Censorship + Moderation = Disservice

[shanagarry]

For some time I have tried to understand the primary purpose of this forum - which was heightened last week when I saw censorship applied in a way that benefits the wrong-doer and not the victim.

Is it the Forum's purpose to:

* Inform?
* Educate?
* Advise?
* Warn?

I am not complaining about the forum as I have had the benefit of a considerable amount of quality advice and feedback in the years I have been a subscriber. I am referring in the main to the censorship of the Mazza shenanigans but am not wishing to reopen that debate - more, understand the logic that suppresses it and any other criminal activity that impacts on the lives of the property owning community in Carvoeiro.

Rightly or wrongly I believe this forum to be a public service - something it does very well - in the main. It is unfortunate then when some subscribers hide behind its respectable and well meaning objectives to defraud those seeking guidance in matters that are potentially life-changing. As previously stated, I am not writing this to reopen the Mazza debate - I am appealing to those who manage this site to find a way that goes beyond just keeping a 'sticky' label on a matter of major importance. The current 'sticky' process does not in my opinion permanently do what it is intended to do. I view it like a health warning on a packet of cigarettes - after a while it becomes a fixture - we all know why it's there but nobody reads it. That can be evidenced by the number of questions asked by some newer subscribers about matters/issues that have been raised time and again and who clearly do not take the time to scroll back.

Returning to the censorship issue. There is a proven track record of spoling tactics by those of a criminal mentality to cause a topic to be deleted by creating a slanging match that adds nothing of value to any intelligent debate - especially where there are unshakeable facts to support the matter under discussion. To my way of thinking this is nothing short of a disservice, bordering on neglect of duty, even recklessness. I am of the opinion that the Moderator(s) take the easy option and delete the topic rather than moderate to omit the insults and threats. Accepting that moderation is not an easy task - I feel very strongly at the ease at which these serious matters are being suppressed - something that is not to the benefit of the Carvoeiro property owning community. I further accept that the laws of Libel have to be born in mind when moderating sensitive matters - but believe that moderators are appointed on the basis of their knowledge of those laws. That being the case - it makes the publication of matters deemed to be libellous very straightforward - provide unshakeable facts to support any allegation - if they're not there or provided - delete the residue (including the insults etc).

I'm also aware that those who moderate do so on a voluntary and unpaid basis and may take a totally different view to their role than the one I have outlined - I sincerely hope not.

To conclude - can I suggest either a new field to highlight apparent 'scams' or a modification to the FAQ section - by giving it a name that is a lot more attention grabbing, e.g.STOP - Prevention is better then Cure or something a lot stronger. It is abundantly clear that there is a criminal 'minority' still at work preying on the uninitiated/naive property owner and if this forum is a Port-of-Call before they take a leap of faith - there is a duty of care to be considered and acted upon

[mac]

Hear, hear shanagarry. I really second this. I read the post in question and as MC says, get the slanging match going and along come the moderators and close the topic. This is a disservice to new property owners trying to find out by recommendation and word of mouth who they can trust to do any work for them, especially when they don't live there permanently.

These 'trolls' and 'spoilers' get away with it.

[fmm]

I agree.

Last week I received a charming email from the lady who had purported to be looking for a Mazza reference. She said she was going to sue me. Sadly, this silly person told me that her solicitor was in Portugal and "knew" everyone. As she told me she lived in the UK, I was a little surprised not to be threatened with an English solicitor. Just proved that the original request for information was fake. After all, if she has a solicitor who knows everyone, and she herself knows every single potential property agent personally, then why on earth was she asking for my advice?

Delete the silly replies - we all know who they are - and leave the meat. Let people make educated decisions

[rossi]

I also agree FMM, but I am not sure in your message whats true and whats NOT. you are a joke.................


I have a email from your current managers to confirm that the following is also lies.

Oh - and the company that I now use and she had heard bad reports about - strangely Mazza was a customer of theirs once and never paid them ....

also a reference from you.

Mazza has been looking after my property since August last year and I am extremely happy with her service and intend to keep her for as long as she wants to work for me. She comes in weekly to do general cleaning, clearing up after guests and making sure everything is OK. She also prepares the apartment for visitors and deals with all the laundry. Twice we have had a flooded roof terrace and each time she has cleared up the mess and reported back to me quickly.

I would definitely recommend her services and I am sure that you will be very pleased with her work.

Hope this is of assistance.

Kind regards

Mandy Hughes

[steve]

The last post merely serves to perfectly illustrate the point that Shanagarry makes.

[rossi]

yes it does, but who is telling the truth............and also who is hiding behind the name Shanagarry maybe a yet another dishonest person.

[Michael Crane]

I also agree FMM, but I am not sure in your message whats true and whats NOT. you are a joke.................


I have a email from your current managers to confirm that the following is also lies.

Oh - and the company that I now use and she had heard bad reports about - strangely Mazza was a customer of theirs once and never paid them ....

also a reference from you.

Mazza has been looking after my property since August last year and I am extremely happy with her service and intend to keep her for as long as she wants to work for me. She comes in weekly to do general cleaning, clearing up after guests and making sure everything is OK. She also prepares the apartment for visitors and deals with all the laundry. Twice we have had a flooded roof terrace and each time she has cleared up the mess and reported back to me quickly.

I would definitely recommend her services and I am sure that you will be very pleased with her work.

Hope this is of assistance.

Kind regards

Mandy Hughes

Are you saying this (in red) is lies?

Is this (in blue) a private letter/email? When was it dated? I have searched this forum but cannot find it attributed to FMM.

[Michael Crane]

Locking a post is a cop-out for Mods. They don't have to delete it, just wait for it to drop off the front page and slowly sink into oblivion. Thereafter, any important or valuable information contained therein is 'lost'.

[steve]

You are playing into Rossi's hands. Ignore him/her.

[rossi]

Mr Crane the following is on the forum for all to see.



Highly recommend the services offered by Mazza!by fmm
Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:42 pm

Forum: Property owners forum / Portugal living.
Topic: Looking for check In Check out Service & Cleaning
Replies: 12
Views: 1049 Jump to post
Personally, it is not the cleaning that bothers me when my place is not lived in, but checking that everything is OK. Having it cleaned and prepared for visits is just a bonus!

I know that I would worry if I didn't have Mazza coming in once a week to check that things are all OK.by fmm
Fri May 02, 2008 6:18 pm

Forum: Property owners forum / Portugal living.
Topic: Checking property on behalf of absent owners
Replies: 8
Views: 1331

[Sharen Crane]

Shanagarry I completely agree with you! Unfortunately, however, it would appear that the same fate is due to descend upon this thread as has many others in the past!

Having a locked, sticky, section in one of the forums (you suggest FAQ) highlighting crooked practices, business that give a less than perfect service (all backed up with evidence of wrong doings etc) is a brilliant idea. It should be called Caveat emptor or some such!

[Michael Crane]

That wasn't the post you quoted.

[Michael Crane]

....Having a locked, sticky, section in one of the forums (you suggest FAQ) highlighting crooked practices, business that give a less than perfect service (all backed up with evidence of wrong doings etc) is a brilliant idea. It should be called Caveat emptor or some such!

I could quite easily open such a topic in FAQ - but not without Steen's permission.

[fmm]

Actually Rossi's post is excellent as it describes the service I received from Mazza in 2008 as opposed to the service I received in 2010. Two quite different things.

Knowing the propensity for my staircase to flood, I was more than a little disappointed that during two weeks of appalling weather earlier in 2010, Mazza did not turn up once to check my place, despite assuring me that all was well. I knew it was fine as I was in the apartment at the time. The locks had been changed although I had not advised her of this, so I know she did not visit whilst I was there. That, as far as I was concerned, was unforgiveable. I had placed my trust - and in fact paid her - to carry out checks - and these were not done.

[mac]

Funny how Mandy Hughes only replies to posts regarding this Mazza.