myself suspecting the origins of these "editorials" now, thanks to some of the ego-driven imposters we have here now. I've never seen an editor refer to any of its site users as "oafs" or "not-so-smart" before, and "Danny's" post just doesn't sound as professional as you would hope an editor's reply would be. And again all this focus on "false" posts...sounds familiar, but not in a good way. <BR> <BR>How can we be sure now? Danny, if that really IS you, please lighten up on the censorship. Too many benign posts have been deleted. Other than that, keep up the good work.

xxx

Thank you for chiming in Danny! <BR> <BR>If I may make a suggestion, is it possible for you to contact any person(s) who have been specifically named in multiple e-mail complaints? Perhaps a gentle "please tone it down, too many of our site guests have written us about you" type of thing? I have a feeling that sort of action would really grab someone's attention and hopefully prompt a change. Is it worth a try?

Linda

First, no, I am not Mrs. Bickers. (Wish I was, he obviously can afford to travel more than I.) <BR> <BR>Second, if you really read my last posting, you will see it is NOT in defense of Rex. It was merely an attempt to change what I perceive to be childish behavior. I guess, from the tenor of Clarence's reply, it didn't help. <BR> <BR>And, no, Jen, I couldn't resist. But I'll shut up now. (If you think I'm going to continually reply and garner the venom that has gone to Rex, you're wrong! I may be foolish at times, but I'm certainly not totally stupid!) <BR> <BR>Bye to this topic

just

Seems strange that Danny would be posting at 6:00 on a Friday night. Traffic on this site generally slows down around then for the weekend. Most site updates and changes are made on Monday mornings. <BR> <BR>I think this may be the work of our host imposter again, logging in from Italy! <BR> <BR>It's awful to be so suspicious of eveything now, isn't it?

s.fowler

Okay Danny... time for your trip report

frogbreath

This editor's post is as phony as the one last Sunday! <BR> <BR>There is NO DOUBT in my mind that this one originated from a laptop or cybercafe in Europe. <BR> <BR>Don't be suckered by this loser again! <BR> <BR>And he *is* a loser if this is how he spends a holiday. <BR> <BR>To creep: I hope you take my little message as words of encouragement.

s.fowler

Dear Frogbreath, <BR>Why don't you just hop onto your lillypad and take a snooze? Maybe after a good long nap and a couple of tasty flies you will realize that you are as paranoid as whatshisname.

fraud detector

The Danny Mangin post sound real to me. I hope I haven't been fooled. Maybe he can confirm it's real by e-mailing someone directly?

Dorothy

Yes, Froggie, no doubt you only posted to offer "the kindest words of encouragement!" LOL! Spineless wonders like our cybercafe psycho need all the "courage" they can get from anyone else, since they have none of their own. Maybe the Cowardly Lion can give him some. <BR> <BR>This post IS just as blatantly phony as the other, including the intro "Hello All" and the shrieking about "false posts." Yeah, Danny and company maintain a 24 hour vigil at this site. They must pay a hell of a lot overtime over there at Fodor's. <BR> <BR>fowler, are you in love with the guy or what? *grin* <BR> <BR>

get

Yeah, blankety blank has certainly figured out how to get a thread deleted. Just pose as the Fodor's editors!

reporter

Once again, location and timing have revealed our "false" editor. I saw no threads about "harsher-than-usual" exchanges on any destination board except Europe. It's difficult to believe that the U.S. board would not be included in that category. Then again, that's not where our imposter likes to roost. <BR> <BR>And the timing tripped him up AGAIN! Darn! First he made the mistake of posting on a Sunday morning when no Fodor's editor would be around, and this time he posted late on a Friday night, and again, only on the Europe board. Both instances were times when the true Fodor's editors would be away, and he took knowing advantage of that. <BR> <BR>This manipulative imposter is no writer, and he is completely ignorant of the basic concepts of public relations. Those deficiencies are glaringly obvious. No professional editor in the world would write what he did. <BR> <BR>It seems as if he is determined to once again manipulate the content and control the discussion on this thread and every other one as well. No doubt he will e-mail Fodor's himself and complain that *someone* is posing as Fodor's editors again, and suggest that this thread be deleted. <BR> <BR>But to do all this while traveling in Europe is just so pathetic and sad that you almost have to feel sorry for the loser. Almost.

cubic

I have never seen Fodor's editors reference specific posters in their comments, much less address them directly in a snide manner or make fun of poster nickname (like JLo). That's a tactic that certain "omnipresent" site visitors like to engage in -- painstakingly listing people who agree with them.