Explanation: Why Simpson's is no longer with us....

[joel]

It's 2:35AM, and i've spent the better part of the night going back and forth with Mark of Simpson/Vulfix and the bottom line is there's just no way we can move forward productively with Mark. In the 6 year history of B&B, we've only had to explain why a member had been banned 2 times, but the intent here is to set the record straight, present the facts and allow the community to move forward.

Before anyone calls into question the legitimacy of the information below, keep in mind Mark represents a large for profit organization with a very prestigious reputation. The DIRECT QUOTES taken from Mark below are being stated publicly and if were not direct quotes from him or were doctored in any way, would put us in a position to be sued for libel. This should unquestionably remove all doubt, even from the most skeptical members here.

The specific reasons/violations and an example of the type of interaction we've had/received from Mark are as follows:

1.) Example of a typical exchange with Mark and a Mod.
FACTS: Mark calls out a mod asserting he "went into hiding" after getting a PM from Mark in this post (http://badgerandblade.com/vb/showpost.php?p=3120195&postcount=157). He did this, without calling out or mentioning the specific mod, forgetting that he had been sending hand slaps (and in some cases nasty grams) to MULTIPLE mods. Thinking he was getting called out in public - 5 year veteran moderator Suzuki responds to Marks post in a gentlemanly manner HERE (http://badgerandblade.com/vb/showpost.php?p=3121008&postcount=192)

Shortly after, Suzuki gets the following PM from Mark:

Sent by: A. E. Simpson 1919
Original Content:
Quote:
I was referring to Mr. Scruffy ...

Why didn't you check here with me first before BLASTING out copies of PM's you ****

Jesus ... You are a Mod?

This is crazy.

While he didn't spell out a curse word, it doesn't take a linguistics specialist to decode the fact that he was calling Suzuki an expletive. A helpless victim? You be the judge.

An example of some of MY messages to both Gary and Mark when they continued to refuse POLITE requests to just tone it down a touch, despite being given WEEKS to comply, then finding out they've been bashing us on other sites. Keep in mind, I make it CRYSTAL clear i've specifically stated that i've refrained from making any public statements, despite them publicly badmouthing us on other sites (keep in mind this message was sent a MONTH ago):


Gary,
This is positively silly - and is turning into a tremendous waste of time. My exact note to Mark is below. It's a Gary Young limited edition Simpson brush. Your family started the company. You're an agent of the company (look up the definition of agent - it's acting on behalf). Should ANY member of our forum act on behalf of a vendor/manufacturer as a "representative" - especially on a product bearing his/her name, clearly their actions are on behalf of a company. In many instances, this has occurred in the past - even in some instances it involving a member who has NO affiliation, relation, etc with a company/product, and they're just a tremendous fan of a particular brand, vendor, product and we've had to ask them to tone it down, or stop entirely. If everyone were promoting a product, this would be a pretty miserable place to participate in.

We will not delete your items, you are free to respond to queries via PM, and we will not remove your account, unless you should act in a way which violates the terms of usage.

I made a simple request several weeks ago for you to tone it down just a touch, and you refused to comply. I made it explicitly clear what the ramifications of disregarding my warning, and when you did so anyway, both you and Mark over-reacted, and immediately went on the offensive over PM and on other communities. In fact, many vendors have complained, as we've given you more leeway than any other vendor (and we've had to moderate quite a few) and then once action was taken (several weeks ago) we continued to give you more leeway than we've given ANY other member or vendor... period. Clearly it was neither recognized, nor appreciated.

Instead of causing you both embarrassment by stating there was an ample warning delivered weeks ago, and a complete dismissal on your part (guaranteed to leave a sour taste in many of your customers/prospects mouths) I took the high road, and got throughly bitten as a result.

Remember chaps - you broke OUR rules, we haven't done wrong by you, and I don't take kindly to the ungentlemanly manner in which you've reacted.

Shaving brushes are QUICKLY becoming a commodity, and there are new, incredibly good brands popping up daily that create exceptional brushes, for a fraction of the price. Burning bridges isn't within your best interest. Follow our rules, you're welcomed with open arms. Break our rules, or upset members, you won't be.


Quote:
Hi Mark,
When you sign up for a vendor account, there are very specific guidelines see here and within your subscription parameters see here. For example, Gary (considered an agent of your firm) made 10 posts in the Simpsons thread yesterday, and in multiple occasions in a row (IE: not a back and forth dialogue, but multiple unique one-way messages). If every vendor were doing so, the vendor forum would be of little value, as there would be tremendous competition to get on the first 1-2 pages in that forum. Also, you are not yet promoting a tangible product, with complete details - which is annoying quite a few folks, who in turn are lodging complaints to the mod team.

I have talked to/warned Gary about his activity, and i've allowed him several weeks to tone it down, yet he has refrained to do so. We've also alienated, and upset many of our other vendors for giving you too much leeway (three posts per week, versus ten in a day is definitely unacceptable) - as with other vendors we typically jump in much faster.

I understand your frustration, but please understand ours. We have a community to run, and to successfully do so, we must have rules/standards.

The above CLEARLY shows adequate and consistent measures being taken to try to compel these chaps to follow our guidelines IN PRIVATE, and adhere to our requests.

After finding out he would not be able to bypass the vendor guidelines for their level of membership by having Gary post things, not him - he sent the following PM, clearly outlining his sole purpose of coming here was to promote his limited edition brush, which coincidentally aligned in lock-step with Gary's activity on the forum. Also as mentioned in the PM above, Gary was never banned (still isn't - but he did ask to have all of his posts, interview and wiki content removed) - he was merely asked to no longer promote Simpson products and since being asked to no longer promote Simpson products, he has chosen not to participate. Maybe it's just a coincidence....


Originally Posted by A. E. Simpson 1919
Joel,

Further to my last PM:

I conciously avoid posting on the shaving brush forum in an effort to distance ourselves as manufacturers, therefore avoiding issues with bias / marketing etc.

My decision to go as a vendor was based purely and simply to inform forum members of up and coming Limted Edition brushes that are going into production.

There is absolutely nothing (as far as I can see) to stop the likes of Shavemac, Plisson, Rooney etc opening accounts here and promoting their goods in an orderly manner?

We are very active on the internet, very customer orientated, very pro-communication but more importantly, VERY open.

As for Gary not being able to post up on anything Simpson related, I'm shocked ...

This is a man with more shaving brush heritage in his blood than 20,000 members of this board put together and he is 'forbidden' to speak. What have we become here?

I look forward to hearing a reply with an insight into the minds of the moderators here.

Best regards,

Mark

The last PM I received from Gary was as friendly as friendly gets, whereby he re-affirmed his desire to have a few ciders with me next time I was in the UK, and provided me his personal email address to get in touch with him. I've got no issue with Gary, I think while he'd probably tell you he didn't understand the whole vendor nonsense, I know he'll tell you he was treated with respect through and through, he was given warnings and multiple weeks to comply and i'll be the first one to tell you, he's acted like a complete gentleman about the whole thing to date.

So what was the issue/break down? Well there were quite a few problems, but the key issue was the way in which they were marketing this product (in which we got a lot of member AND vendor complaints about) and the amount of activity they were generating in the vendor forum (which grossly exceeded their allowance) and the way in which some of the mods were treated in the PM's. If every vendor were to do this, that forum would quickly become unruly, and as a result we made consistent, repeated gentlemanly requests to adhere both to their vendor subscription post/thread allowance, and to the vendor terms of usage (http://www.badgerandblade.com/index.php?page=terms), which all vendors/members agree to when creating an account here on B&B, and is available to view at the bottom of EVERY page (see the link "Terms of Usage"). There was a failure to comply, consistent snaky (and in some instances RUDE) responses from Mark, and a tremendous attitude. Worst yet, was the public bashing of B&B/the mod team on other sites, and the call to rally support as the victim, promoting untrue assertions - IE: Gary Young was banned (never happened).

Now - the specific rules that were broken (above and beyond the vendorship excess)

1.) Vendor Rule #2 (http://www.badgerandblade.com/index.php?page=terms) Know that SPAM will not be tolerated on the site, and is grounds for immediate termination of posting privileges. Our definition of SPAM includes frequent discussion of your products outside of appropriate forums/threads, any attempts made to use the site as a means of making personal contact (via PM, etc.) with members who have not specifically sought said contact, and advertisement of items which are, in the discretion of moderators, not in keeping with the purpose of the site. Specifically each item outlined in the red text has specific violations associated with them - from PMing mods/members arguing about comments made about Simpson brushes, to promoting a product without specs, promoting product in the brush forum, pricing, pictures, designs, info etc (some of that came eventually) - despite being warned.
2.) Vendor Rule #3 (http://www.badgerandblade.com/index.php?page=terms) Comply with the requests of the moderators. We don’t interfere unless it’s absolutely necessary. We will gladly discuss with you, via private message, any requests we make. I think this is self explanatory.
3.) Vendor Rule #4 (http://www.badgerandblade.com/index.php?page=terms) Realize that it is B&B policy not to specifically endorse any vendor or vendors. All are welcome, so long as they comply with the aforementioned terms of use. Self explanatory.

I think some the above should paint a clear picture of the amount of time, energy and resources we've spent dealing with this issue. As I finish this post at 3:30AM on a work night, I hope you realize the amount of energy we put into handling this situation as much as possible behind the scenes. I hope you understand how important it was for us to be fair, give them MORE than enough time to comply to reasonable requests and ONLY take things public after they had been warned many times, over the course of 1+ month and after they took issue with our mods to other sites publicly, then proceeded to make snide public comments here on the forum. I hope you understand what a miserable position we're in, how painful it is to have our actions called into question and how tiresome it is to be constantly put on the defensive.

We have no motive to mess with vendors. All vendors are treated the same. John is a mod, John's wife owns/runs WCS, there's clearly room for wacky theories and other nonsense, but the simple fact of the matter is, John gets more negativity to his business by being a mod here on B&B, then positivity. He gets a TON of grief and a ton of flack (and resentment) from some members for the MISPERCEPTION that he's treated in special way or somehow benefits from his position as a mod. Well, he isn't and doesn't. Some will believe me, others won't - but frankly, if he were, i'd have no problem saying it - I have no reason to "hide" that from anyone, it's my site, if I wanted to give him special perks and if I thought it would be fair to do so, I would, but I don't. There's no cloak and dagger action, there's no behind the scenes black ops missions, it's a bunch of schmucks running a shaving site in the best way they can.

I care about each and every one of you members here on B&B. More often than not, for me - this place is more of a hassle, than it is a place of fun. Issues like the above are common among place to deal with on a daily basis from spammers and problem/unbalanced members (vendors are usually awfully appreciative and tow the line with the greatest amount of civility, thus this being such a strange outlier) but please fellas - know this... we stay up late at night, we sacrifice personal relationships, and we break our backs to try to make this place the best it can be, and to try to "hide" these situations from your view so as to not poison the mood/tone of the site, and overall - I think most of you will admit, more often than not, we do a pretty darn good job as a mod team.

With hundreds of thousands of visitors, no matter what I say, or what PM's/info I share, there will still be a small number of folks in the "this should have never been posted or public" camp, and/or in the "Mark was wronged, framed and ganged up on" camp - it's just a simple law of statistics. With that said, if you take issue with anything in this post, please - send me a private message and let me know what you have an issue with and why. I want to hear from you, and I care about what you have to say.

Alright - 3:45AM, time to pass out.

[jreacher]

I've not been here on B&B long, Joel, but I've quickly become impressed with your professionalism and adept guiding hand.

It must have been a very difficult situation to find yourself in, but I think you made the right call. At the end of the day, B&B is largely defined by the gentlemanly, friendly behavior of its clientele, and I wouldn't compromise that for one vendor either.

[kaban]

this whole story is rather sad

[MajorBurnz]

this whole story is rather sad

Yes, nobody came out looking good on this issue.

We should probably lock this thread. I don't think a discussion will add anything to what Joel said. Anyway, the 'accused' cannot defend himself here anymore, so it's fairest to just leave things as they are and close the thread.

[rearviewmirror]

thank you, Joel, for the explanation. It's sad that it had to come to this for everybody involved.

[maxman]

We should probably lock this thread. I don't think a discussion will add anything to what Joel said.

+1. It's easy to get caught up in the fun and the fury.
Sometimes we forget that there are real people on the other end of this.
I've always supported the Mods (even when I'm poking fun at them).
I know how hard they work to keep this place running.

[Tha Baron]

[QUOTE=MajorBurnz;3122625]Yes, nobody came out looking good on this issue.


I disagree... I think situations like this (and unfortunately the GB debacle) really show how much these guys care about keeping things here legit.

EDIT: Removed post on other forum.

[Osborn Cox]

I have no horse in this race, but the one true thing I see from all of this is that the Vendor Corner would quickly spiral into a useless void of noise without adherence to the rules put in place. I am sorry to see Simpsons go but I commend Joel in his handling of this situation. Surely the small revenue that was generated will not be missed and is not worth the amount of effort and time that it has resulted in. First and foremost, what makes this a great site is gentlemanly integrity, without that its just another site lost in the dark space of the internet.

[drewmac]

Joel, I think I can speak for most when I say that we truly appreciate all that you (and the other mods) do to keep this a place where we want to come back to everyday. I really feel bad that you have to deal with these hassles, but your hard work and dedication make this the best forum on the internet.

[JPDyson]

Youdaman, Joel. I appreciate this post.

[Don_Draper]

Good show Joel. Thanks for being a steward of the members of this community and protecting the integrity of this forum.

[Malache]

Thank you for the explanation. As a past moderator on a very small, 40 people, forum I only have the smallest taste of the pains the moderators go through. I appreciate all the hard work it takes to make B&B such a great place to be.

I think part of the problem here is the Simpson was the only manufacturer here that is also a wholesaler. This would definitely cause friction with the other fantastic vendors here selling his product.

I would also see this working out differently had he become a supporting member or was strictly acting in a manufacturer and relied on his vendors for distribution.

Having a manufacturer here explaining their process and answering questions could have become an invaluable resource.

I wonder if there is a place for a manufacturer subscription...

[Baloosh]

Yeah, dredging up posts made on other boards is probably in bad form at this point. What's done is done, and I can't help but feel everyone, on all "sides" of this, has suffered a loss. :frown1:

I agree it's probably best to close this thread - since Joel specifically asked for feedback on his post to be handled via PM.

Appreciate the late night on our behalf, Joel. Hope you can have a somewhat-productive day at work today, despite the lack of sleep. :001_smile

[TThunder]

I thank-you for your explanation----which I knew was going to happen
from the first post.....I think that this thread needs to be closed as no
one needs to inflate or deflate ones ego no matter who is right or wrong...
The real losers here are we the members of B&B.....
Duke

[jreacher]

I agree it's probably best to close this thread

It is up to Joel and the moderators as to whether this gets closed. Posts asking for a close merely create a basis for it to be closed in their own right.

I'm sure people here are capable of mature discourse. Let's not just assume it will spiral out of control, and instead let the mods do their job.

[California Cajun]

I think the members at B&B should walk away with an appreciation of the moderators. This is an exceptionally run site. I ran a college sports forum for several years and I can tell you that the job isn't for sissies. Perhaps one of the things I enjoy most about being a member here is not being a mod. I get all the gravy and they get all the grief.

[Merv]

Joel, hope this day goes great for you. Moderators have a tough job and your explanation shows just how difficult behind the scenes can get. Great forum and your dedication to keeping it so is appreciated. Merv

[Baloosh]

It is up to Joel and the moderators as to whether this gets closed. Posts asking for a close merely create a basis for it to be closed in their own right.

I'm sure people here are capable of mature discourse. Let's not just assume it will spiral out of control, and instead let the mods do their job.

We're all entitled to our opinions, even when they are opposite from one another.

Your opinion, like everyone else's, I appreciate. Still sticking by my original thoughts. :001_smile

[Wil Dorenbos]

No explanation needed, AFAIAC.

[_JP_]

More often than not, for me - this place is more of a hassle, than it is a place of fun.

This is the line that really caught my eye. I have seen sites disappear for this very reason. So what can I do to help?

I almost sent this via PM, but I thought it better to post it.

[drewmac]

This is the line that really caught my eye. I have seen sites disappear for this very reason. So what can I do to help?

I almost sent this via PM, but I thought it better to post it.

That bothered me as well.

[Not The Original Kermit]

I've seen 3 vendors get banned in my time here on b&b. (maybe there were more but I seldom pay attention).

Its sad when politics has to get in the way of the fun this site is supposed to be about, it makes me want to come here less and less.

[michiganlover]

I've seen 3 vendors get banned in my time here on b&b. (maybe there were more but I seldom pay attention).

Its sad when politics has to get in the way of the fun this site is supposed to be about, it makes me want to come here less and less.

I have seen 4 in my time here. In all cases, the banning was more than warranted.

Run your business with honesty, and integrity, and be willing to follow simple rules, and you will do quite well as a vendor on this site. :thumbup1:

[Stevestan]

I'm glad to see the rules being enforced--it's the only way to maintain integrity.

[Balcmeg]

that bothered me as well.

+1...

[tvldatsi]

yes I was also sad to see that

will a smiley help? :thumbup:

trying to add some levity... maybe not such a good thing. this is a seriously disappointing scenario, I was brand new when Gary joined the forum and I was so intrigued like most everyone else by the history. He didn't manage to sell me a brush, though. It's too bad it had to come to this but after I read all that I can see that there weren't a whole lot of other options; I'm a prole around here but I fully support you guys and the hard work you do, in fact, it's contribution time.

one more? :001_tt2:

ok I'm done


This is the line that really caught my eye. I have seen sites disappear for this very reason. So what can I do to help?

I almost sent this via PM, but I thought it better to post it.


That bothered me as well.

[Perished]

I have seen 4 in my time here. In all cases, the banning was more than warranted.

Run your business with honesty, and integrity, and be willing to follow simple rules, and you will do quite well as a vendor on this site. :thumbup1:

So long as the rule apply to EVERY vendor, and enforced fairly, then there isn't an issue, and that's what i think, for want of a better word, annoyed some people. It looked like Simpsons were/are being singled out.

Never mind. It's finished with now. A major wet shaving forum has banned a major player in the wet shaving market. Be interesting to see how it all pans out.
Neither side comes out of it looking well is all I'm saying :mad2:

Does this mean we're not allowed to review/talk about/mention Simpsons brushes? I know mentioning other banned vendors are avoided like the plague, but I wasn't here to see who got banned and don't know how it all works...? It would be crazy not to be able to talk about some of the best brushes around, especially as I just received my Chubby 2 in best and wanted to post pics :001_unsur

[Hodari D.]

I found it a bit odd that a manuracturer of shaving brushes would be an active member here. None of the other brush manufacturers actively post and market to the forums directly, at least it doesn't seem that way. That type of thing is left to their retail vendors and word of mouth. We don't see shavemac, rooney, plisson swooping in with what essentially amounts to an advertising campaign, and I for one am grateful for that. I don't think it is a bad thing for manuracturers to take part here, but there should be a limit to the type of participation they can have. I'm glad to see the rules being enforced, although I would have preferred if a resolution, other than banishment, could have been reached amicably. A sad day for all affected.

[bladeruner]

This is the line that really caught my eye. I have seen sites disappear for this very reason. So what can I do to help?

I almost sent this via PM, but I thought it better to post it.

That's the spirit. And that's what makes this site special and unique. The willingness of the members here to help each other.

We all have a good time here and tend to forget the hard work that goes on behind the scene's to ensure that we do. And that includes having to make the tough decisions. The mod's sacrifice a lot for us. And while this is a sad situation indeed our response to there diligence should be "So what can I do to help?" How may I serve?

[goby]

I found the Simpson's presence quite annoying.

[michiganlover]

Does this mean we're not allowed to review/talk about/mention Simpsons brushes? I know mentioning other banned vendors are avoided like the plague, but I wasn't here to see who got banned and don't know how it all works...? It would be crazy not to be able to talk about some of the best brushes around, especially as I just received my Chubby 2 in best and wanted to post pics :001_unsur

I know of perhaps 5-6 firms that are banned on B and B. Of those discussion of products is forbidden only for three of them. I don't think it's standard practice to prevent discussion of products; the vendor has to be a true moron for that severe of a step to be taken.

[GuitarGuy]

A newbie tip of the hat to the many vendors who do follow the rules and help out us new guys... Thanks!!!

[Pebcak]

This is the line that really caught my eye. I have seen sites disappear for this very reason. So what can I do to help?

Ditto. What can we do to help Joel? I have a beating stick in the house that I can let you borrow if it will help. :wink2:

[john.bradburne]

But by them being banned what does this mean for us?? I understand that they cannot sell or post here anymore burgled that mean we are banned from using their name when discussing shaving products?? Are we not allowed to sell used brushes of theirs on the bst?? I know I cannot even use the name of a certain razor company that rhymes with a camera brand so does that apply to this as well??

[azmark]

But by them being banned what does this mean for us?? I understand that they cannot sell or post here anymore burgled that mean we are banned from using their name when discussing shaving products?? Are we not allowed to sell used brushes of theirs on the bst?? I know I cannot even use the name of a certain razor company that rhymes with a camera brand so does that apply to this as well??

No. The Vendor is banned not filtered.

[joel]

So long as the rule apply to EVERY vendor, and enforced fairly, then there isn't an issue, and that's what i think, for want of a better word, annoyed some people. It looked like Simpsons were/are being singled out.

Never mind. It's finished with now. A major wet shaving forum has banned a major player in the wet shaving market. Be interesting to see how it all pans out.
Neither side comes out of it looking well is all I'm saying :mad2:

Does this mean we're not allowed to review/talk about/mention Simpsons brushes? I know mentioning other banned vendors are avoided like the plague, but I wasn't here to see who got banned and don't know how it all works...? It would be crazy not to be able to talk about some of the best brushes around, especially as I just received my Chubby 2 in best and wanted to post pics :001_unsur

Nope - you can talk about Simpson brushes as much as you'd like :thumbup:

Also - yes, all the same rules are enforced to ALL vendors.

[joel]

But by them being banned what does this mean for us?? I understand that they cannot sell or post here anymore burgled that mean we are banned from using their name when discussing shaving products?? Are we not allowed to sell used brushes of theirs on the bst?? I know I cannot even use the name of a certain razor company that rhymes with a camera brand so does that apply to this as well??

All it means is Simpson cannot participate at B&B, or promote their products here (naturally, since they can't participate). You can talk about Simpson brushes, sell them, and mention them in the same way you could yesterday, nothing changes there.

RE: other vendors and the "filter" thats a topic for another day, but as i've hinted a few times, there will be some changes here on B&B (for the better - decrease in policy, new forum software/features, new programs/activities, etc) over the next few weeks, and the filter will be affected as well.

[franz]

Joel, you have my support. Nobody likes the way this went down, but you did what needed to be done.

[Dpflaum]

A newbie tip of the hat to the many vendors who do follow the rules and help out us new guys... Thanks!!!

And a similar tip of the hat by a less than newbie. You guys are class acts.

[noahpictures]

Thanks Joel for the post.

[livingontheedge]

I found the Simpson's presence quite annoying.

+1 From the get go thier posts left me with a bad taste in my mouth. Too much of a "You may worship me" attitude for my liking. Unfortunatly my feelings for the brand has been seriously damaged.

[whereisandy]

Joel, you have my support. Nobody likes the way this went down, but you did what needed to be done.

I agree:thumbup1:.

I think it's sad how the relationship broke down and led to this drastic of a decision. However, I appreciate all of the efforts behind the scene to make this one of the most gentlemanly forums around.

[TonyN]

Joel,
A big thanks to you and the Mods for a great site and all the hard work that goes into it.

[mattface]

RE: other vendors and the "filter" thats a topic for another day, but as i've hinted a few times, there will be some changes here on B&B (for the better - decrease in policy, new forum software/features, new programs/activities, etc) over the next few weeks, and the filter will be affected as well.

I am very glad to hear that. I understand the reason for the filtered vendors list, and appreciate the effort to reduce shills and the like, but have wished for a little less restriction in what could be discussed by legitimate members. Any improvements in the filtered vendors setup will be much appreciated by many I'm sure.

[denim]

I like my Simpsons brushes. I did get a CH2 in Best due to the various recommendations, including Gary's. But I didn't buy it new, due to cost. And the brushes they kept pushing were also well above what I'm willing to pay.

I liked the interview, and I thought it good that Gary was around, but I won't miss Mark's presence. I don't care what the brushes cost to make, I don't care what their materials cost. I want an amazing brush at an amazing price. That does not mean "extravagant, completely over-priced". It means great value. Above a certain limit, I don't care if the brush will lather and prep my face on voice command: I can't afford it.

Pulling the interview (was that request complied with?) strikes me as childish. I don't know if I'd have complied with that, myself. And I've been a mod. Did it for well over 10 years on a commercial site. I know what it's about. This move must've been tough for you, and while I find it unfortunate, it's probably the best thing y'all could do.

BTW Joel, please come up with a label for yourself. When you started participating in that last thread, I had no idea who you were. Maybe, "Lord High Inquisitor", or "I 0wnz", or "Small God" ("Tortoise" would probably be too subtle), or "sysop" (can't get clearer than that!). Maybe in bright red type on a light gray background?

Oh good, the interview seems to still be there. I'm glad.

[JPDyson]

"sysop" (can't get clearer than that!)

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. :lol:

But I agree, Joel needs a badge. "Admin" is common, "Owner" would be good - something like that.

[psram]

With hundreds of thousands of visitors, no matter what I say, or what PM's/info I share, there will still be a small number of folks in the "this should have never been posted or public" camp, and/or in the "Mark was wronged, framed and ganged up on" camp - it's just a simple law of statistics. With that said, if you take issue with anything in this post, please - send me a private message and let me know what you have an issue with and why. I want to hear from you, and I care about what you have to say.
What you present is now a one-sided story with the other side not able to rebut. That is never really a fair playing ground for reflection. This is really not about statistics, or "camps"; it is about right and wrong. The majority or heavyweights (on either side) trying to right a wrong or vice-versa will not make it so.

1) I will take your word about Simpson's as a vendor repeatedly violating rules even after best efforts on your end, and action had to be taken - right.
2) It is your board as you said it, and members have to play by rules set by you - right.
2) It is very clear that your intent and efforts are to provide a level playing field where everyone (B&B, members individually and vendors) mutually benefits - RIGHT.

But the mod team has slipped quite badly in the latest closed thread.
1) A mod openly suggested to a major vendor on how they ought to be distributing their wares - wrong.
2) You did a pseudo financial analysis of their project without having any detailed data of that particular project - wrong.
3) Multiple instances of mods looking the other way when the vendor was subject to uncalled sledging (I don't mean plain criticism - am all for that) - wrong.

If Simpson's as a vendor is responsible for this situation, the mod team has contributed to letting it get there. You set the playing field and rules, you set the team to enforce them, and therefore the final buck for how a situation turns out stops at your table. I will get flayed by members for the above, but frankly I make this comment in spite of that.

My request to the mod team is this : when the dust on this has settled, and you have all had time to calm down in a few days - please rethink on how to influence to maintain decorum, and better enforce rules/guidelines. Your inability to do so at the right junctures has resulted in
1) A major and more importantly popular vendor gone for ever from this forum.
2) A bad aftertaste in everyone's mouth, and some mods now not really in a position to moderate effectively.
3) A temporary (hopefully) chill effect for most vendors in participating more here.

This could be a one off incident and end here, or a cusp of a growth curve. If it is the latter, what I have seen now indicates that you are under-prepared. You can take what I have said however you want. My intent is only to provide constructive criticism for you to improve on things.

[nEver-Ready]

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. :lol:

But I agree, Joel needs a badge. "Admin" is common, "Owner" would be good - something like that.

I appreciate what Joel does and that he has tremendous responsibility and deserves our recognition and appreciation, but while, in Joel's own words "it's my site," he may own the infrastructure and intellectual property, but he does not own the community, which is really what makes this a special place. I suspect and hope that Joel would not want a title that would be suggestive of an enhanced level of authoritarianism or control over the community. I would be disappointed if this site came to be or seem dominated by an "owner" as have some others I've passed through. Just my 2 cents.

[Merv]

"I liked the interview, and I thought it good that Gary was around, but I won't miss Mark's presence " post by Denim expresses how I feel. Gary added to Simpson name and how I thought of the brand whereas Mark's responses damaged my image of Simpson. I am still glad I have my Simpson Brushes but my image of the past has been "clouded".

[MajorBurnz]

What you present is now a one-sided story with the other side not able to rebut. That is never really a fair playing ground for reflection. This is really not about statistics, or "camps"; it is about right and wrong. The majority or heavyweights (on either side) trying to right a wrong or vice-versa will not make it so.

1) I will take your word about Simpson's as a vendor repeatedly violating rules even after best efforts on your end, and action had to be taken - right.
2) It is your board as you said it, and members have to play by rules set by you - right.
2) It is very clear that your intent and efforts are to provide a level playing field where everyone (B&B, members individually and vendors) mutually benefits - RIGHT.

But the mod team has slipped quite badly in the latest closed thread.
1) A mod openly suggested to a major vendor on how they ought to be distributing their wares - wrong.
2) You did a pseudo financial analysis of their project without having any detailed data of that particular project - wrong.
3) Multiple instances of mods looking the other way when the vendor was subject to uncalled sledging (I don't mean plain criticism - am all for that) - wrong.

If Simpson's as a vendor is responsible for this situation, the mod team has contributed to letting it get there. You set the playing field and rules, you set the team to enforce them, and therefore the final buck for how a situation turns out stops at your table. I will get flayed by members for the above, but frankly I make this comment in spite of that.

My request to the mod team is this : when the dust on this has settled, and you have all had time to calm down in a few days - please rethink on how to influence to maintain decorum, and better enforce rules/guidelines. Your inability to do so at the right junctures has resulted in
1) A major and more importantly popular vendor gone for ever from this forum.
2) A bad aftertaste in everyone's mouth, and some mods now not really in a position to moderate effectively.
3) A temporary (hopefully) chill effect for most vendors in participating more here.

This could be a one off incident and end here, or a cusp of a growth curve. If it is the latter, what I have seen now indicates that you are under-prepared. You can take what I have said however you want. My intent is only to provide constructive criticism for you to improve on things.

+1 to most of this (I don't really see how some mods are not in a position to moderate effectively).

It's pretty poor form to bash someone and not allow them to defend themselves here.

[mandoman]

It's to bad that it had to come to this

[jeffpofutah]

Joel, you have my support. Nobody likes the way this went down, but you did what needed to be done.

+1 Joel, you have my support too! :thumbup1:

This makes me sad in many ways. I love my Simpson brushes and I (was) looking forward to the custom brush but all of it has thrown me off my Simpsonophilia.

I'm also sad because being a Mod here has made B&B more of a hassle than a good time for you. Because of what the Mods do all the time, I love this forum.

May the gentlemen and gentlewomen persevere.

Thanks for all you do.

[MajorBurnz]

"I liked the interview, and I thought it good that Gary was around, but I won't miss Mark's presence " post by Denim expresses how I feel. Gary added to Simpson name and how I thought of the brand whereas Mark's responses damaged my image of Simpson. I am still glad I have my Simpson Brushes but my image of the past has been "clouded".

+1 here too.

I defended Mark's comment in the last thread because of what I saw as undue criticism of his posts in that thread. However, some of his posts (and some PM's reproduced for us), show that he was impolite, to say the least. It doesn't affect my view of Simpson brushes - they're fine. I would have to think long and hard before I interact directly with Mark, though. He'd at least have to explain those communications.

EDIT (much later): After thinking about it for a while I wonder if he was pushed to react the way he did. I still think he shouldn't have written some of the stuff he did, but if people came after me the way they did after him, I'd probably say stuff I wouldn't normally say too. I'm not making excuses for his behaviour, but it does occur to me that I was not the person who's business was attacked.

[psram]

+1 to most of this (I don't really see how some mods are not in a position to moderate effectively).
I speak from experience. Most moderation is done really by influence. When a forum gets to a certain size, you cannot specify everything as rules. Lots of gray areas among rules/guidelines naturally exist/emerge. When there is a conflict in these areas, a mod's word has to hold good. Members (most) accept actions and move on quickly only if that mod is seen as fair, flexible and impartial. Otherwise, they will start (and keep on) arguing about how their actions don't violate any rules. It is a no-win situation then. Once a mod comes across as biased, he/she loses influence and therefore the ability to effectively moderate.

All mods make mistakes (they are human after all), but the successful one's own up to it quickly. As long as you don't do it regularly (like for every other post), those mods implicitly carry a huge goodwill and ability to influence and therefore moderate well.

It is just like in real life :biggrin1:

[joel]

I appreciate what Joel does and that he has tremendous responsibility and deserves our recognition and appreciation, but while, in Joel's own words "it's my site," he may own the infrastructure and intellectual property, but he does not own the community, which is really what makes this a special place. I suspect and hope that Joel would not want a title that would be suggestive of an enhanced level of authoritarianism or control over the community. I would be disappointed if this site came to be or seem dominated by an "owner" as have some others I've passed through. Just my 2 cents.

Bingo - why I don't have a "badge" - it's everyone's community.

[mattymatt]

I won't miss Mark. Gary seamed like a nice guy and I think it is sad that this has happened. I have never been a fan boy of Simpson brushes, I am to much of a tight wad to spend that kind of money on a brush. I want to thank the mods for all they do.:thumbup1:

[joel]

What you present is now a one-sided story with the other side not able to rebut. That is never really a fair playing ground for reflection. This is really not about statistics, or "camps"; it is about right and wrong. The majority or heavyweights (on either side) trying to right a wrong or vice-versa will not make it so.

1) I will take your word about Simpson's as a vendor repeatedly violating rules even after best efforts on your end, and action had to be taken - right.
2) It is your board as you said it, and members have to play by rules set by you - right.
2) It is very clear that your intent and efforts are to provide a level playing field where everyone (B&B, members individually and vendors) mutually benefits - RIGHT.

But the mod team has slipped quite badly in the latest closed thread.
1) A mod openly suggested to a major vendor on how they ought to be distributing their wares - wrong.
2) You did a pseudo financial analysis of their project without having any detailed data of that particular project - wrong.
3) Multiple instances of mods looking the other way when the vendor was subject to uncalled sledging (I don't mean plain criticism - am all for that) - wrong.

If Simpson's as a vendor is responsible for this situation, the mod team has contributed to letting it get there. You set the playing field and rules, you set the team to enforce them, and therefore the final buck for how a situation turns out stops at your table. I will get flayed by members for the above, but frankly I make this comment in spite of that.

My request to the mod team is this : when the dust on this has settled, and you have all had time to calm down in a few days - please rethink on how to influence to maintain decorum, and better enforce rules/guidelines. Your inability to do so at the right junctures has resulted in
1) A major and more importantly popular vendor gone for ever from this forum.
2) A bad aftertaste in everyone's mouth, and some mods now not really in a position to moderate effectively.
3) A temporary (hopefully) chill effect for most vendors in participating more here.

This could be a one off incident and end here, or a cusp of a growth curve. If it is the latter, what I have seen now indicates that you are under-prepared. You can take what I have said however you want. My intent is only to provide constructive criticism for you to improve on things.

There's definitely some merit to what you say, I appreciate your commentary. In fact - I agree with most of it. The challenge is finding the balance between the folks who will cry for details and want EVERY single PM/Email, etc to see the whole picture, and the folks who will cry foul play for not allowing someone to respond.

That said, I stand firm on everything i've posted - one thing I want to clarify is my knowledge base and experience with the manufacturing and sourcing of shaving brushes and shaving brush materials. I've been involved in this industry for 9 years. In that time I have been engaged with wholesalers, retailers, manufacturers AND suppliers involved in designing, manufacturing and sourcing shaving brushes and shaving brush materials for 7 of those 10 years (my projects/brushes are on record here, and on SMF since 2004). I've also engaged with Simpson (under prior ownership) to do a forum brush project multiple times (never came to fruition) and understand their cost structure (prior to Vulfix) - Vulfix is a much larger operation, and to assume their costs are substantially greater isn't realistic. According to the Progress-Vulfix web site, Mark has been involved in the industry for 6 years. This is in no way an effort to discredit Mark, but what i'm getting at is when you say i'm not in a position to reasonably estimate costs for a brush project of this nature, you have been misinformed.

I won't go into further discourse on this, but I compel you to for instance, purchase a Rudy Vey shaving brush. You'll quickly see astounding quality at sub $60. Ever wonder why this is possible for a small operation to create a brush of superlative quality at a price that low and make money/stay in business?

[ctkelly]

Eddie Murphy could sum this up easily for Joel. "It's my house, if you dont like it you can get out.". Yes, I purposefully left out the profanity. It's his rules plain and simple...I've seen sites moderated in a very strict and harsh sense...I rather not see b&b come to that and i think for the most part it's ran very well. I would not have contributed if i thought it was mismanaged or unfair in any sense.

[Brian-M]

Who's been puttin' their Kools out on my floor?!?!

sorry couldn't resist.

[California Cajun]

All it means is Simpson cannot participate at B&B, or promote their products here (naturally, since they can't participate). You can talk about Simpson brushes, sell them, and mention them in the same way you could yesterday, nothing changes there.

RE: other vendors and the "filter" thats a topic for another day, but as i've hinted a few times, there will be some changes here on B&B (for the better - decrease in policy, new forum software/features, new programs/activities, etc) over the next few weeks, and the filter will be affected as well.

I certainly want to echo the sentiments of others who appreciate this site enough to want to be helpful. That's certainly my motivation for being a contributor and trying to help others with their shaving. When we make suggestions please don't take it to mean that we're dissatisfied with the site as is.

[Tha Baron]

Who's been puttin' their Kools out on my floor?!?!

sorry couldn't resist.

"looking good Louis!"

"feeling good, Billy Ray!"

[denim]

Bingo - why I don't have a "badge" - it's everyone's community.

That doesn't change the situation. The fact that you speak with a certain authority relative to this site should be understood when you post. However, without the badge, I, for one, had no idea who/what you were when you started posting in that last thread. It's confusing. Still, your call.

[Perished]

That doesn't change the situation. The fact that you speak with a certain authority relative to this site should be understood when you post. However, without the badge, I, for one, had no idea who/what you were when you started posting in that last thread. It's confusing. Still, your call.

Same.

[danparker77]

Joel, you have my support. Nobody likes the way this went down, but you did what needed to be done.


+1 Joel, you have my support too! :thumbup1:

+2 (or whatever we are up to now)


This makes me sad in many ways. I love my Simpson brushes and I (was) looking forward to the custom brush but all of it has thrown me off my Simpsonophilia.

I'm also sad because being a Mod here has made B&B more of a hassle than a good time for you. Because of what the Mods do all the time, I love this forum.

May the gentlemen and gentlewomen persevere.

Thanks for all you do.

That line in Joel's original post also saddens me. I too want to fall into the line forming for "what can I do to help?". Thank yous to both Joel and the Mod team for making the tough decisions around here and keeping the place up and running!

[Perished]

+1 here too.

I defended Mark's comment in the last thread because of what I saw as undue criticism of his posts in that thread. However, some of his posts (and some PM's reproduced for us), show that he was impolite, to say the least. It doesn't affect my view of Simpson brushes - they're fine. I would have to think long and hard before I interact directly with Mark, though. He'd at least have to explain those communications.

To be fair, you saw one persons side of the argument here on this thread (Joel), and a pointed out by others, it's not fair on Simpsons. Sure we can all present a balanced, well put and detailed argument out if the other side of the debate is effectively silenced.

[Perished]

There's definitely some merit to what you say, I appreciate your commentary. In fact - I agree with most of it. The challenge is finding the balance between the folks who will cry for details and want EVERY single PM/Email, etc to see the whole picture, and the folks who will cry foul play for not allowing someone to respond.

That said, I stand firm on everything i've posted - one thing I want to clarify is my knowledge base and experience with the manufacturing and sourcing of shaving brushes and shaving brush materials. I've been involved in this industry for 9 years. In that time I have been engaged with wholesalers, retailers, manufacturers AND suppliers involved in designing, manufacturing and sourcing shaving brushes and shaving brush materials for 7 of those 10 years (my projects/brushes are on record here, and on SMF since 2004). I've also engaged with Simpson (under prior ownership) to do a forum brush project multiple times (never came to fruition) and understand their cost structure (prior to Vulfix) - Vulfix is a much larger operation, and to assume their costs are substantially greater isn't realistic. According to the Progress-Vulfix web site, Mark has been involved in the industry for 6 years. This is in no way an effort to discredit Mark, but what i'm getting at is when you say i'm not in a position to reasonably estimate costs for a brush project of this nature, you have been misinformed.

I won't go into further discourse on this, but I compel you to for instance, purchase a Rudy Vey shaving brush. You'll quickly see astounding quality at sub $60. Ever wonder why this is possible for a small operation to create a brush of superlative quality at a price that low and make money/stay in business?

Sorry, maybe it's because I'm I'm British, and by nature we tend to question 'the establishment' over most things, and whilst appreciating Joel and the mods for all their unseen work in making B&B work, and I really do, I read something like this and think "wow".

It's the same point made on the other closed thread, I don't really care how long you have been around the brush business Joel, and I'm sure your knowledge on the subject is far superior to mine, but YOU keep grinding this point over price.
Is it up to you to decide what is reasonable price for a brush to be sold at? No, I don't think so. Your opinion is as valid as any on here, but it's not gospel.

If someone wants to pay £200 for a Simpsons brush, that's their call. Recommending a Rudy Vey brush is all good and proper, although I think in this situation you are way outta line for doing so, especially as this whole fiasco is over supposed covert marketing... That is supposedly against the rules, but the owner, badge or not, of Badger and Blade coming out and effectively saying 'why bother with a Simpsons, just go buy a Rudy Vey', smacks of hypocrisy.

It's MY opinion, not that MY opinion matters. But my reading of between the lines is that there's far more to this than rude comments exchanged via personal messages.

[insomniac]

I'm laughing at his latest ...

"banning justification rant" where the spineless are crawling out of the woodwork as it's 'safe' now.

I'm no FBI profiler, but I'd stick a grand on that bloke being bullied at school ... LOL.


No comment.

[DFSDAILY]

[/B]

Sorry, maybe it's because I'm I'm British, and by nature we tend to question 'the establishment' over most things, and whilst appreciating Joel and the mods for all their unseen work in making B&B work, and I really do, I read something like this and think "wow".

It's the same point made on the other closed thread, I don't really care how long you have been around the brush business Joel, and I'm sure your knowledge on the subject is far superior to mine, but YOU keep grinding this point over price.
Is it up to you to decide what is reasonable price for a brush to be sold at? No, I don't think so. Your opinion is as valid as any on here, but it's not gospel.

If someone wants to pay £200 for a Simpsons brush, that's their call. Recommending a Rudy Vey brush is all good and proper, although I think in this situation you are way outta line for doing so, especially as this whole fiasco is over supposed covert marketing... That is supposedly against the rules, but the owner, badge or not, of Badger and Blade coming out and effectively saying 'why bother with a Simpsons, just go buy a Rudy Vey', smacks of hypocrisy.

Not that you care, or any other member on here, but my reading of between the lines is that there's far more to this than rude comments exchanged via personal messages.

I don't believe he was advertising and pushing Rudy's brushes, just illustrating a point.

[noahpictures]

[/B]

Sorry, maybe it's because I'm I'm British, and by nature we tend to question 'the establishment' over most things, and whilst appreciating Joel and the mods for all their unseen work in making B&B work, and I really do, I read something like this and think "wow".

It's the same point made on the other closed thread, I don't really care how long you have been around the brush business Joel, and I'm sure your knowledge on the subject is far superior to mine, but YOU keep grinding this point over price.
Is it up to you to decide what is reasonable price for a brush to be sold at? No, I don't think so. Your opinion is as valid as any on here, but it's not gospel.

If someone wants to pay £200 for a Simpsons brush, that's their call. Recommending a Rudy Vey brush is all good and proper, although I think in this situation you are way outta line for doing so, especially as this whole fiasco is over supposed covert marketing... That is supposedly against the rules, but the owner, badge or not, of Badger and Blade coming out and effectively saying 'why bother with a Simpsons, just go buy a Rudy Vey', smacks of hypocrisy.

Not that you care, or any other member on here, but my reading of between the lines is that there's far more to this than rude comments exchanged via personal messages.

Unlike you I am NOT a mind reader.

Off subject I'd like to reply to your signature: I LOVE Tabac! :tongue_sm

[denim]

I don't believe he was advertising and pushing Rudy's brushes, just illustrating a point.

He singled one manufacturer out over another. Mentioning RV at all could be considered advertising. shrug

[Perished]

Unlike you I am NOT a mind reader.

Off subject I'd like to reply to your signature: I LOVE Tabac! :tongue_sm

Be grateful, it's not a blessing, it's a curse... As for Tabac, spawn of Satan I tell thee.

[Perished]

He singled one manufacturer out over another. Mentioning RV at all could be considered advertising. shrug

THANK YOU. Far too much grovelling on this thread for my sensibilities.

[insomniac]

Unlike you I am NOT a mind reader.

Off subject I'd like to reply to your signature: I LOVE Tabac! :tongue_sm

We need another Tabac appreciation thread :thumbup:

[denim]

THANK YOU. Far too much grovelling on this thread for my sensibilities.

Note, I'm not knocking RV or Simpsons or Vulfix or any other maker. I'm just sayin'.

[Perished]

We need another Tabac appreciation thread :thumbup:

To be fair, for all my whining about fair play, if Joel decided to blanket ban Tabac, I'd support him to the hilt :lol:

Tabac. God's practical joke on the wet shaving community. Smells like an old man's dirty underwear, and performs like a man with no arms at an arm wrestling competition.

Anyway, must dash, I have an appointment with my psychiatrist now... :blushing:

[insomniac]

Tabac. God's practical joke on the wet shaving community. Smells like an old man's dirty underwear, and performs like a man with no arms at an arm wrestling competition.

I disagree, but that doesn't stop your comment from being quite funny :lol:

[noahpictures]

You know who else makes great shaving brushes: Shavemac. :thumbup:

[Perished]

I disagree, but that doesn't stop your comment from being quite funny :lol:

Laugh now mate, but for those poor saps, and I count myself amongst their number, who actually went out and bought this abomination of a shaving soap, it's no laughing matter.

Did you know Saddam Hussein, Hitler, Pol Pot, Michael Jackson, Atilla the Hun, and Cher all shaved/shave using Tabac!!!

And what do these people have in common? Yea, that's right, brought nothing but misery to humanity through the ages.

I even bought the shower gel that goes with it! THE SHOWER GEL!! That's right, they actually expect my whole body to smell of 'it'.

I'd like to defend myself claiming I was drunk at the time of ordering, or even on 'smack', but I can't, and that's the worst thing about it all, I bought Tabac sober as a judge! The shame of it all.

I feel dirty just looking at it. DIRTY!!

[Perished]

You know who else makes great shaving brushes: Shavemac. :thumbup:

Yes they do. And priced the same as Simpsons :thumbup:

[kooshman7]

Overall this leaves a bad taste in ones mouth. Well at least mine. I'm sure few would disagree though there are no winners in this at all, only losers. :sad:

[Zephyr]

I haven't paid much attention to either of the "Simpson" threads latetly, but then I read this, and I've just spent the last couple hours reading every single post in both this and the now closed "LE" thread, and this whole thing has turned into a sad story.

Unfortunate things have been said in public by both parties, I think we all can agree on that.

But based on what I have read, both posts and quotes from PM's I do partially support Joel/Mod teams decision.

I say partially because I don't know all the facts and everything that have taken place behind the curtain.

But from what I can see, rules have been broken, several warnings have been given without noteworthy effect, and unexpected and unnecessary rude behaviour have occured, and since there are rules and guidelines in this forum, some sort of action had to be taken.

I can't say I like what have happened here, but I do respect Joel and the Mod team and their decision, I'm sure it wasn't an easy one.


And Joel: A "Founder" badge could maybe be something, although it's kinda fun when someone who doesn't know who/what you are comments on your post sometimes :biggrin1:

And FWIW: personally I have nothing but positive experience with Mark and Simpsons/Vulfix.

[insomniac]

Did you know Saddam Hussein, Hitler, Pol Pot, Michael Jackson, Atilla the Hun, and Cher all shaved/shave using Tabac!!!


And Harold Wilson, so I've heard...

[SiBurning]

It's an unfortunate fact that moderators are more visible in the negative side of their work. Let's not cry over one lost sheep. Instead, let's all remember that thanks to a lot of hard work--some of it not-so-visible and of a positive nature--there are over 30,000 members learning, sharing, and having a great time every day.

[kwigibocity]

Count me amongst those who's also learned (the hard way, my preferred lesson absorption method) that there's no real winners in internet forum squabbles, high ground of proper scruples hardly any solace.

And while this certainly seems an organic community culture, it operates within the friendly confines of dictatorship,...which is just fine.

Private enterprises, whether for profits however small or just for the compensation of those that commit their time operating such enterprises, are the business of those that own them - their football, so their rules.

They don't have to justify their actions as far as I'm concerned, and frankly I don't even expect fairness. Either party is free to end the at-will relationship.

[mhdena]

I found it a bit odd that a manuracturer of shaving brushes would be an active member here. None of the other brush manufacturers actively post and market to the forums directly, at least it doesn't seem that way. That type of thing is left to their retail vendors and word of mouth. We don't see shavemac, rooney, plisson swooping in with what essentially amounts to an advertising campaign, and I for one am grateful for that. I don't think it is a bad thing for manuracturers to take part here, but there should be a limit to the type of participation they can have. I'm glad to see the rules being enforced, although I would have preferred if a resolution, other than banishment, could have been reached amicably. A sad day for all affected.

Its a slippery slope when a Manufacturer ,Vendor, Authorized Dealer, etc., become active beyond their support of any hobbyist site. When things get to "Chummy", lines tend to become blurred/crossed leading to this this type of discussion.

[rickboone1]

This is something I'd of never known about had this post not existed.

[Loner16]

Count me amongst those who's also learned (the hard way, my preferred lesson absorption method) that there's no real winners in internet forum squabbles, high ground of proper scruples hardly any solace.

And while this certainly seems an organic community culture, it operates within the friendly confines of dictatorship,...which is just fine.

Private enterprises, whether for profits however small or just for the compensation of those that commit their time operating such enterprises, are the business of those that own them - their football, so their rules.

They don't have to justify their actions as far as I'm concerned, and frankly I don't even expect fairness. Either party is free to end the at-will relationship.

Jarrod hits the nail squarely on the head!

[joel]

I'm laughing at his latest ...

"banning justification rant" where the spineless are crawling out of the woodwork as it's 'safe' now.

I'm no FBI profiler, but I'd stick a grand on that bloke being bullied at school ... LOL.
No comment.

Thanks for sharing this post he made. It's amazing how one can get act like this, and still be supported/defended :001_rolle .

To date, i've not said a single negative thing about Mark. I've just repeated over and over, he refused to follow the rules, and treated us in an abusive, and ungentlemanly fashion. While he calls it a rant, he also doesn't dispute the facts/data. While a few folks in this thread are still on his side - they clearly didn't read the post where we AFFIRMED all 5 of my key points as to the things he was doing which were breaking the rules and ungentlemanly (he only took issue in me dissecting the profit margins of shaving brushes).

There is no "one side of the story." We have on record, the guy saying he was "nodding his head in general agreement" with the previous grievances and violations I had laid out. Now in this thread, you have some of the actual text/exchanges... but some are still questioning it? THE GUY ADMITTED IT, and still doesn't disagree with any of the factual statements, which at least for that, i've got to give him credit...

[joel]

[/B]

Sorry, maybe it's because I'm I'm British, and by nature we tend to question 'the establishment' over most things, and whilst appreciating Joel and the mods for all their unseen work in making B&B work, and I really do, I read something like this and think "wow".

It's the same point made on the other closed thread, I don't really care how long you have been around the brush business Joel, and I'm sure your knowledge on the subject is far superior to mine, but YOU keep grinding this point over price.
Is it up to you to decide what is reasonable price for a brush to be sold at? No, I don't think so. Your opinion is as valid as any on here, but it's not gospel.

If someone wants to pay £200 for a Simpsons brush, that's their call. Recommending a Rudy Vey brush is all good and proper, although I think in this situation you are way outta line for doing so, especially as this whole fiasco is over supposed covert marketing... That is supposedly against the rules, but the owner, badge or not, of Badger and Blade coming out and effectively saying 'why bother with a Simpsons, just go buy a Rudy Vey', smacks of hypocrisy.

It's MY opinion, not that MY opinion matters. But my reading of between the lines is that there's far more to this than rude comments exchanged via personal messages.

You're not getting it. This is not a debate. This is not a 2 sided thing. The guy isn't denying he broke the rules, and he isn't denying the actions he took, in fact, he's admitting to them. The whole business with pricing has NOTHING, NOTHING, NOTHING (should I say it a few more times?) to do with what a reasonable price is, the value of their products, etc. I own simpson brushes, and I don't think I got a poor value.

The SOLE purpose of detailing the cost structure is to illustrate the fact that a considerable amount of $ is to be gained from this project. Based on the amount of $ he stands to realize by marketing his product here on B&B, it's totally unreasonable for him to violate the rules, complain and treat mods poorly. I'll admit, when I reflect on it, it was a pretty weak point to make (although it is true) and it didn't add much value - and was a point of contention (and the primary misunderstanding) for many folks. Again - I admit, probably didn't need to be said, and it didn't add much weight to the conversation - it was more of an emotional string if you will. It's one thing when someone's following the rules and promoting an $8 cake of soap they sell, but it's another when someone is promoting a HIGH END, high margin product - while simultaneously being disrespectful, ungentlemanly and unwilling to follow the rules.

Any fact/data i've presented - I welcome a challenge, but thus far i've not heard ANY brought into question, just speculation and easy to levy "hollow grenades." Changing the topic on me not mentioning a Rudy Vey to make a point is asinine. If you think this debacle is over "covert marketing" then you're on drugs.

Lemme put it bluntly in one run-on sentence: "The issue is over this gentleman refusing to follow stated rules, treating mods like trash and using expletives, and proceeding to do whatever he wants, how he wanted to promote his product (which he admits is the sole reason for his participation) because he represents a well known established brand, and thinks as a result - he can use that leverage to do whatever he wants."

If a member were to attack YOU, and send you a PM with expletives we'd take action against them. The issue here is, he's not only done this to moderators, but he's broken rules despite being given quite a few chances AND OVER ONE MONTH to comply, and he's badmouthed us and promoted factually incorrect statements (IE: that we banned Gary) elsewhere.

Maybe it's a cultural thing, but when someone's here for profit, and getting tremendous monetary value from this community, I don't take kindly to them showing no respect to it, its rules, its other vendors and its caretakers.

[_JP_]

Joel beat me too it, but I'm going to say it anyway:

Go back and read the first post of this thread. It has all been laid out as fairly as possible, and with as much respect as possible.

[spanx]

I am glad he's gone.I find it a disgusting business practice for a manufacturer to set up shop right next to their retailers.The retailer spends thousands of dollars to bring items to market to provide consumers with top rated goods to earn a living.Then the manufacturer sets up shop right next to them taking potential customers away.Why go through an independant vender when you can buy direct from the manufacturer next door.My feelings apply to all manufacturers or wholesalers who compete directly with their venders.

[psram]

I am glad he's gone.I find it a disgusting business practice for a manufacturer to set up shop right next to their retailers.The retailer spends thousands of dollars to bring items to market to provide consumers with top rated goods to earn a living.Then the manufacturer sets up shop right next to them taking potential customers away.Why go through an independant vender when you can buy direct from the manufacturer next door.My feelings apply to all manufacturers or wholesalers who compete directly with their venders.
That is how all industries have been heading the last few decades. The name of the game is to get the product directly to the consumer at a lower price and still make a higher profit. Consumers will head to wherever they get most value for their money, and I see nothing wrong in it.

[JPDyson]

Bingo - why I don't have a "badge" - it's everyone's community.

Not to beat a dead horse, and after all, it's not the point of the discussion at hand, but I've seen on more than one occasion folks totally miss the fact that you're the founder of this community, and completely miss why you have the right (or the khutspa) to make a matter of fact statement about how things are going to be. Most of us know "who Joel is" but to the random newbie, you just look like a tenured member.

But, of course, I recognize the irony in the very fact that I'm making this suggestion... :wink2:

Anyway, you do a thankless job (not entirely thankless, but "underthanked" didn't quite have the ring to it) and as far as I've seen, you do it well. If you want to mingle with the commoners and leave your crown back at the castle, hey - your call.

[sid3000]

Joel, you and the rest of the mods are doing a fantastic job. I had no clue any of this was happening until I read this thread. Very great work keeping it controlled and hush-hush so it didn't get out of control.

[closer]

I haven't read this whole thread, or the other one, but have read sufficient parts of both to gain enough understanding to form an opinion. What stands out to me are a few things.

Firstly, I too found it coincidental that Gary/Mark started being active on B&B a short while ago, then started promoting an LE product. While I found this distasteful, its no violation of the rules, so they should be allowed to promote their product, as long as they follow vendor rules. The community should be allowed to vote with their pocketbook.

Secondly, this quote from Joel:



...
The SOLE purpose of detailing the cost structure is to illustrate the fact that a considerable amount of $ is to be gained from this project. Based on the amount of $ he stands to realize by marketing his product here on B&B, it's totally unreasonable for him to violate the rules, complain and treat mods poorly.
...
It's one thing when someone's following the rules and promoting an $8 cake of soap they sell, but it's another when someone is promoting a HIGH END, high margin product - while simultaneously being disrespectful, ungentlemanly and unwilling to follow the rules.


I think this is a poor point to make, and actually weakens your argument, because it focuses attention on a point that is irrelevant. Its sufficient to take issue when the person is being disrespectful, ungentlemanly and unwilling to follow the rules. The dollar amount that stands to be gained should have nothing to do with it.



Lemme put it bluntly in one run-on sentence: "The issue is over this gentleman refusing to follow stated rules, treating mods like trash and using expletives, and proceeding to do whatever he wants, how he wanted to promote his product (which he admits is the sole reason for his participation) because he represents a well known established brand, and thinks as a result - he can use that leverage to do whatever he wants."


This, I believe, is fair grounds to question the behavior. Vendors are here to make money. How much money they make should be irrelevant, as long as the playing field is level. The ones that contribute beyond a mere Vendor badge - provide advice, help, etc - will generate word of mouth goodwill and those vendors will benefit further. Those that don't, won't. However, the products they sell, quality, business practices (unless they're illegal or unethical) should not be issues that the mod team should be enforcing. The mod team should be enforcing appropriate conduct and adherence to rules, and on that basis, as Joel has shown, Simpsons was found lacking.

Finally, one thing I'd like to see examined in the aftermath of this situation - the role of Moderators when they post an opinion on any topic. Its unclear whether the opinion is posted in their capacity as a Mod, in which case there may be an implied admonition (for a negative opinion), or whether the opinion was put forward in their capacity as a member of the forum. I believe this is what happened earlier in the thread, and may have served to fan the flames, but to me, still does not justify violation of the rules.

At the end of the day, its a sad situation all around. But kudos to Joel and the mods for making the right call.

[DanOK]

I can only echo the voice of others when I say my trust and support lies with the efforts Joel, Suzuki, and all the mods make for our community. As Bill Cosby would say in reference to mothers, " I have seen their job and I don't want it".

This is one of the few places I go for which I have no responsibility to shepherd and/or maintain, to nurture or grow. It is the reason I am here. Even at my most ignorant I have always been treated fairly, and with respect, by people of character.

This situation was unfortunate but these decisions must be made and I commend the mods on the deliberate method they use to make these decisions on my behalf.

To all pass, present and future mods I can only say Thank You.

[Obsessed]

Not to beat a dead horse, and after all, it's not the point of the discussion at hand, but I've seen on more than one occasion folks totally miss the fact that you're the founder of this community, and completely miss why you have the right (or the khutspa) to make a matter of fact statement about how things are going to be. Most of us know "who Joel is" but to the random newbie, you just look like a tenured member.

How about a "Joel" badge?

[john.bradburne]

here is a post from SMF
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 11:36 am Post subject: Bidding a fond farewell!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Guys

I am heading away from the world of shaving internet forums.
I have not spent as much time on here as I should but there some great members of here and I wish everyone all the very best for the future.
When I joined the forums back in December I never realised how much interest there was in all things Simpson.
I really do appreciate all the messages from here since joining. I have enjoyed the debates (well most of them!! )
Nothing that has happened here has caused me to make this decision-I want to make that crystal! It just seems that my presence causes issues for others which is not something I think is very fair (not on here but in the shaving internet world in general).
You all know my love for Simpson and if any of you want to contact me away from the forums regarding historical info, etc please feel free. I have offered to help with Simpson historical info on here - that still stands. The guys on here are very learned and have gained incredible knowledge through a heck of a lot of self-learning. I am lucky to have come from a line of brush makers and had all my knowledge passed on from some amazing people who I am very proud to be related to.

I hope you don't forget me and please contact me whenever you like.

All the very very best guys. SMF is the most gentlemanly and knowledgable shaving forum around and I will miss joining in the discussions.

This 'Simpson' is heading back to the non-forum world!

Cheers!

Gary

[diphy]

Joel, I thinK most memebers will back you on this. I agree that rules are rules and everyone needs to follow them. It is commendable that you chose toexplain things to all of us here. In my mind you DIDNT Have too, yet you did. Says a lot of great things about your stewardship and being impartial.

[OldSaw]

It's sad to see things like this when they happen.

[gil3591]

i guess i have to put in my 2 cents. if this was meant to be an explanation for the action taken by the powers to be of this forum then i think the classy procedure would have been to close the thread after the inital post. but instead it has been left open, under my impression, to permit additional badgering of mark. no matter who's side you're on, it serves no purpose to kick someone after he's down, why not give this a rest already and move on!

[Jack Straw]

i guess i have to put in my 2 cents. if this was meant to be an explanation for the action taken by the powers to be of this forum then i think the classy procedure would have been to close the thread after the inital post. but instead it has been left open, under my impression, to permit additional badgering of mark. no matter who's side you're on, it serves no purpose to kick someone after he's down, why not give this a rest already and move on!
Agreed. Don't even really see the purpose of dragging him through the mud in the first place, whatever happened. My 2 cents anyway.

[john.bradburne]

i will not take sides. I love Simpson brushes and I love B&B... BUT for every action there is a reaction. No one came out smelling like roses here and in the end we all lose. Thats all I have to say about that.
John

[Ignatius]

i guess i have to put in my 2 cents. if this was meant to be an explanation for the action taken by the powers to be of this forum then i think the classy procedure would have been to close the thread after the inital post. but instead it has been left open, under my impression, to permit additional badgering of mark. no matter who's side you're on, it serves no purpose to kick someone after he's down, why not give this a rest already and move on!
This has been covered already, repeatedly. If there were no explanation/thread for comment, there would be endless snide remarks about heavy handed mod'ing and lack of explanation. A bit, I suppose, like this comment you yourself have just posted at another forum:


simpson bannded from a shaving forum! that's rich! kinda like the yankees throwing the "babe" out of NY

i think you should all go over there and get banned. it ain't hard. it's what they do!

Joel/the Mods are in a 'damned if do, damned if don't' position with these threads; not only do the difficult to juggle sentiments of criticism of bans and the desire to see these threads locked/not exist occur within the 'community', but apparently within the same individual. As you can see, not an easy balance to strike.


edit: I haven't followed this drama and have nothing to say about the specifics, just trying to clarify the difficulty of the position the modship is in and why threads like these are public consumption.


~Adam

[danparker77]

If Joel would have locked this thread after his initial post he would have got grief for not allowing others to comment on his decision. Really a no win situation. IMO leaving it open was the lesser of the two evils. Keep it all in one thread as opposed to everyone starting seperate threads and taking up the entire first page for the next few days.

Edit: that is what happens when browsing and posting from a phone. You get beat to the punch! :lol:

[Tha Baron]

Count me amongst those who's also learned (the hard way, my preferred lesson absorption method) that there's no real winners in internet forum squabbles, high ground of proper scruples hardly any solace.

And while this certainly seems an organic community culture, it operates within the friendly confines of dictatorship,...which is just fine.

Private enterprises, whether for profits however small or just for the compensation of those that commit their time operating such enterprises, are the business of those that own them - their football, so their rules.

They don't have to justify their actions as far as I'm concerned, and frankly I don't even expect fairness. Either party is free to end the at-will relationship.

If Jarrod is wrong, I don't want to be right!

Love those actual Simpsons listings... get what ya see!

[Balcmeg]

I have only been a member of this forum for a few months, but constantly been surprised over the generally high level of gentlemanly actions of both members, mods and owners.
Everyone of course have bad days and sometimes what we write does not come out as in tendes, but of course in this case it is a bigger issue.

I fully support/respect Joel & The Mods (sounds like a 60-rock band...) decision, even if I am sad to see Gary leave us.

I just hope that the forum will live on and not be too exhausting to run - as said by others before. If there is anything I can do to help...

[Linyx]

I've not been here on B&B long, Joel, but I've quickly become impressed with your professionalism and adept guiding hand.

At the end of the day, B&B is largely defined by the gentlemanly, friendly behavior of its clientele
+1
I am/have been among the staff on several forums, and am a member at many more; and not a single other forum I've been to has the quality of mods/admin as this one. Well handled!:thumbup1:

[Kevan]

I haven't agreed with all mod actions here over the years, but this one seems warranted. I'll miss Gary's presence here though. His posts brought me back to the brush forum.

It's also sad to see B&B disparaged on other forums.

I do not envy Joel's position. I think we're lucky to have him in situations like this.

[ackvil]

I am late to the party and did not see the OP. Let me say at the outset that I am an owner of a Duke 3, like the brush, and was impressed by their customer service. With that said, I was surprised by the amount of posting by Gary and others at Simpsons - it began to sound like an advertising campaign in the forum and if I did not know better it could look like Simpsons had favored vendor status at B&B.


Now that I have read the OP - and every post thereafter - I appreciate the lengths that Joel went through to assure compliance with the vendor rules of B&B.

To me, you went out of your way to be fair to Simpson as well as other vendors. You have my vote of confidence - for what it is worth! :w00t:

[Hex]

Joel beat me too it, but I'm going to say it anyway:

Go back and read the first post of this thread. It has all been laid out as fairly as possible, and with as much respect as possible.

I am doing this JP.

And I am going to stop after commenting on point 1 because this is giving me a headache.

Point 1:
***
(Someone left out the comment by Mr. Scruffy that started the whole mess. At least that was the 1st that was apparent to me. I think Suzuki responded and accepted some responsibility.

-----------------------------------------------
Quote from 1st post in this thread.

1.) Example of a typical exchange with Mark and a Mod.

FACTS: Mark calls out a mod asserting he "went into hiding" after getting a PM from Mark in this post. He did this, without calling out or mentioning the specific mod, forgetting that he had been sending hand slaps (and in some cases nasty grams) to MULTIPLE mods. Thinking he was getting called out in public - 5 year veteran moderator Suzuki responds to Marks post in a gentlemanly manner HERE

Endquote
-------------------------------------------------------------------
I was following the original GYLE thread in the vendor forum without being aware of what the rules were for vendors, nor that Gary qualified as a vendor or agent. I also didn't know that there were different kinds of vendors.
However, my ignorance is immaterial.

Until Mr Scruffy's post all seemed to be going swimmingly well. I think had Mr. Scruffy (maybe he did) taken that post to PMs this might not have happened.
Then the thread went downhill fast, for no apparent reason to me.

The posts by Mark and Gary did not, to my untrained eye seem like shilling, subtle marketing tricks, etc.
They seemed like genuine attempts to continue to keep us posted/involved in the evolution of this brush and were mostly responses to others.

But, I was not privy to any e-mails between the parties and those might have been inflammatory.

I still think you were way out of line with the pricing analysis, and it does seem like you are/were still upset about them charging what they will.

With respect, that's none of your business. Let them charge what they want.
Maybe it seemed to you that they were getting a lot of free promotions for their brush and that was the case, but I believe them to be innocent of any underhanded shilling. The promoting was done quite a bit by B&B members as well.

So why did that bother you so much ?

For me that was the tipping point, and it seemed childish.

[Hex]

Not to beat a dead horse, and after all, it's not the point of the discussion at hand, but I've seen on more than one occasion folks totally miss the fact that you're the founder of this community, and completely miss why you have the right (or the khutspa) to make a matter of fact statement about how things are going to be.

Thanks Josh, now I know how to spell khutspa :thumbup1:

[Hex]

I haven't read this whole thread, or the other one, but have read sufficient parts of both to gain enough understanding to form an opinion. What stands out to me are a few things.

Firstly, I too found it coincidental that Gary/Mark started being active on B&B a short while ago, then started promoting an LE product. While I found this distasteful, its no violation of the rules, so they should be allowed to promote their product, as long as they follow vendor rules. The community should be allowed to vote with their pocketbook.



If I remember correctly and I think I do, it was a B&B member that suggested to Gary that Simpsons design and market the GYLE.
It also seems natural that there would be a lot of back and forth between us and them, similar to what the mods do when they are designing a B&B LE.

In hindsight, this probably should have been handled in a different way.

[Doug_in_NNY]

I'm weighing in, not on the merits of how the Simpsons brush people were handled, but about how important it is to be clear about one's role in a conversation, and to operate within the opportunities and limitations of that role.

Joel (and any other founders), it is imperative that you identify yourself as a founder. You are not a commoner, you are a founder. That's your role. When you speak, you can't be other than whom you are. I don't mean that role is important in every conversation (choice of this or that brush, etc.), but it was clearly important when dealing with someone with reference to B&B rules and structure.

Full disclosure: I am a private-practice marriage and family counselor with nearly twenty years full-time experience. Every day of my professional life I deal with people and their roles and how they occupy them (or not). Mothers may *want* to be their daughter's best friend, but they cannot. Ever. A parent's role is set by the nature of the structure of family life. A mother can be friendly with her daughter, but there's a role that each occupies inside a family. That role carries throughout the life span. One's role determines both opportunities and limitations.

When an eleven-year old's parents divorce and the child *insists* that he/she *knows* which parent to live with (when children talk and act authoritative over time, as if they are equal to their parents, the term for that is parentification), I discount that child's opinion. It is for parents to decide how to care for a child *because that is their role.*

A Founder tag lets us all know your role (which I would never have known outside of following this thread, because I joined only in early 2010 and I'm only learning who's on first, etc.). If you want to argue that a twenty dollar steel wool brush is the equivalent of a three hundred dollar Rooney, well, I may stand up to you on that. But if you are involved in discussions of B&B rules and structure, then you're the man.

If you want to be a commoner, you'll have to join another forum. If, however, you want to more clearly define your role as a responsible leader on this forum, well then I believe an appropriate tag is in order. I have tags that help others to know where I fit in. Founders need a tag.

jm2c

Doug

[rockviper]

The best way I can think to show my support for this community and those who work behind the scenes keeping it so great is to become a contributor, which I've just done (albeit at the entry level). I've mod'd forums before (never again) and can appreciate the work that goes into it. Thanks guys.

[_JP_]

I am doing this JP.

And I am going to stop after commenting on point 1 because this is giving me a headache.

>snip<


You have some good points. I could be wrong here, but my take is that you based your reaction on that one thread. The actions taken by the mods here were based on many threads.

[nathanb]

I continue to be amazed that people will see conspiracy theories wherever they can. I seriously doubt that Gary Young and Mark from Simpson's had an elaborate scheme to start hyping Simpson's brushes when Gary first joined this forum back in December.

Rather, I imagine that much of this is the result of a lot of misunderstandings, unfortunate comments made on both sides, the natural ambiguity of communication on the internet (not being able to see a person's body language, tone of voice, or ask for clarification easily), and things that happened behind the scenes.

I would like to say that I feel the repeated references to profit and business practices (a "manufacturer" selling brushes as a "vendor" - which is just ridiculous because there are other brush manufacturers that do this on B&B and no one seems to have a problem with that) don't sit that well with me. I feel that they take away from the good points that are being made about Mark not following the rules like other vendors. Whether or not this is the case, it gives the impression that there is something else going on here. Which I doubt there is but the impression is made nonetheless. Or it leaves the impression that it is not merely the breaking of vendor rules that was the problem but something else.

At the end of the day I am sure there are very few people who are happy with how this turned out.

EDIT: I am not criticizing Joel for the decision he had to make or accusing him of anything, I understand that he is in a difficult position and that he is trying to do what he feels is right for the good of the B&B community. I definitely appreciate him and the moderators that give a lot of time and energy to this website. Thanks.

My reference to conspiracy theories is not talking about Joel but rather about the members in this thread who keep posting that Gary Young and Mark had something sinister in mind since they first showed up.

Just saying that it is unfortunate that the very good points that Joel made about Mark's actions are being detracted from by the repeated references to profit or business practices. In my opinion.

[Antique Hoosier]

Bravo! Where were you during my divorce mediation?
I'm weighing in, not on the merits of how the Simpsons brush people were handled, but about how important it is to be clear about one's role in a conversation, and to operate within the opportunities and limitations of that role.

Joel (and any other founders), it is imperative that you identify yourself as a founder. You are not a commoner, you are a founder. That's your role. When you speak, you can't be other than whom you are. I don't mean that role is important in every conversation (choice of this or that brush, etc.), but it was clearly important when dealing with someone with reference to B&B rules and structure.

Full disclosure: I am a private-practice marriage and family counselor with nearly twenty years full-time experience. Every day of my professional life I deal with people and their roles and how they occupy them (or not). Mothers may *want* to be their daughter's best friend, but they cannot. Ever. A parent's role is set by the nature of the structure of family life. A mother can be friendly with her daughter, but there's a role that each occupies inside a family. That role carries throughout the life span. One's role determines both opportunities and limitations.

When an eleven-year old's parents divorce and the child *insists* that he/she *knows* which parent to live with (when children talk and act authoritative over time, as if they are equal to their parents, the term for that is parentification), I discount that child's opinion. It is for parents to decide how to care for a child *because that is their role.*

A Founder tag lets us all know your role (which I would never have known outside of following this thread, because I joined only in early 2010 and I'm only learning who's on first, etc.). If you want to argue that a twenty dollar steel wool brush is the equivalent of a three hundred dollar Rooney, well, I may stand up to you on that. But if you are involved in discussions of B&B rules and structure, then you're the man.

If you want to be a commoner, you'll have to join another forum. If, however, you want to more clearly define your role as a responsible leader on this forum, well then I believe an appropriate tag is in order. I have tags that help others to know where I fit in. Founders need a tag.

jm2c

Doug

[Scott0079]

I will continue to participate on B&B. I will continue to purchase Simpson brushes. Life will go on. As Jarrod pointed out earlier this isn't a democracy and the decisions have been made. Honestly no explanation was or is required. I appreciate the sense of community here but at the end of the day it is a privately owned and operated site. The founders/owners thereof can and will do as they wish.

[drewmac]

I will continue to participate on B&B. I will continue to purchase Simpson brushes. Life will go on. As Jarrod pointed out earlier this isn't a democracy and the decisions have been made. Honestly no explanation was or is required. I appreciate the sense of community here but at the end of the day it is a privately owned and operated site. The founders/owners thereof can and will do as they wish.

The thread should be closed after your comment. That's honestly all there is to it!

[Perished]

I will continue to participate on B&B. I will continue to purchase Simpson brushes. Life will go on. As Jarrod pointed out earlier this isn't a democracy and the decisions have been made. Honestly no explanation was or is required. I appreciate the sense of community here but at the end of the day it is a privately owned and operated site. The founders/owners thereof can and will do as they wish.

I don't like to hear it but yes, spot on. At the end of the day it's the owners (Joel) who decides who can and can't use B&B, including Vendors. This whole affair has just made it clear that yes, it is a community for its members to use, but at the same time it is also a business for Joel. He has to protect his interests whilst trying to keep its members happy.
And judging by MOST of the comments on this article, he has succeeded.

I just HOPE that despite all the things said behind the scenes between Badger & Blade and Simpsons, talking can and will resume, leading to some kind of reconciliation, and Simpsons return.

Ultimately it just seems like a clash of personalities to me, with mistakes on BOTH sides.
And I don't think you need to believe in conspiracy theories to see that.

[lungho]

This is something that shouldn't have been aired in a public forum. Even if a mod did fire the first shot publicly, both parties are to blame for this embarrassment.

I will continue to support B&B and Simpson but at this point in time I am rather embarrassed to be both, a B&B contributor and a Simpson brush owner.

[Kevan]

It will be interesting to see how future product announcements from vendors/manufacturers/"agents" will be handled. I for one could not understand the issue so many vendors had with the end-around they thought Simpsons were performing by marketing the LE brush here. Simpsons/Vulfix is also a vendor of their wares so they have (had) that right (but obviously, not to act ungentlemanly as they did).

It's no different than if VintageScent and Semogue announce another LE brush as they've done in the past (but now Lee's Razors sells Semogues too and possibly other vendors, I don't know) and Italian Barber/RazoRock with their product launches (now that several other vendors have picked up those products as well). Maybe Simpsons was aggressive in their marketing but from the moment the reports came out that vendors were complaining about it, I didn't understand why.

It's clear from the revealed PMs and other behavior why they were banned. That's where this issue rests, and I ultimately support B&B in the final analysis. It's just that stepping back and looking at the whole picture, things escalated initially with a mod comment that was really strange IMO.

[BroJohn]

I've read through these two big threads on the upheaval involving Simpsons and all, and have a few general comments to add some perspective.

I joined B&B a few years back, before many of the current 'rules' existed. The vendor status was later created, in part because of abusive behavior of some of the businesses/individuals. Although upsets occur from time to time, overall the 'rules' that were created have worked pretty well.

I've not always agreed with Joel or the mods, and they've not always been 'fair'. At times, they've made postings that I wouldn't have made. But in the end I've never, ever, known them to be unjust.

There seems to be a collective deliberation on the part of the mods that leads them to a proper outcome. I am grateful for their efforts.

-- JOhn Gehman

[ridgerunner]

It is sad to see such a downward spiral of events. I do not know; do not have the right to know; and do not want to know all the particulars leading up to this decision. Agree with the decision or not to ban anyone; the Founder/Owner has the right and the authority to decide who has the ability to be a part of this forum. Does that mean the best decision was reached? I tend to believe that we make the best decision that we can, at that point in time, given our abilities and the information available to us. I would imagine that all of the principal parties in this troubled discourse would agree. Decisions have been made and it's unfortunate that the outcome reached this level.

Truly, a sad turn of events. I will continue to visit this forum and I will continue to own and purchase Simpson products.

[MajorBurnz]

Joel -

I just wanted to comment a bit on your 'brush making cost analysis'. Not to cause an argument, but just to present a different take on it.

Your assertion that a brush costs a lot less to make than Simpson's charges for theirs is right. As you pointed out, artisans like Rudy Vey make excellent brushes for $60+. (I'd point out that while Rudy's handles are every bit as good as, or better than, a Simpson's handle, if you use a TGN knot, you're not in the same ball-park as far as knot quality. Using a DO1 knot makes the brush better, but then you're approaching the Simpson's price range. --- but this is not why I'm writing this post.)

Did you consider overhead and business costs?

An artisan like Rudy (who was working alone, last I heard - this may have changed) has very low overhead.

I used to work in an academic lab. We used to write million-dollar grant proposals, and we'd get that amount. However, almost 50% of the money went directly to overhead - it ain't cheap!

Similarly, a company like Simpson's, while it's probably small, still has significant overhead costs. Factor in employee pay, accountants, insurance, distribution, retirement benefits (I don't know if they offer healthcare), etc. and your cost analysis becomes erroneous.

Also think about the risk they take because they make brushes in bulk (relative to Rudy, for example). If the economy goes through a down-turn (sound familiar?) people stop buying luxury brushes as much, but the company still has to pay the overhead and their employees. Rudy could just shut shop and return to doing other stuff (not as easy as I paint it, but certainly not as expensive as keeping a company like Simpson's chugging along).

Think about that and you'll find that your cheap brush (when you only think of manufacturing costs), costs a lot more than you think.

If the luxury brush business was as lucrative as you paint it, don't you think that the Simpson/Young family would still own the company?

It sometimes takes tough business practices to keep a concern going. The profit margins are probably large, but not as large as you think they are.

[Picaro]

seven,...eight,....nine,...ten!

OK


I've just backspaced my whole post. Please, just please.

[ridgerunner]

You're not getting it. This is not a debate. This is not a 2 sided thing. The guy isn't denying he broke the rules, and he isn't denying the actions he took, in fact, he's admitting to them. The whole business with pricing has NOTHING, NOTHING, NOTHING (should I say it a few more times?) to do with what a reasonable price is, the value of their products, etc. I own simpson brushes, and I don't think I got a poor value.

The SOLE purpose of detailing the cost structure is to illustrate the fact that a considerable amount of $ is to be gained from this project.Based on the amount of $ he stands to realize by marketing his product here on B&B, it's totally unreasonable for him to violate the rules, complain and treat mods poorly. I'll admit, when I reflect on it, it was a pretty weak point to make (although it is true) and it didn't add much value - and was a point of contention (and the primary misunderstanding) for many folks. Again - I admit, probably didn't need to be said, and it didn't add much weight to the conversation - it was more of an emotional string if you will. It's one thing when someone's following the rules and promoting an $8 cake of soap they sell, but it's another when someone is promoting a HIGH END, high margin product - while simultaneously being disrespectful, ungentlemanly and unwilling to follow the rules.

Any fact/data i've presented - I welcome a challenge, but thus far i've not heard ANY brought into question, just speculation and easy to levy "hollow grenades." Changing the topic on me not mentioning a Rudy Vey to make a point is asinine. If you think this debacle is over "covert marketing" then you're on drugs.

Lemme put it bluntly in one run-on sentence: "The issue is over this gentleman refusing to follow stated rules, treating mods like trash and using expletives, and proceeding to do whatever he wants, how he wanted to promote his product (which he admits is the sole reason for his participation) because he represents a well known established brand, and thinks as a result - he can use that leverage to do whatever he wants.

If a member were to attack YOU, and send you a PM with expletives we'd take action against them. The issue here is, he's not only done this to moderators, but he's broken rules despite being given quite a few chances AND OVER ONE MONTH to comply, and he's badmouthed us and promoted factually incorrect statements (IE: that we banned Gary) elsewhere.

Maybe it's a cultural thing, but when someone's here for profit, and getting tremendous monetary value from this community, I don't take kindly to them showing no respect to it, its rules, its other vendors and its caretakers.

A couple of items that I chose not to include in my earlier post in this thread.

The first remarks about how much the vendor stands to make has no bearing on compliance with the forum rules. The reference to the emotion behind the interactions reveals the what was fueling the response at this time. My understanding and expectation for a vendor's participation at the B&B is that they want to market their goods. If they choose to contribute to the membership in other ways that again is a choice.

To consistently enforce the rules (easier said than done) irrespective of the status or size of the vendor keeps playing field level for all. Once leeway (exceptions) are allowed then the boundaries become blurred.

It was very disappointing to see the (second highlighted) reply referring to the person being on drugs. Again, the emotional intensity rises to the surface. This forum promotes itself as a place where members treat each other as gentlemen.

The third and last highlighted section. Understood. Decision made. Time to move on.

Enough said from my perspective. Time to take a break.

[Picaro]

To Mr. Scruffy,

I want to publicly offer an apology for my knee jerk reaction to your post.

I responded, as I said in an earlier post, on the basis that your post was made by a member. If I had taken the time to notice you are a mod, I would have assumed things were happening behind the scenes, and hopefully, possibly, I would have kept my big yap shut and left it to the mod team to sort out anything that may or may not have been needed.
Trouble is I have big rocks and a bigger mouth, and if I'm going to shoot off one of them.....

[Picaro]

To ridgerunner et al, you guys are winding yourselves up under the premise that an internet community is some sort of democracy. It is a privelege bestowed by the owners, to be able to share in B&B. Possibly some folk view contributing as an investment which bestows rights. No, contributing is also a privelege.

[mkornecki]

I'm weighing in, not on the merits of how the Simpsons brush people were handled, but about how important it is to be clear about one's role in a conversation, and to operate within the opportunities and limitations of that role....

I don't see how that is relevant in this case. It would simply generate a lot of hypocritical, talk out of both sides of a person's mouth.

Why should anyone need to KNOW who the founder is, so that he can speak in a courteous manner to the FOUNDER, and otherwise be a jerk?

[Doug_in_NNY]

I don't see how that is relevant in this case. It would simply generate a lot of hypocritical, talk out of both sides of a person's mouth.

Why should anyone need to KNOW who the founder is, so that he can speak in a courteous manner to the FOUNDER, and otherwise be a jerk?

Knowing the respective roles of each person in a conversation helps frame the conversation. It isn't about guaranteeing how one or the other will exercise appropriate self control. It *is* about knowing where each person stands and therefore each has a better opportunity (not the guarantee) to stay on task, and that promotes better outcomes.

My post is clear enough, I think, and I'll leave it at that. Antique Hoosier, for one, seemed to get it. Helping folks clarify and solve problems is my day job. That is helpful to some, and that's good. If not, I'm okay with that. As with lots of things in life, YMMV.

Doug

[drewmac]

Can't we just move on? What's done is done, let's get back to normal. I find it crazy that so many people have weighed in on this matter (that overall really means little to the average B&B'er) when only a handful have participated in my 1000th post PIF that could get you $50 to spend at WCS (http://badgerandblade.com/vb/showthread.php?t=207840). It's actually kind of disappointing...

[Crixus]

B&B and Simpson had a simple business contract, much like an apartment building owner/landlord and a renting tenant. Terms of that contract were made known to the tenant upon entering into that agreement.

Despite repeated notification that the terms of the agreement were being overstepped, resulting not just in turmoil to the owner/landlord and his family, but to the other renting tenants in the building, the renting tenant in question continued to circumvent the owner/landlord's contractual terms of residency as spelled out in the initial business contract.

The owner/landlord realized that although the renting tenant in question acknowledged a historical disregard for the contractual terms, no attempts were being taken by said tenant to correct them. The owner/landlord took into account the serial breaching of the contract terms and the resultant fallout among his employees and other rental tenants and determined the best course was to terminate the business agreement and have the tenant in question vacate the premises.

I could have said that in less than ten words. That's what went down from where I sit.

[jgkeegan]

Can't we just move on? What's done is done, let's get back to normal. ..


I think that is a good idea, "back to normal."

At present, everybody is a loser.

Mark and Simpson/Vulfix, Joel and the B&B Moderators, and most of all us, the B&B membership. Even some of us found ourselves sniping at each other.

I'd like to see Joel and Mark find a way to restore B&B to the way it was. We don't need to know how, but it would be great for everyone if the wounds could be healed.

"back to normal" -- a great goal.

--james

[OldSaw]

B&B and Simpson had a simple business contract, much like an apartment building owner/landlord and a renting tenant. Terms of that contract were made known to the tenant upon entering into that agreement.

Despite repeated notification that the terms of the agreement were being overstepped, resulting not just in turmoil to the owner/landlord and his family, but to the other renting tenants in the building, the renting tenant in question continued to circumvent the owner/landlord's contractual terms of residency as spelled out in the initial business contract.

The owner/landlord realized that although the renting tenant in question acknowledged a historical disregard for the contractual terms, no attempts were being taken by said tenant to correct them. The owner/landlord took into account the serial breaching of the contract terms and the resultant fallout among his employees and other rental tenants and determined the best course was to terminate the business agreement and have the tenant in question vacate the premises.

I could have said that in less than ten words. That's what went down from where I sit.

That pretty much sums it up I guess. I would prefer to see some sort of suspension prior to banning so that things could possibly be reconciled. Perhaps if there were a mediator involved it could have been resolved more positively.

[redrako]

Joel, Susuki, and all Moderators, you have my support and appreciation. The fact is that you have enabled and facilitated a community that is in someways life changing. The fact that we can learn about the art of wet shaving in a virtual community is simply magnificent.

Yet, we all occasionally see the "sausage making" part of this community. The fact that there are hours of work, some of it difficult, that keeps this glued together.

The result of this work, is a unique place that has unusual integrity and honor!

[bbarton713]

i think that is a good idea, "back to normal."

at present, everybody is a loser.

Mark and simpson/vulfix, joel and the b&b moderators, and most of all us, the b&b membership. Even some of us found ourselves sniping at each other.

I'd like to see joel and mark find a way to restore b&b to the way it was. We don't need to know how, but it would be great for everyone if the wounds could be healed.

"back to normal" -- a great goal.

--james

+1

[Big Dog]

Can't we just move on? What's done is done, let's get back to normal. I find it crazy that so many people have weighed in on this matter (that overall really means little to the average B&B'er) when only a handful have participated in my 1000th post PIF that could get you $50 to spend at WCS (http://badgerandblade.com/vb/showthread.php?t=207840). It's actually kind of disappointing...

Right on, Drewmac. Let's get back to normal here!

As I have gotten older and experienced more in life I find that the world still one big sandbox. I have seen the same thing in family, work, political parties, bowling leagues, forums, etc. It just seems that nobody ever really "grows up".

Having said that I appreciate Joel's attempt to give us all an understanding of the situation. I also appreciate the mods and the way this forum is handled. It is the best one I have ever belonged to and I will continue to participate.

PS. I had to retype this about 4 times because of the stupid caps lock key. Who the hell needs one of those anyway :mad3:

[Sejanus]

That pretty much sums it up I guess. I would prefer to see some sort of suspension prior to banning so that things could possibly be reconciled. Perhaps if there were a mediator involved it could have been resolved more positively.

As a professional mediator I'd agree, however both parties would have to be willing to discuss and see if there was a way to come to some sort of solution. I am not sure if the parties would be interested at this point in participating in such a process though..

[Obsessed]

I find it crazy that so many people have weighed in on this matter (that overall really means little to the average B&B'er)

I know. I really haven't watched The Simpsons in years.

[Mike...CDN]

I have followed this unfortunate fall out between B&B and Mark which has stirred debate and emotion by many members on this forum as well as mention on other forums and yes twitter.

I agree that Mark broke the vendor forum rules, and even sent perhaps less then gentlemanly PM’s to moderators but more then one moderator has posted confrontational replies leading to long negative and unwanted threads. If this happened to you each time you posted I’m sure you would be unhappy as well.

Since Mark has been banned then chastised for his action when he was unable to tell his side of the story I do not think it unfair for moderators to answer for their action.

I can tell you that the I have receive a number of PM’s starting with removing my post, harassing me about my position and threatening that I will be banned if I do not fall inline. Comments were also made about the forum “ Mike please do not make the mistake of assuming this is a debate”

If you doubt my comment I will gladly email you the PM thread.

Mike

[Walker]

Wow. Another sad turn of events for everybody. Kinda been out of the loop the last few months and just found this. Great job to Joel and the Mods for there outstanding work!!

[Wil Dorenbos]

Perhaps time to close this thread?

[joel]

Perhaps time to close this thread?

Personally, I don't like closing threads. I wasn't thrilled when the other thread was closed either, but cest la vie. In some instances, it's necessary to do when there is a never-ending debate (ie politics, religeon, etc) but in instances like these, sometimes its best to let folks get their comments out... to me, it's one of the things that makes B&B unique. I'm not going to sweep the dust under the rug, and I'm not afraid of tough questions, or dissenting opinions/comments.

[joel]

I have followed this unfortunate fall out between B&B and Mark which has stirred debate and emotion by many members on this forum as well as mention on other forums and yes twitter.

I agree that Mark broke the vendor forum rules, and even sent perhaps less then gentlemanly PM’s to moderators but more then one moderator has posted confrontational replies leading to long negative and unwanted threads. If this happened to you each time you posted I’m sure you would be unhappy as well.

Since Mark has been banned then chastised for his action when he was unable to tell his side of the story I do not think it unfair for moderators to answer for their action.

I can tell you that the I have receive a number of PM’s starting with removing my post, harassing me about my position and threatening that I will be banned if I do not fall inline. Comments were also made about the forum “ Mike please do not make the mistake of assuming this is a debate”

If you doubt my comment I will gladly email you the PM thread.

Mike

Hi Mike,
I don't want to take us off topic, but your situation and the threats lodged against you are news to me. That's not to say they didn't happen (I've got no reason to disbelieve you) but I'd like to look into it. Could you please pm me, explain the situation in your pm, and forward me the pm exchange?

Thanks!

[nav]

Can't we just move on? What's done is done, let's get back to normal. I find it crazy that so many people have weighed in on this matter (that overall really means little to the average B&B'er) when only a handful have participated in my 1000th post PIF that could get you $50 to spend at WCS (http://badgerandblade.com/vb/showthread.php?t=207840). It's actually kind of disappointing...

That's a Simpson Berkeley right there! :tongue_sm :lol:

Great PIF though, very generous indeed! :thumbup:

[shaveBandito]

I'd like to join the others and applaud Joel gor a job well done. Personally, I am one of those who felt that simpsons was on a marketing rampage and nothing was going to stop them. The gentlemanly insistence that rules be followed (and the patience and respect provided in the enforcement) was exemplary. Shutting down this thread only helps to stop posts like mine - and I can understand it, with the amount of fondness that most of us have for the brush. However - one possible solution/venue would be for a "marketing" forum where manufacturers could have one thread where they can announce upcoming products.

[Perished]

I'd like to join the others and applaud Joel gor a job well done. Personally, I am one of those who felt that simpsons was on a marketing rampage and nothing was going to stop them. The gentlemanly insistence that rules be followed (and the patience and respect provided in the enforcement) was exemplary. Shutting down this thread only helps to stop posts like mine - and I can understand it, with the amount of fondness that most of us have for the brush. However - one possible solution/venue would be for a "marketing" forum where manufacturers could have one thread where they can announce upcoming products.

Now that does sound like a good idea. B&B could charge a fee, a larger fee than say a typical Vendor, for the privilege. Members would know what to expect from a marketing forum. Arguements like we've seen between Simpsons and B&B could just result in a thread being moved to the new section...
Yes, I think that's a very good idea. Surely everyone would win that situation :thumbup1:

Joel, while you're on. You know when a member/vendor is banned, for whatever reason, do you review it after a set time or can they ask to have it reviewed? Or is a ban permanent?

[MajorBurnz]

I'd like to join the others and applaud Joel gor a job well done. Personally, I am one of those who felt that simpsons was on a marketing rampage and nothing was going to stop them. The gentlemanly insistence that rules be followed (and the patience and respect provided in the enforcement) was exemplary. Shutting down this thread only helps to stop posts like mine - and I can understand it, with the amount of fondness that most of us have for the brush. However - one possible solution/venue would be for a "marketing" forum where manufacturers could have one thread where they can announce upcoming products.

That's an excellent idea!

Perhaps it should be a sub-forum where only the vendors themselves can post. Sort of an 'announcement' thread where no regular B&B user can comment.

On thread per week, with one 'bump' allowed per week.

Regular members can discuss the item in open forum, but then the vendor can answer the questions posed in his 'bump' post - once per week.

---

It would be nice to see something positive come from this very sordid situation.

[mhdena]

Regular members can discuss the item in open forum, but then the vendor can answer the questions posed in his 'bump' post - once per week

Vendors should post their sales/specials with an email, phone number, and or web link to their site for inquiries in the vendor forum. Members don't need to discuss with vendors in threads questions that could/should be taken up with them directly.

That back and forth vendor-member postings is why what happened happened.

[gollum83]

That pretty much sums it up I guess. I would prefer to see some sort of suspension prior to banning so that things could possibly be reconciled. Perhaps if there were a mediator involved it could have been resolved more positively.

A suspension is an interesting idea. It might have allowed cooler heads to prevail.

[jgkeegan]

A suspension is an interesting idea. It might have allowed cooler heads to prevail.

I'm curious: suspend who exactly?

B&B is the world's best shaving board. It's diverse and offers a huge potential for analysis and problem solving. I believe we have the capacity to resolve this issue positively.

I just don't think suspending one person or one company is a positive resolution.

This whole problem resulted in a lot of things being said that probably shouldn't have been said and that resulted in responses that shouldn't have been made. An ugly cycle began and continued until something had to be done and Joel rightly did that.

But I hope that didn't end the matter at today's status quo. I think B&B is better than that.

--james

--James

[danparker77]

Can't we just let this go? I think, in general, most feel that no side of this came out smelling like roses. Maybe the idea of suspension is good, maybe not, but can't it be moved to the Site Feedback forum? Instead of bumping this thread?

[rearviewmirror]

http://thmg.photobucket.com/albums/v214/willysmb44/th_beatingA_DeadHorse.gif

[goby]

http://cdn0.sbnation.com/legacy_images/mccoveychronicles/images/admin/BeatDeadHorse.gif

[Phog Allen]

http://cdn0.sbnation.com/legacy_images/mccoveychronicles/images/admin/BeatDeadHorse.gif

THIS.


Todd

[Perished]

http://cdn0.sbnation.com/legacy_images/mccoveychronicles/images/admin/BeatDeadHorse.gif

:001_rolle

I accept I'm guilty of bumping this thread, but this made me laugh :lol:

[OldSaw]

Can't we just let this go? I think, in general, most feel that no side of this came out smelling like roses. Maybe the idea of suspension is good, maybe not, but can't it be moved to the Site Feedback forum? Instead of bumping this thread?


http://thmg.photobucket.com/albums/v214/willysmb44/th_beatingA_DeadHorse.gif


http://cdn0.sbnation.com/legacy_images/mccoveychronicles/images/admin/BeatDeadHorse.gif


THIS.


Todd


:001_rolle

I accept I'm guilty of bumping this thread, but this made me laugh :lol:

I think some valid points were made and to see Joel's latest comments also helps bring this to a close. If you don't want to read what others have to say, then don't read it and by all means quit bumping the thread with silly pics of a dead horse (unless, of course, you're simply trying to amuse yourself, then carry on and quit complaining). :biggrin1:

[jgkeegan]

i think some valid points were made and to see joel's latest comments also helps bring this to a close. If you don't want to read what others have to say, then don't read it and by all means quit bumping the thread with silly pics of a dead horse (unless, of course, you're simply trying to amuse yourself, then carry on and quit complaining). :biggrin1:

+1

[goby]

I deleted my image. Joel asked if I had a gentlemanly, intelligent opinion (post below mine), and I do.

Joel and the mods are the boss. That is not subject to negotiation. Every vendor knows the rules. Play by the rules, or get a warning. Don't heed the warning, and you'll get banned.

It's really that simple.

[joel]

Thanks! I am amusing myself. But now I'm done. Time to get serious again. I fear that some newbie is about to buy a puck of Williams. We can't let that happen!! :tongue_sm

http://www.enginerdiness.com/wp-content/uploads/Misc/Horse.gif

Not funny, not gentlemanly, please stop immediately. Posting a "beating a dead horse" post, only to shortly after post another "beating a dead horse" image negates your whole point by bringing this thread to the top again... and again.

If you have some gentlemanly, intelligent commentary to add - i'd love to hear it. Otherwise, your "horse beating" posts are adding no value, are not furthering this serious discussion, and are only continuing to drag this situation out.

[gollum83]

I'm curious: suspend who exactly?

B&B is the world's best shaving board. It's diverse and offers a huge potential for analysis and problem solving. I believe we have the capacity to resolve this issue positively.

I just don't think suspending one person or one company is a positive resolution.

This whole problem resulted in a lot of things being said that probably shouldn't have been said and that resulted in responses that shouldn't have been made. An ugly cycle began and continued until something had to be done and Joel rightly did that.

But I hope that didn't end the matter at today's status quo. I think B&B is better than that.s

Suspend who? Mark, of course, assuming we're still on topic here. As for it not being a positive resolution, I don't see a suspension as a resolution so much as a path to a resolution. And one that could have lead to a reconciliation rather than banishment.

Spending some time away from here may have done a world of good and allowed him to act more proactive rather than reactive. And doing so may have prevented a number of the things said from being said. Granted, Mark was given ample warning regardless and did make disparaging remarks elsewhere, so perhaps not. Regardless, what done is done, and honestly the situation seems to have been handled as best as possible such as it developed.

[jgkeegan]

I'm curious: suspend who exactly?

B&B is the world's best shaving board. It's diverse and offers a huge potential for analysis and problem solving. I believe we have the capacity to resolve this issue positively.

I just don't think suspending one person or one company is a positive resolution.

This whole problem resulted in a lot of things being said that probably shouldn't have been said and that resulted in responses that shouldn't have been made. An ugly cycle began and continued until something had to be done and Joel rightly did that.

But I hope that didn't end the matter at today's status quo. I think B&B is better than that.

--james

--James


Suspend who? Mark, of course, assuming we're still on topic here. As for it not being a positive resolution, I don't see a suspension as a resolution so much as a path to a resolution. And one that could have lead to a reconciliation rather than banishment.

Spending some time away from here may have done a world of good and allowed him to act more proactive rather than reactive. And doing so may have prevented a number of the things said from being said. Granted, Mark was given ample warning regardless and did make disparaging remarks elsewhere, so perhaps not. Regardless, what done is done, and honestly the situation seems to have been handled as best as possible such as it developed.


I don't think suspending one of several parties who contributed to the mess is particularly positive. In fact, I think it makes a martyr of Mark and might prompt even-handed readers to sympathize.

Mark isn't the only person to have made disparaging remarks either. In fact, the whole thing escalated when a Mod made a personal remark which was widely seen as a remark from a Moderator rather than a member.

At the point when Joel acted, you're right. I dont think he had any other choice at that time. But if you're suggesting that the whole mess was Mark's fault alone, I think that's off-target. This was a difficult, complicated issue with lots of things said by everyone which might have been better left unsaid, myself included.

Where things stand now is that everyone lost. Everyone.

Maybe I'm being pollyannish, but I think B&B is lots better than that. I also thing that B&Bers in general are good hearted people who have the capacity to do a lot of things.

One of those things I'd like to see is to heal the feelings and repair this mess.

End of cheerleading rant.

--james

[Go West Young Man]

I got the feeling that both Mark and Gary were relatively new to message boards - guys of their generation often don't understand the dynamics involved in online communities since they don't have the years of experience younger guys do. Some people eventually figure it out and learn to use the new technologies to productive ends, some just get into a lot of arguments and end up storming off.

[jgkeegan]

I got the feeling that both Mark and Gary were relatively new to message boards - guys of their generation often don't understand the dynamics involved in online communities since they don't have the years of experience younger guys do. Some people eventually figure it out and learn to use the new technologies to productive ends, some just get into a lot of arguments and end up storming off.


Guys of their generation, or older, created message boards which existed in the 80s. Some of the "younger guys" you're referring to weren't born then.

I think you're right about experience though. No one gets that any more without participating. In the very early days admins would set people up to read but not post for the first 30-90 days so they could get a feel for the on-line communities they wanted to participate in before they shot themselves in the foot.

Question: who stormed off?

--james

[gollum83]

I don't think suspending one of several parties who contributed to the mess is particularly positive. In fact, I think it makes a martyr of Mark and might prompt even-handed readers to sympathize.

Mark isn't the only person to have made disparaging remarks either. In fact, the whole thing escalated when a Mod made a personal remark which was widely seen as a remark from a Moderator rather than a member.

At the point when Joel acted, you're right. I dont think he had any other choice at that time. But if you're suggesting that the whole mess was Mark's fault alone, I think that's off-target. This was a difficult, complicated issue with lots of things said by everyone which might have been better left unsaid, myself included.

I'm not suggesting that at all. I'm sure the moderators are in a difficult position at times. As you and others have pointed out, it's rather hard to separate the moderator from the person sometimes, but punishing a moderator would put them in an even more difficult position perhaps to the point of making that particular moderator appear ineffective to the membership. Anyways, we could go around and around about this, but I rather not as I suspect we're pretty much on the same page James.

[tvldatsi]

I almost feel bad for bumping this thread but I have one last thought I'd like to express
Of all the sordid events and consequences that resulted, seeing members with different interpetations snipe at eachother is more distressing to me than losing the Simpson presence. Not saying that's what the above comments are; there are plenty of examples to be found in the threads that encompass this debacle.

That's all, sorry if my prolonging this debate is offensive or annoying to ya, just had to get that out

[GreekGuy]

I've been watching this whole thing unfold, and the reactions to it, and I'd just like to add my 2 cents. I will preface this by saying I do not own a single simpson's brush

While the appearance of Gary and Mark to the forum was a little coincidental with the announcement of the LE, I think we should cut them a little slack. I think the two of them decided to do an LE, and they came here to market it. Honestly, I don't see a problem with that. How is it any different than any other vendor coming here to market something? Gary was also helpful in addressing questions in the brush forum, and he dodged a lot of rude comments in the GLYE thread in the best way he could IMO

Yes, the LE thread turned into a massive thread with hundreds of posts, when in reality there were very limited details of the actual product. In hindsight, yes, they should have had this all determined ahead of time. But the endless discussion can't really be blamed on them. Gary and Mark can't stop people from posting in the thread. So while they should have had every detail, including the exact price, worked out by the time they announced it, I think they took a lot more grief than was necessary for that one. I think the mods let it go on because they were hoping for details, and the thread kept growing and growing, but I'm not sure that it was resolved in the best way possible.

Perhaps Mark didn't handle "complying" in the best way he could. Maybe he made some comments he should not have said. And I'm not trying to point fingers here, but I think an unwarranted comment in the thread, from a mod mind you, is what really started things spiraling out of control. If I were Mark, I can understand being upset, or even angry, about that. He paid to be a vendor, and was criticized for selling some brushes in the vendor forum. Without going into all the tiers of vendor sponsorship, etc...I think this was really unwarranted. And if I were him, I would be upset with someone, especially a mod, criticizing me for selling a brush in the vendor corner. Bernd announced a sale on his site, which bypassed many of the vendors here, and nobody blinked an eye at that. While Mark may not have had the best track record leading into his announcement for the ivory fleck brushes, the comment made was out of line IMO.

And Joel, I know you face a lot of decisions here that are neither easy, fun, nor pleasant, but I think singling them out as a vendor and naming pricing guidelines was in less than good taste. We all know that Mark was going to make money on the brush. Perhaps a lot of money. The percentage, in my mind, is really irrelevant from a strict "equality" point of view, and while he may not have followed the rules, I don't think this aspect of your explanation was beneficial to anyone, including the other vendors upset by the viral marketing campaign.

Lastly, I'd just like to note that I think Mark and Gary received a lot of negative attention as soon as the LE was announced. They could have handled the announcement better. Maybe some people felt duped. Maybe vendors were upset that they were announcing a high end LE and it cut into their business. Maybe Mark didn't handle criticism and didn't follow the rules as he should have. But I think there were some poor decisions made on both sides, and in the end nobody came out of this looking good. I've seen vendors banned before, but this was one where I think everybody lost, poor decisions were made on all sides, and things escalated to the point where it became very difficult to reconcile with one another. I'm sure a lot of the discussion went on behind the scenes, and I don't need to know every detail. I trust that the leadership here handled things as well as they could, but when all is said and done, it just doesn't leave me feeling good about anyone's actions.

I don't mean to be overly critical of the decisions that were made by the "forces that be" here, but as a member who was following this throughout all the stages, I wanted to share my opinion, with the hope that some solution could still be reached, or if nothing else, to prevent something like this from happening again

[Kevan]

I don't believe Gary stormed off. I read his (little) explanation over at SMF and I find it completely understandable. He was probably honestly flabbergasted at the way some people reacted to his project as it unfolded, and thought that if he stayed at another forum buit not this one, conspiracies would be spun. And y'know what? I don't blame him.

Shavegeekery in its fullest sense was probably hard to take.

[Hex]

One other thing that bothers me quite a bit is this.

I am part of an excellent shaving community that banned Simpsons. It's tough getting used to saying that. :sad::sad:

[_MementoMori_]

Wow... I'm just now discovering all of this.

As someone who doesn't own a Simpson brush and is frankly more interested in Rooney, I didn't really ever follow any of Mark or Gary's threads. Still, I knew they were here and I thought it was cool. I had no idea all of this childish drama was going on behind the scenes, though!

Joel, I admire you. I think you're a stand-up guy and you did the right thing. It must have been an incredibly tough decision to ban what some deem to be THE name in shaving brushes from B&B, but hey, someone who thinks they can push everyone else around just because of their pedigree has no business here on B&B anyway.

I'm sorry that you don't often have fun here. That really makes me sad. I hope things can eventually, somehow, take a turn and you can get some enjoyment out of your site. That goes for all of you mods. Just because you guys have to police the rest of us knuckleheads doesn't mean you shouldn't get some enjoyment and enrichment from B&B too.

Keep up the great work. It doesn't go unnoticed.

[Merv]

Joel's move was correct but to be fair to Mark and Gary--I would point out that I do not think their moves were because of wanting money but got out of hand when we as a forum fed the fire with questions and pushing for immediate answers (all for fun but added fuel) Mark on the other forum says he new brush would be limited to around 150 to 175 (not millions of $ here).

[mkornecki]

...comments do not contribute anything to what many would consider to be a very serious discussion. ...

I wonder what this "serious discussion" is now about.

Certainly B&Bers are still able to purchase merchandise from simpson?

Is it just that certain unnamed peoples have had their feathers ruffled and are worried about a possible loss of sales due to their inability to toot their own horn? Which is, (if I read the OP properly) what got them into trouble in the first place.

[Crixus]

Even 3-4 days after losing their company representation on B&B, Simpson continues to dominate the Vendor Corner. For their ten bucks a month, Simpson has benefitted from an extra-ordinary amount of global buzz on here. With 39,000+ members and surely a huge but publicly unknown amount of unregistered lurkers, the concentration of wet shaving inspired consumers that browse the pages of B&B is very impressive.

I know that Joel is aware of that. He was not being flippant when he stated in a recent post that "The vendors need us. We don't need them." If what I gather from Joel's posts is accurate, this phenomenom was pointed out to Simpson on more than one occasion. They were getting plenty of exposure for a nominal fee. To completely dominate a section of the forum mutually paid for by multiple and rule-abiding members was over the line.

Once it was apparent the situation was out of hand, since now there were two company owners (Vulfix and Badger & Blade), multiple small business owners, volunteering moderators and monetary/content contributing members, there was no other viable choice than to do what Joel did. Although he is taking lots of flak on here for his decision, I for one think the ball was in Simpson's court as to let this whole situation de-escalate. They were getting an incredible amount of exposure on here for next to nothing, and the Simpson managing director either failed to take that into account or chose not to when things heated up.

[bbarton713]

Is it just that certain unnamed peoples have had their feathers ruffled and are worried about a possible loss of sales due to their inability to toot their own horn? Which is, (if I read the OP properly) what got them into trouble in the first place.

Ok, in the interest of fairness I read through the Gary Young LE Signature Series thread. In all cases Mark's subsequent posts were only a result of a question or comment by another person in the thread. Nearly always, a public reply answered that question for more than one person.

Gary Young didn't even post in that thread until post #120.

There was some concern and back & forth after Mark announced a price in post #94. Up until that point it was reply after reply expressing interest in the project.

It wasn't until posts 283 & 284 that the thread took a negative turn with complaints about how the brush was being marketed.

After that there were other complaints about the G3 Eagle, people decrying the new brush or praising the efforts of Mark and Gary, until Joel finally closed the thread at post #430.

There wasn't much in the way of tooting but certainly a lot of requests for information or complaints both of which required a reply. They weren't tooting their horn but instead responding to the overwhelming show of support and interest and even gracious replies to the complaints.

After all, we had the MD of Simpson and Gary Young, nephew of the founder, that were posting and replying in a thread on B&B and it seemed that most people loved having that access.

For a time, it was very exciting, but like all good things it came to an end.

As an aside, it is a wonder that anyone does anything in terms of B&B limited edition anything or Group Buys. There always seems to be plenty of people who's sole contributions are complaints about the process, the price, how long it took to arrive, etc.

This whole thing is a sad commentary all around and speaks volumes regarding the need to think before you click. I'm not speaking from a morally superior position because I've certainly had my moments but it is good advice all the same.

[psram]

He was not being flippant when he stated in a recent post that "The vendors need us. We don't need them." If what I gather from Joel's posts is accurate, this phenomenom was pointed out to Simpson on more than one occasion.
There certainly is evidence that Joel thinks this is the case; see his PM to Gary in the first post of this thread about brushes becoming a commodity. He has also repeatedly stuck to a cost vs. value analysis for brushes. I disagree with his position based on what I observe in general. There is enough evidence even in this forum that folks will pay a lot of $$ for brand names and antique/rare items. It is not value/performance-based purchasing in these particular niches.

B&B is the biggest forum in the wet shaving community and has huge clout in that if you want to market something, you have the largest audience. It also plays a huge role in educating wetshavers about products and the process. I have learnt a lot more about brushes, creams and razors here than I probably need to know to get a good shave :biggrin1:.

But well established brands can and will command premiums even without this marketing tool, albeit with most likely higher marketing costs cutting into profits a bit. This is not limited to brushes, but shaving creams, razors almost every item. Tomorrow if Shavemac/Rooney announce a LE brush, a huge buzz will get created here whether announced here or not. Same with say a new Trumper/Truefitt cream. You won't get anywhere as close to that for a new Tweezerman brush or Godrej shaving cream. Forget hypotheticals, you can observe the buzz a WCS/Bullgoose thread has when they announce the addition of a well known brand.

Support at an internet forum can be a survival situation for a small mom-and-pop vendor (I mean no disrespect here), but not for well established brands. You have to realize that today wetshaving is an eco-system where smart hobbyists with an impressive spending power rule. It is in everyone's interest (vendors, distributors and community forum owners) to understand where they stand in this eco-system, and act maturely to maximize their profits in this spending pie. I think both Simpson and B&B have fallen short in remarkable fashion this time.

[bhorsoft]

Darn, I've read all the posts on all the threads and really thought hard if I should add my kindling to the fire. I guess I do. I'm a fairly new member (< 2 months), but from what I could see in my wet shaving Internet journeys, this was and is the place to be. As a former moderator of a web site with a couple hundred users, I have a taste of what Joel is going through.

On my board, which was a Harley Owners Group board, we had just a few simple rules:

* No politics, religion, sex, etc. If you wouldn't discuss it with your mom or at a dinner table with your boss, then it shouldn't be discussed on the board.

* Keep it clean - Harley Owner's Group is a family type group. We are also part of a big Harley family. Treat each other well and with respect.

* We are sponsored by our dealership - this is not the place to bash the dealership, air your dirty laundry or direct members to the competition.

Simple rules, but as the moderator I had to warn more than one member they were violating the rules. We also got to the point where every post was reviewed before being allowed on the board, and despite that, we still had to ban a member or two. We tried to do our most of this behind the scenes in private, but eventually had to go public on some actions.

I know that if Joel had kept everything between himself and the moderators, there would have been rumors, especially if Mark suddenly disappeared from the board. At some point, major actions like this have to come out into the open.

I stand with Joel and the moderators on their decisions. Moderating a 30,000+ member board would become almost a full time job. From the bit that Joel made public, it does look like Mark was breaking the rules, ignoring repeated warnings, and was uncivil at times. That is all I need to know.

[TonyN]

I hope things can eventually, somehow, take a turn and you can get some enjoyment out of your site. That goes for all of you mods. Just because you guys have to police the rest of us knuckleheads doesn't mean you shouldn't get some enjoyment and enrichment from B&B too.

Keep up the great work. It doesn't go unnoticed.

+1

Very well said David!

[SliceOfLife]

A few pages into the LE thread it was clear that Mark would be banned. The idea that this situation was brought about simply by his failure to adhere to certain rules and motivated by a mad need to promote his brushes, is, as others have only recently pointed out, an utter fairy tale. It simply is the easiest way to justify the steps that had to be taken for the sake of the site, regardless of what is the most honest course.

I am frankly amazed at the attitudes shown by many in this thread. Either I'm completely mad or only a fool would believe that Mark simply refused to follow the rules and attacked moderators unprovoked in PM's... and the world is full of fools. Without the background that has been left to our speculation, the pretty ridiculous and publicly unprovoked attack on Marks character and business practices by a mod, regardless of his meaning for it to be taken in the context of a member's opinion or not, on a forum Mark had paid to promote his business on going without even acknowledgment from the staff would justify almost any tone in his future contacts in my opinion. And the willingness of Joel to speculate towards Mark's greed and pick apart juicy quotes to demonstrate how "ungentlemanly" he is makes me frankly ashamed to be a witness to this whole fiasco.

[htownmmm]

As a long time member of this forum and a former moderator, I can say I'm absolutely amazed-not that someone was banned after repeated warnings(sadly, it happens) but that Joel took it upon himself to let the collective in on the process.

This is the first time in B&B history that I can recall that occuring; but I understand why. Every now and then I have seen posts asking/questioning about leisureguy, stantheman, various former vendors, etc etc., and wondering how someone could be banned and can the details be shared.

Whether you agree with Joel or Mark, either way, none of us are going to stop shaving or stop buying Simpson's products(I still have not picked up a Chubby 2 as of yet!).

Now sadly, some will decide to leave B&B for their belief that the situation was handled poorly; others will choose to continue to be here. The bashing on other shaving forums will continue as usual-no matter what happens here, B&B gets slammed.

I just think it's fascinating to see this process work itself out in 'real time' as it were. I hope to see many of you in the future. Now I can see why the banning process is mostly handled behind closed doors-why set yourself up foir more angst when you don't have to? Remember, it's Joel's and Nick's ball and if you choose not to play according to the rules, you won't get to play with it at all.

marty


marty

[Drubbing]

A few pages into the LE thread it was clear that Mark would be banned. The idea that this situation was brought about simply by his failure to adhere to certain rules and motivated by a mad need to promote his brushes, is, as others have only recently pointed out, an utter fairy tale. It simply is the easiest way to justify the steps that had to be taken for the sake of the site, regardless of what is the most honest course.

...

And the willingness of Joel to speculate towards Mark's greed and pick apart juicy quotes to demonstrate how "ungentlemanly" he is makes me frankly ashamed to be a witness to this whole fiasco.

Agreed. One painstakingly posted side of the story doesn't make the story true. But we'll never know that, only one side gets to tell the story.

The defence of having a Vendor/mod on this forum makes a mockery of the hypocrisy on show here, and the assertion that no favours are pulled is laughable. If being a vendor/mod caused more grief than benefit for the person concerned, they'd have pulled the pin on one of those positions long ago.

I have my own opinion as to why Simpsons have been singled out here. This sort of needy self justification makes me reconsider my need to be a part of this faux 'gentlemanly-ness' anymore. It always seemed an overweening veneer.

[drewmac]

I'm unsubscribing to this thread, there's honestly no need to keep reading any of this....

If you don't like what went down, there's a button near the top of the page on the right called "Log Out."

[mkornecki]

... that it really does appear that there is a very similar fate that befalls all vendors who certain moderators or the site management personally do not like.,,,


If (a big if, imo) that is the case, the question remains, Why do they not like them?

Unless you have some inside information or other evidence that highlights why certain vendors are disliked, I will continue to use Occam's razor and state that they were/are disliked, ~because they broke the rules~!

[W_B_K]

A few pages into the LE thread it was clear that Mark would be banned. The idea that this situation was brought about simply by his failure to adhere to certain rules and motivated by a mad need to promote his brushes, is, as others have only recently pointed out, an utter fairy tale. It simply is the easiest way to justify the steps that had to be taken for the sake of the site, regardless of what is the most honest course.

I am frankly amazed at the attitudes shown by many in this thread. Either I'm completely mad or only a fool would believe that Mark simply refused to follow the rules and attacked moderators unprovoked in PM's... and the world is full of fools. Without the background that has been left to our speculation, the pretty ridiculous and publicly unprovoked attack on Marks character and business practices by a mod, regardless of his meaning for it to be taken in the context of a member's opinion or not, on a forum Mark had paid to promote his business on going without even acknowledgment from the staff would justify almost any tone in his future contacts in my opinion. And the willingness of Joel to speculate towards Mark's greed and pick apart juicy quotes to demonstrate how "ungentlemanly" he is makes me frankly ashamed to be a witness to this whole fiasco.


While it saddens me greatly, after reading *everything*, I find myself feeling the same way.

It is a wonder the 2010 Semouge boar was ever made....

[mkornecki]

...And the willingness of Joel to speculate towards Mark's greed ...

I claim that this is his OBLIGATION as the host of a gentleman's site. This site is not meant to be a vehicle for manufacturers to to pull out every last penny from the unwary consumer!

Are we not supposed to keep a watchful eye on the going-ons at the B/S/T? I state that in a similar manner, there is an obligation of every informed person (no matter the subject) to give their opinion to those less informed regardless of the sub-forum.

I publicly thank Joel and value his opinion regarding the quality/materials/manufacture/pricing.

Once again, thank you sir!

[Brian-M]

I'm relatively new here so excuse me if I'm being naive. But it seems that having a major vendor being a part of this community whilst promoting their products would be very beneficial to members while at the same time lending even greater credibility to the forum.

[MajorBurnz]

Ian, Drubbing and Kadet -

You guys have posted what I've been struggling to express myself. I think Mark/Simpson's got bullied out of the site because Mark reacted (predictably) to provocation. Given his reaction (possibly justified), the banning was not a surprise, and was also justified at that point.

What bothers me is that there's not even been a hint of an apology from the mod who started the downward spiral on Mark's last thread. He made a stupid comment and hasn't even so much as acknowledged it.

---

The 'like it or leave it' comment is not really worth wasting any more cpu cycles on.

EDIT: As an aside, I don't know why I'm still posting in this thread. Maybe it's because I don't like what happened, but nothing's going to change, so why do I bother. :blush:

[W_B_K]

EDIT: As an aside, I don't know why I'm still posting in this thread. Maybe it's because I don't like what happened, but nothing's going to change, so why do I bother. :blush:

Probably because you care about this site, the people on it, and the actions that occured just seem to go against that special "B&B feeling". I too wasn't going to post in this thread, but Ian's post really put into words what I was feeling.

[mkornecki]

I'm relatively new here so excuse me if I'm being naive. But it seems that having a major vendor being a part of this community whilst promoting their products would be very beneficial to members while at the same time lending even greater credibility to the forum.

My respect for this site was not increased by their presence and it is not diminished by their absence.

[craig87c]

But the Semogue boar was a B&B brush; a group buy put together by members here, with mod approval, and with the help of Semogue. Not just a manufacturer selling stuff here. Just a slightly different situation.

This entire situation is sad. It's something (else?) that's going to get B&B trashed on the other shave forums.

[W_B_K]

But the Semogue boar was a B&B brush; a group buy put together by members here, with mod approval, and with the help of Semogue. Not just a manufacturer selling stuff here. Just a slightly different situation.

This entire situation is sad. It's something (else?) that's going to get B&B trashed on the other shave forums.

True, but how often was Simpsons and Gary asked if something special would be put together? And when something was come up with, they get a rude bashing.

Yes, this is not a group buy brush limited to B&B, just something available only through Simpsons, regardles of what shaving forum you frequent... to be honest, I could see more of a reason for complaints when the Semouge boar was put together as it was being facilitated by a vendor, not directly by a manufacturer. (To be clear, I didn't see anything wrong with the Semouge group buy!!)

[Austin]

Gents, this thread is going around in circles. Nothing new is being added to this thread. Joel was kind enough to give you an explanation, something he rarely does with banned vendors or members. Let's move on from this redundancy.

[brianw]

Follow the threads... It's like watching the movie "The Sting"... build up a desire.... dangle a chance and watch the frenzy build, without a price or even a final product to show, see how much interest and then toss out a price.... and you have set the hook.

is there any other product in your daily life that you would blindly make a commitment to buy.....I think not

Please remember this is my very own humble opinion.

Joel has said, quite well, what his view point was.

I personally was a big Simpson's lover... I still am....just not for the current production.....

[Eric V]

Joel,

Thanks for the great work you do for B and B. I realize it is difficult and frustrating at times. I have come to see B and B as a very safe place to share ideas about anything shaving related. You have my full support.

Sincerely,

[Tha Baron]

Would you be specific about the "low scruples" you said your wife referred to? I have read every post in the Simpson related threads and haven't seen anything from Simpson remotely approaching that kind of behavior. I agree with your remark about drawing conclusions from "such fee facts" and I'd like to understand how the "low scruples" came about with no facts that I could locate.

Thanks.

--james

I'm not sure you're going to get your specifics on this, but I'll just say I am going to avoid sending anymore business their way because Mark is annoying. Simple as that. You keep focusing on "finding specifics" and reading all the threads. Give it up - it has been said there is a lot more going on through direct conversation. There is going to be no public trial or whatever you think is going to "right the wrongs of the world".

I personally think he stretched the rules here and knew he was going to get banned. He has been quoted elsewhere implying that he was putting up with B&B to sell brushes "at £150 a pop".

Hence you have his twitter account with all these new loyal followers and all the other boards he cozying up to. Childish if you ask me, downright idiotic for a business owner.

You can tell by his twitter postings that he is continuing to be a clown elsewhere in the world... I'd rather send my business elsewhere just because he is annoying.

Out

EDIT: For the sake of factual accuracy and clear understanding, I would like to note that the context in which Mark made the "at £150 a pop" comment.


That's how I felt at the time so I chose to leave. I'm actually enjoying being back there now. LOL at £150 a pop etc.

[brianw]

Certainly a number of people here have made up their minds and are in here to endlessly rehash the same feelings. If all you are reading are the threads from the past few weeks... then you are only seeing a small microchasm... go back 5 months.

I have now said all I have wanted to say on this... and bid you adieu

[Pjotr]

A few pages into the LE thread it was clear that Mark would be banned. The idea that this situation was brought about simply by his failure to adhere to certain rules and motivated by a mad need to promote his brushes, is, as others have only recently pointed out, an utter fairy tale. It simply is the easiest way to justify the steps that had to be taken for the sake of the site, regardless of what is the most honest course.

I am frankly amazed at the attitudes shown by many in this thread. Either I'm completely mad or only a fool would believe that Mark simply refused to follow the rules and attacked moderators unprovoked in PM's... and the world is full of fools. Without the background that has been left to our speculation, the pretty ridiculous and publicly unprovoked attack on Marks character and business practices by a mod, regardless of his meaning for it to be taken in the context of a member's opinion or not, on a forum Mark had paid to promote his business on going without even acknowledgment from the staff would justify almost any tone in his future contacts in my opinion. And the willingness of Joel to speculate towards Mark's greed and pick apart juicy quotes to demonstrate how "ungentlemanly" he is makes me frankly ashamed to be a witness to this whole fiasco.

Agree wholeheartedly. In my dealings with Mark I've found him to be really helpful and a first class operator. Many others have said the same. I thought what was thrown at him was condescending, patronising and just plain wrong.

[insomniac]

Guys, this is getting a bit heated and some of the comments border on personal attacks.

[drewmac]

Guys, this is getting a bit heated and some of the comments border on personal attacks.

"border" is quite the understatement...someone please close this thread...

[insomniac]

I also fear that the rifts between B&B members is likely to escalate until some kind of resolution is reached. I've said that before.


Given Mark's remarks on another shaving board about B&B, the operators, and even some of the posters here, I doubt that is going to happen.

[Go West Young Man]

I also fear that the rifts between B&B members is likely to escalate until some kind of resolution is reached. I've said that before.

--james

Come on..... this thread is going to beat the proverbial horse for a few more pages then either run out of steam or get closed because someone crossed the line. In two weeks you'll barely remember the whole kerfuffle, and in a year some newbie will bump the thread and we'll laugh about what a crazy time that was.

[joel]

1.) This thread is not going to be closed. I personally think closing threads is a poor way to "resolve" an issue - and should only be used in rare instances. I also think that's what makes B&B so unique - there's not another shaving forum (hell, there are few forums in general) that allow members to air their concerns, challenge owners/moderators, etc.
2.) I will be going through this thread right now, and MODERATING it. Remember, we have rules here - and if you don't follow them, just like what happened with Mark, you'll be asked to leave. You MUST act like a gentleman, and personal attacks are NEVER allowed.
3.) With the number of folks we have on the site - there are always going to be unhappy folks... always. No matter what we do, folks will have crazy theories, and think there's all sorts of ulterior motives. No matter what is said, or what evidence is provided - nothing will change these individuals opinions. I'm ok with this, it's a necessary evil and it's just something that's bound to occur. These individuals NEVER contact me, NEVER pm me, NEVER try to assuage their concerns and try to understand a situation 1:1 - they merely pop in, throw out a few curmudgeonly remarks, then step back and wait for a reaction. What's most interesting, is folks who chime in who are former moderators, who immediately "get it." Folks don't like to be moderated. I can't tell you how many times I (or other) moderators have made a perfectly gentlemanly request, and received an "F-U" response. It's impossible for some to imagine (primarily those who haven't worn a moderator hat) - but it happens... a lot.

If you have something intelligent/constructive to say on this matter, by all means do so. If you aim to engage in a circuitous game of childish attacks or soapboxing the same point over and over (you were heard you the first time) then we'll have a problem. A lot of leeway has been extended due to the nature of the situation, but enough is enough.

Proceed posting in this thread with caution - you've all been warned.

[Hex]

1.) This thread is not going to be closed. I personally think closing threads is a poor way to "resolve" an issue - and should only be used in rare instances. I also think that's what makes B&B so unique - there's not another shaving forum (hell, there are few forums in general) that allow members to air their concerns, challenge owners/moderators, etc.
2.) I will be going through this thread right now, and MODERATING it. Remember, we have rules here - and if you don't follow them, just like what happened with Mark, you'll be asked to leave. You MUST act like a gentleman, and personal attacks are NEVER allowed.
3.) With the number of folks we have on the site - there are always going to be unhappy folks... always. No matter what we do, folks will have crazy theories, and think there's all sorts of ulterior motives. No matter what is said, or what evidence is provided - nothing will change these individuals opinions. I'm ok with this, it's a necessary evil and it's just something that's bound to occur. These individuals NEVER contact me, NEVER pm me, NEVER try to assuage their concerns and try to understand a situation 1:1 - they merely pop in, throw out a few curmudgeonly remarks, then step back and wait for a reaction. What's most interesting, is folks who chime in who are former moderators, who immediately "get it." Folks don't like to be moderated. I can't tell you how many times I (or other) moderators have made a perfectly gentlemanly request, and received an "F-U" response. It's impossible for some to imagine (primarily those who haven't worn a moderator hat) - but it happens... a lot.

If you have something intelligent/constructive to say on this matter, by all means do so. If you aim to engage in a circuitous game of childish attacks or soapboxing the same point over and over (you were heard you the first time) then we'll have a problem. A lot of leeway has been extended due to the nature of the situation, but enough is enough.

Proceed posting in this thread with caution - you've all been warned.

And I admire that you are keeping this thread open Joel. Frankly, it is what I had come to expect from you. That is part of the reason I was so surprised at your heavy hand with Mark. Not the fact that you, and perhaps other Mods, felt that it needed censoring. There came a point when the thread probably began to be in violation of your policies. Though I submit that it was an innocent and natural progression of B&B members interest and queries re the GYLE brush.
And I think that Mr. Scruffy's remark was most likely made as if he was a commenter and not a mod. He has always seemed fair and a gentleman and I would hate to see him painted as an ogre over this.
Given all that, my objection was in how you went about doing it and what your comments were. And I am equally sure that someone will continue to preach the "It's his forum, he can do what he wants", mantra. I don't think that has been your style. You and the other mods had seemed fair in my dealings with you, that is until this thread.
I said it before and still maintain that had you stuck to why the thread had drifted into forbidden territory, (both B&B members & Mark bear responsibility for this), and left out the whole cost/benefit analysis, this might have worked out differently.

At the point Mr. Scruffy (a fine gentleman imho), made his remark, this might have been resolved amicably.
Sequence of events as I saw them:

1) B&B community suggests a GYLE brush
2) GY and Mark put heads together, come up with idea
3) GY & Mark begin discussions at B&B
4) B&B community reacts positively with many questions & comments
5) Mark responds to posts
--------Thread drifts into violation------------------
6) Mr Scruffy makes remark
7) Fireworks begin

At step 6, you or a mod could have stepped in, explained why the thread was in violation (leave out the $$$) and perhaps start another thread about the forthcoming GYLE. Though as I think about it, there really might not be a vehicle within the forums for vendors to begin promoting design ideas.
Though the Semogue LEs come immediately to mind and my remembrances are probably not clear enough to recall if there is an exact (or close) similarity to the GYLE.

Additionally, during the fireworks, there were probably heated PMs being fired back and forth. I didn't read them and have no interest in doing that.
Cooler heads could have prevailed and derailed the war.

[Loner16]

Hopefully, this will be my last comment in this thread..

People seem to believe that the Constitutional Rights we enjoy in this country, which incidentally erode a bit more every year, apply equally to private message boards such as this one. They do not! Every poster is here, and this applies to all these forums, at the owner's suffrance. In other words, anyone can be gone for any reason at any time. Some folks can operate within those confines, some believe that they are the forum, and so they cannot. Fortunately or unfortunately, there are some rude awakenings.
This post is not to make judgements on who is right, and who is wrong on this issue. For one thing, it doesn't matter to me that much, and for another, the facts of any case are always colored by perception... Fact are often quite elusive.

I will say this. I consider it poor form for a principal in a large, well respected company to take to the internet with insults toward anyone, and it lessens the esteem and respect that people hold for them and the company they represent. But, maybe acting in an immature manner on a Twitter account, or finding sympathetic ears on other forums is part of the "Brave New World" of Marketing. No matter, I still consider it a bit unseemly and degrading.

As far as the highly touted "gentlemanly behavior" is concerned... It's a nice ideal for a forum to aspire to, but it's up to the members themselves to live up to that lofty ideal, and I see many instances, even by some longtime and well respected members, of that ideal being a fantasy. I'm not singling out B&B for that criticism. All these stops on the internet are quite similar, from rough and tumble chainsaw boards, to the bastions of linen & lace...

We're all the same... We suffer the same triumphs and failings as everyone else... All we can do is learn from our mistakes, and MOVE ON...

[Tha Baron]

Additionally, during the fireworks, there were probably heated PMs being fired back and forth. I didn't read them and have no interest in doing that.
Cooler heads could have prevailed and derailed the war.

Not trying to disregard your whole post, but I think a lot of people are seeing this as a B&B action that was taken in response to Mark's single string of posts and PMs. The way I see it and understand it is that the actions taken by the mod team were in response to behavior that has been displayed for several months now.

I've stated in another thread that I always felt odd about their presence and behavior here on B&B as far back as December. I have received quite a few PMs from members saying that was exactly how they felt.

[Bestarrkin]

Chain of events that I had been witnessed.

1) In last November/December we had discussed about irregularities about knots of Simpson brushes. Simpson had signed up to B&B after some time they left B&B without an explanation.
2) In December GY signed up to B&B which he talked about us about history of Simpson and informed us.
3) After some time GY opened a thread which is about "if I made a brush who is with me?" Then he said that he couldn't make that brush.
4) A poll about vintage handle shapes was opened by GY again. We used our votes and the brush was selected.
5) From this point Simpson signed up again.

Well, I have words for both parties. First of all I don't like this chain of events. Either there is a cunning plan or a very big coincidence which I just informed the events without any thoughts or feelings of mine. But in the end I felt "used".

About mod's comment that one makes no sense to me. Dividing a LE party to vendors causes just speculation and variable prices which was happened before in 90th Anniversary brush of Simpson. I think that way is not good for us.

For a side note, talking about other brush makers business practices and criticize them without evidence and purposely spreading words for creating an "inconvenient truth" image is ungentlemanly at all. Unfortunately, that moral hints their business practices. Thank you.

[joel]

Not trying to disregard your whole post, but I think a lot of people are seeing this as a B&B action that was taken in response to Mark's single string of posts and PMs. The way I see it and understand it is that the actions taken by the mod team were in response to behavior that has been displayed for several months now.

I've stated in another thread that I always felt odd about their presence and behavior here on B&B as far back as December. I have received quite a few PMs from members saying that was exactly how they felt.

This is an ESSENTIAL point to re-enforce. What's public is the "final" event which ultimately led to the conclusion of this issue, but we had been dealing with combative and elusive behavior for about 5 months which precipitated this unfortunate conclusion - starting with the repeated promotion/marketing of product in the wrong forums (non-vendor forum), and the resistance to become a vendor and work within the confines of the vendor rules/forum.

Does it justify all of the actions on our end? No, we're not perfect - but think about it logically.... Simpson is MY favorite brush manufacturer (pre-vulfix I have no first hand experience with simfix). It's well documented in hundreds of my posts. We've done a charity shaving brush - which Mr. Scruffy helped coordinate with Simpson, the Eagle. Why would a team of 20 fellas (mods) all have a bone to pick with them without due cause? What does it get us, other than a tremendous head ache (case in point this thread)? Every action, causes a reaction. Ignore the mods, respond in a snippy/combative fashion, refuse to comply/follow the rules, and while it may not be immediate - there will eventually be a reaction. We strive to keep that reaction as gentlemanly as possible, but in the face of continued derisive behavior, sometimes even we go a little too far. The longer a situation plays out (in this instance 5 months) the greater the tension, but so much leeway was given due to the company/brand as it was clear a subsequent fall-out was sure to come from a parting of ways.

I'll be the first to admit, one public mod comment made didn't help things. I'll be the first to admit, the entire bit on pricing came out the wrong way and had I thought about it for a day, or re-read the post before hitting "submit reply" I likely would have removed it, or heavily edited it. The intent on that was not to criticize profit or pricing structures. The intent was to respond to the multiple claims that they stood to make very little money on this project, and that it was more of a "favor" to the forum. It was also intended to help illustrate the monetary VALUE and the respective ROI a vendor like Simpson's receives from being a vendor here on B&B - which as a result, should further compel them to operate within the confines of our rules, in order to continue to reap the benefits. It alsonwas intended to help illustrate the issues present in over using, abusing or not following the vendor guidelines, especially when it takes away from smaller vendors who are following the guidelines. There's no getting around it - it's unfair to them.

No one wins on this one. Let's just cut our losses, agree it was an unfortunate turn of events, and move on and continue having fun...

[craig87c]

That post pretty much sums everything up for me. I'll continue to read this thread, but that's all I NEED to hear about the situation.

Honestly, it isn't too big of a deal for me since Simpsons is now only banned from having an account; they'll still get great press for their brushes here (with good reason). If Simpsons had become a filtered vendor, then there'd really be a problem.

[mattymatt]

This is an ESSENTIAL point to re-enforce. What's public is the "final" event which ultimately led to the conclusion of this issue, but we had been dealing with combative and elusive behavior for about 5 months which precipitated this unfortunate conclusion - starting with the repeated promotion/marketing of product in the wrong forums (non-vendor forum), and the resistance to become a vendor and work within the confines of the vendor rules/forum.

Does it justify all of the actions on our end? No, we're not perfect - but think about it logically.... Simpson is MY favorite brush manufacturer (pre-vulfix I have no first hand experience with simfix). It's well documented in hundreds of my posts. We've done a charity shaving brush - which Mr. Scruffy helped coordinate with Simpson, the Eagle. Why would a team of 20 fellas (mods) all have a bone to pick with them without due cause? What does it get us, other than a tremendous head ache (case in point this thread)? Every action, causes a reaction. Ignore the mods, respond in a snippy/combative fashion, refuse to comply/follow the rules, and while it may not be immediate - there will eventually be a reaction. We strive to keep that reaction as gentlemanly as possible, but in the face of continued derisive behavior, sometimes even we go a little too far. The longer a situation plays out (in this instance 5 months) the greater the tension, but so much leeway was given due to the company/brand as it was clear a subsequent fall-out was sure to come from a parting of ways.

I'll be the first to admit, one public mod comment made didn't help things. I'll be the first to admit, the entire bit on pricing came out the wrong way and had I thought about it for a day, or re-read the post before hitting "submit reply" I likely would have removed it, or heavily edited it. The intent on that was not to criticize profit or pricing structures. The intent was to respond to the multiple claims that they stood to make very little money on this project, and that it was more of a "favor" to the forum. It was also intended to help illustrate the monetary VALUE and the respective ROI a vendor like Simpson's receives from being a vendor here on B&B - which as a result, should further compel them to operate within the confines of our rules, in order to continue to reap the benefits. It alsonwas intended to help illustrate the issues present in over using, abusing or not following the vendor guidelines, especially when it takes away from smaller vendors who are following the guidelines. There's no getting around it - it's unfair to them.

No one wins on this one. Let's just cut our losses, agree it was an unfortunate turn of events, and move on and continue having fun...

This pretty much ends this discussion as far as I am concerned. I think we should just move on and forget about this unfortunate episode.

[bbarton713]

No one wins on this one. Let's just cut our losses, agree it was an unfortunate turn of events, and move on and continue having fun...

This is the best point and my feelings about the matter in a nutshell. If it causes too much heartburn for someone they are certainly free to move on and post elsewhere. While Joel and company can ban someone for what they consider just cause they can't make you stay here as a member against your will.

I don't like the unfortunate turn of events. However, B&B is more to me than this event and is still an organization that I'm happy to support with contributions, posts, and by taking part in the philanthropic endeavors.

Likewise, I continue to support Simpson and Mark because I love the brushes and have received excellent customer service from them.

I don't see how this has to be an all or nothing scenario so I'm not going to make it one for me.

Thanks, Joel, for your detailed explanations and willingness to admit that things weren't handled perfectly. It reminds me of a quote, "Temper gets you into trouble, pride keeps you there." Thanks for not being too proud to admit when you were wrong. :thumbup::thumbup:

[MajorBurnz]

.......

No one wins on this one. Let's just cut our losses, agree it was an unfortunate turn of events, and move on and continue having fun...

That's certainly what I'm going to do!! :thumbup:

Cheers, everyone!! Let's see what else I can blow my money on. I think I need a horsehair brush now, or was it a vintage Butterscotch Simpsons? :lol::lol:

[insomniac]

That's certainly what I'm going to do!! :thumbup:

Cheers, everyone!! Let's see what else I can blow my money on. I think I need a horsehair brush now, or was it a vintage Butterscotch Simpsons? :lol::lol:

Get both! :thumbup:


PS: I really hope that nobody leaves B&B because of this. Regardless of your feelings about how this was handled, you are still welcome and valued here.

[jazzman]

As a member who has been here a while, and who has had a few disagreements with mods and others (not regarding vendors), I have a few words of advice: Joel and the mods do what they do with the best intentions, and they put more time into it than we should reasonably expect. Humans sometimes disagree with each other. But they've kept this community a pleasant place to be for several years. They deserve nothing but thanks.

[nole1]

couldn't agree more with Joel's last post. Mistakes made by all concerned. I'd like to think a reconciliation or common ground can be found.



... I'm not the type to hold a grudge though. It's possible I was a bit trigger happy myself.

The above are Mark's last two posts on twitter. If he, of all people, is moving on. Can the rest of us who were not originally involved do the same, please?

[DEF]

He has been quoted elsewhere implying that he was putting up with B&B to sell brushes "at £150 a pop".

For the sake of factual accuracy and clear understanding, I would like to note that the "£150 a pop" wording was mine and not Mark's. Readers without the full background might take Baron's post as attributing that quote to Mark, which would put him in a more cynical light than I believe is fair in this case.

EDIT: The snippet that Baron has now added to his original post does nothing to clarify the facts. Mark was "LOL'ing" at my original quip regarding "£150 a pop," I think because he knew I had just zinged him a bit. Anyone reading the full thread "over there" can see how the conversation went. (I doubt that "150 a pop" is idiomatic British English, besides.) This probably looks like a minor quibble, but I cringe to see my words attributed as a quote to another person in a way that does a disservice to everyone.

[JPDyson]

I have no first hand experience with simfix

Don't you?

(around the 2:30 mark)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4W44WFTfqzA

[Hodari D.]

don't you?

(around the 2:30 mark)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4w44wftfqza

BUSTED! hahaha

[bbarton713]

Don't you?

(around the 2:30 mark)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4W44WFTfqzA

Hey, Joel! You're a pretty good-looking gent for simfix user.

I did not have lather with that brush!


:lol::thumbup::lol:

[CaptainK]

Don't you?

BUSTED! hahaha
Forgive me if I'm being acluistic, but could that not be a pre-Vulfix brush?

[bbarton713]

Forgive me if I'm being acluistic, but could that not be a pre-Vulfix brush?

You don't know that you don't know so you can't possibly be acluistic. :thumbup:

[psram]

Finally, reason and real community flowing back into this thread :thumbup:

I cannot access that video link. Recently deleted?.

[mike]

Forgive me if I'm being acluistic, but could that not be a pre-Vulfix brush?

Not if it's called a simfix, and not with the bulb shape.

[JPDyson]

Nah, he says it's a Simfix in the video (and his current favorite - I've been eyeing one for a while, maybe a size 2, but they're spendy).

[mike]

Finally, reason and real community flowing back into this thread :thumbup:

I cannot access that video link. Recently deleted?.

Yes, it has been deleted, which is too bad because it was very informative. I must admit however that it was funny hearing joel refer to simfix as his favorite brush.

[bbarton713]

Yes, it has been deleted, which is too bad because it was very informative. I must admit however that it was funny hearing joel refer to simfix as his favorite brush.

I just accessed the video again so it hasn't been deleted. :biggrin1:

[Obsessed]

Yes, it has been deleted, which is too bad because it was very informative. I must admit however that it was funny hearing joel refer to simfix as his favorite brush.

I just clicked on the link. The video is still there.

This is really getting ridiculous. Unless someone just got a "B&B and Simpson's, together forever!" tattoo two weeks ago, I'm not sure this merits getting this worked up about.

[mike]

I just clicked on the link. The video is still there.

This is really getting ridiculous. Unless someone just got a "B&B and Simpson's, together forever!" tattoo two weeks ago, I'm not sure this merits getting this worked up about.

yep, it's there.

[bbarton713]

I just clicked on the link. The video is still there.

This is really getting ridiculous. Unless someone just got a "B&B and Simpson's, together forever!" tattoo two weeks ago, I'm not sure this merits getting this worked up about.

Ummmm...we were just having fun like ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!

Joel and Mark have a man-date at Miami Inc. to get that tattoo next week but that was a closely guarded secret. :lol::lol::lol:

[Austin]

:lol::lol::lol:

[Mr. Imperial]

So, I've finally sorted my way through this whole thread.

Dear Mods:

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/internet-high-five.jpg

[nEver-Ready]

Didn't picture Joel as such a young whipper snapper. Feel even more like a geezer now. If I ever see that Ouch is really not an old curmudgeon as I picture him, it's really going to mess up my world view :lol:

[Austin]

Didn't picture Joel as such a young whipper snapper. Feel even more like a geezer now. If I ever see that Ouch is really not an old curmudgeon as I picture him, it's really going to mess up my world view :lol:

Here's a recent picture of ouch taken at his last picture shoot.

[nEver-Ready]

Here's a recent picture of ouch taken at his last picture shoot.

Nervously chewing my pencil and babbling incoherent mono syllables as I type. Looks like he needs a good spanking :lol:

[Austin]

:lol::lol::lol:

Unfortunately, I'm the oldest mod.

[craig87c]

I seem to remember that this was the photo posted of part of the mod team:

http://www.portlandmercury.com/images/blogimages/2011/01/06/1294341258-men-in-belted-sweaters-3643-1294094830-4.jpg

PS: Yes, this image was burned into my brains, and I'll never be able to forget it thanks to B&B.

[nEver-Ready]

:lol::lol::lol:

Unfortunately, I'm the oldest mod.

Thaaats more like it!

This approximates my mental image of Ouch. Please don't disabuse me...

164319

[psram]

Yes, it has been deleted, which is too bad because it was very informative.
I can access it if I am signed into youtube.

[bbarton713]

:lol::lol::lol:

Unfortunately, I'm the oldest mod.

That makes me feel younger. :thumbup1:

[Intrigued]

...........No one wins on this one. Let's just cut our losses, agree it was an unfortunate turn of events, and move on and continue having fun...

:thumbup1: This post helped a lot to clear the air.





.............I don't like the unfortunate turn of events. However, B&B is more to me than this event and is still an organization that I'm happy to support with contributions, posts, and by taking part in the philanthropic endeavors.

Likewise, I continue to support Simpson and Mark because I love the brushes and have received excellent customer service from them.

I don't see how this has to be an all or nothing scenario so I'm not going to make it one for me.

Thanks, Joel, for your detailed explanations and willingness to admit that things weren't handled perfectly. It reminds me of a quote, "Temper gets you into trouble, pride keeps you there." Thanks for not being too proud to admit when you were wrong. :thumbup::thumbup:

This pretty much sums up how I feel. Thanks Bob
Today I feel like we finally chased the 800 pound gorilla out of the room. :001_smile


.... Simpson is MY favorite brush manufacturer (pre-vulfix I have no first hand experience with simfix).


Don't you?

(around the 2:30 mark)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4W44WFTfqzA

:lol::lol::lol:


Forgive me if I'm being acluistic, but could that not be a pre-Vulfix brush?


Nah, he says it's a Simfix in the video (and his current favorite - I've been eyeing one for a while, maybe a size 2, but they're spendy).


Ummmm...we were just having fun like ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!

Joel and Mark have a man-date at Miami Inc. to get that tattoo next week but that was a closely guarded secret. :lol::lol::lol:


:lol::lol::lol:

A big +1 Because I never thought that I'd find myself laughing when I read this thread. :thumbup:

[craig87c]

Joel's silence on this incredibly important issue is what I find truly nefarious :001_tt2:

[brianw]

The real pictures

Ouch....
164327

Austin
164328

[joel]

Don't you?

(around the 2:30 mark)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4W44WFTfqzA

You're right - but only "kinda." While it was manufactured under Vulfix ownership, it was shortly after the transition, and it was a limited brush of 2 band hair stocked by West Coast Shaving - from previous Simpson stock prior to the cquisition. So while yes, it technically is a "Simfix" - I don't consider it first hand experience as it is not the current hair being used on their brushes - so I can only evaluate the handle manufactured by Vulfix, not the knot.

That video is almost 1.5 years old - and while I don't use it as much as I did then i'm stuck on my T2 and my Wee Scott. As I said - Simpson's is my favorite brush manufacturer.

[verdict]

Wow, shaving is serious business.

So what does this mean anyway? Will the word "Simpsons" be filtered out? Are we not to discuss Simpsons products ever again?

[Austin]

Wow, shaving is serious business.

So what does this mean anyway? Will the word "Simpsons" be filtered out? Are we not to discuss Simpsons products ever again?

Discuss Simpsons all you want.

[rajun50]

Wow, shaving is serious business.

So what does this mean anyway? Will the word "Simpsons" be filtered out? Are we not to discuss Simpsons products ever again?

It just means that Simpson is no longer able to post on B&B. We can talk about them all we want. Nothing else has changed, AFAIK.

[OldSaw]

For the sake of factual accuracy and clear understanding, I would like to note that the "£150 a pop" wording was mine and not Mark's. Readers without the full background might take Baron's post as attributing that quote to Mark, which would put him in a more cynical light than I believe is fair in this case.

EDIT: The snippet that Baron has now added to his original post does nothing to clarify the facts. Mark was "LOL'ing" at my original quip regarding "£150 a pop," I think because he knew I had just zinged him a bit. Anyone reading the full thread "over there" can see how the conversation went. (I doubt that "150 a pop" is idiomatic British English, besides.) This probably looks like a minor quibble, but I cringe to see my words attributed as a quote to another person in a way that does a disservice to everyone.

Hey Doug, thanks for clarifying that. I thought it went more like that but wasn't sure and wasn't going to take the time to go and look at all the posts on two different forums.

I have also been curiously watching on both forums and biting my tongue at times. It certainly has been an interesting turn of events. The ruffled feathers on SMF seemed to have everyone worked up pretty good with Mark seemingly having SMF on full ignore and then all of a sudden he switched gears and moved everything over there right about the time he was shut down here. It almost seemed (to me anyway) as though he felt that once he made nice on SMF he didn't have to care about it over here anymore.

The whole thing has soured my taste for the brush. I will keep up with the thread on SMF and will make my decision when all is revealed, but the steam is dwindling.

[mike]

.. It almost seemed (to me anyway) as though he felt that once he made nice on SMF he didn't have to care about it over here anymore.

..

What choice did he have?

[flycbyrd]

Thank you for the information. Thank you for everything you and the rest of the mods do. I really appreciate the dedication you guys give to the site to make it an enjoyable place for use members to better educate each other and just shoot crap about shaving all day. I myself unknowingly have stepped out of line before and it was quickly brought to my attention by a mod in the most polite gentlemanly way possible and the issue was solved. That is what the mod team is made of just a bunch of ordinary gentleman who have a passion about shaving and do an extraordinary job keeping the site in top notch. Every decision they have ever made i have stood behind and will continue to.

[OldSaw]

What choice did he have?

Play nice on both playgrounds. Could have been a much nicer project.

Also, I'm not talking about moving the project over to SMF because he had no choice. It just seemed to me that he was making amends over there shortly before things fell apart here, not after. Obviously, after the ban on here he had little choice but to pursue the project on other forums.

I have nothing against any other forums and am a member on several.