Here at the Institute we have tried to keep the forums focused on the science and not the individual retail products, because discussions about different products/companies invariably devolve into hissy fits and flame wars. We have had our share.
Lately, I have not been able to monitor this as much as I like. More and more retail product discussions are showing up and this is not a good thing (by the way, Anthony has been around for a long time and for most of that time has been very cooperative with not mentioning his company name and following the admittedly somewhat nebulous rules).
What we need is a different set-up that will make it easier for the Navigators to keep the science first and the retail flame wars in the background. One of our former sponsors suggested having a forum area (not on the active topics list) where advertising sponsors could answer questions/concerns about their products and interact with the Imminst community. All other discussions that did not revolve around the science of supplements or longevity treatments would be deleted.
Navigators/concerned members, please comment (again...I know this topic has come up before).
I noticed Sardi is claiming ImmInst is a front for RG (http://www.longevine...sp?story=E-mail Regarding Competition Comparisons). It looks mostly like a rant and as if Sardi has gone off the deep end, but it may not be a bad idea to have some sort of forum for the various supplement providers where they could discuss their products. I'd have ImmInst send out official invites to a number of the major supplement companies, asking them to participate. I wouldn't necessarily limit it to sponsors, because I think the community as a whole would like to hear from non-sponsors too and it'd help undercut any accusation of bias from ImmInst.
Just my two cents.
I think having company folks on forums is the future of this business... Biotivia has recently made some changes, and is buying a forum outright from another "health related" forum, along with forum spokespersons that seem to push the product as part of the marketing. Not a bad arrangement really.
I believe visiting these forums, participating, and allowing folks access to myself is beneficial. I see it as a new method of being visible to folks, and developing a history of posts that can be searched, read, and saved for informational purposes. It allows folks to ask questions, and have them answered by companies. If there is a method to do this without much fighting I am all for it.
Others call it schlepping when I answer questions, I call it being available to the public. Besides, every time we are mentioned on our competitors websites, we then get the opportunity to answer questions from people who never knew we existed. I simply can't be angry at any competitors, because in the end all of our customers get a product we all believe in... which of course is resveratrol. We have different opinions about amount, absorption, pricing, and marketing methods... but in the end our customers benefit regardless of who they get resveratrol from. Everybody wins, and I think thats the really the goal to aim for.
It's interesting that Crep asked this question regarding retail discussions, when he is the same person initiating the "RevGen vs Longevin" post. I have to say that when I saw that "RevGen vs Longevin" thread, I was thinking... "this is going to get messy again...". The post pushes for a comparison which will create conflict of sorts, as it asks folks to state who is better. I think it's really a post to try to bait me into saying something awful, and because of Creps history of posts that certainly lean a certain way, it certainly continues to feels that way to me.
Again, I think rules are necessary if forums are opened for particular competitors to be open to the public, otherwise fights are likely to break out. Initially in 2007 I was trying to stay fair when we were in discussions with another competitor. Eventually the other competitor got other anonymous logins to appear as multiple people trying to argue with me. Not very fair, but It eventually got out and folks realized what was happening which made the competitor appear bad (at least in my opinion).
I believe anonymity is key for folks asking questions, but not for company folks regardless of who they represent. IP addresses for company folks maybe a requirement so navigators can kill these kind of issues.
I think there are alot of other issues, but for now I believe I will continue to come by here for questions...
A
Edited by Anthony_Loera, 21 December 2008 - 04:25 AM.