Skip to main content

Closed535 replies

Wine Spectator Has Been Scammed

S seaquamMember
quote:
Originally posted by Walla2WineWoman:
quote:
Originally posted by Seaquam:
...I can't believe that I'm going to post to this almost-absurd thread...
I have no horse in this race...
...all that crap has muddied the information so much...
And that is my 2¢ worth.


Yes, and it's only worth 2¢. But for someone who has no horse in this race, you seemed to manage to get at least eight paragraphs full of crap that has added to this muddied almost-absurb thread that you speak of. Cheers!


Hey, I never pretended that what I wrote was any better than anything else posted to this thread.

Nor did I claim to write any "facts."

And that's a fact.
V vt2itMember
Ahh, my faith in humanity has been restored. You see I have always felt that the majority of the world’s population is made up of complete morons. It is so nice to have my view confirmed every now and then. I can’t begin to describe my joy in seeing so many people publicly humiliate themselves with their posts here. A special “densest of the dense award” should go to Machine. Way to join in with an attack based upon a completely erroneous view, and then keep repeating it. And thank you to all those with one post which showed all anyone needed to know about your ability to reason. Again, thank you all that have helped to once again make me realize how lucky I was to be born with a fully functioning brain.
W walla2winewomanMember
quote:
Originally posted by Seaquam:
Hey, I never pretended that what I wrote was any better than anything else posted to this thread.

Nor did I claim to write any "facts."

And that's a fact.


And I never "pretended" that what I wrote was any better... You may not have claimed to write any "facts" but you are basing your opinions on the facts that you know of at this time. I didn't do anything different, but with one exception - -

The difference? I reported my opinions and the facts that I have at this time on my blog and you chose to post yours on this forum.
Y yhnMember
quote:
Originally posted by azprwb:
yhn

I am of the impression that one cannot trace that information if one is not the blog owner/admin with access to the identifying info of each poster (ip, whois, etc)


You are responding to: "Can't the WS web guru trace these people to see if any are him and if any are posting under multiple names?"
G gigondassMember
quote:
Originally posted by inciter:
I have read each reply, and made note and completed a database d/l to prove that somthing is off with all these replies.

The time to post of each message it to unrealistic, It seems someone not a true members posted all these replies, A simple look at the times posted will give a clear views as to the ligitimate reason. Just to make it look like members are mad... Interesting, I will keep this thread and post times for future use.

PS: Next time Wait a bit longer till you post your next fake reply.. Your BUSTED again.. Smile
You seem to be not only wrong but fairly illiterate. Kind of common with the new drive-by hack posters.

Unlike you, many of us are part of this community. The people telling you to sod off are probably all genuine "members" of this forum. We just have lots of time on our hands....
V vt2itMember
I’m curious. What exactly are the qualifications needed to have a blog? I always assumed it was access to a computer and a couple of acquaintances that will claim to care about the drivel you write. Are there anything more than those? No I don’t think so. That being so nobody cares if any blogger is insulted as you are completely without worth. As cdr's sig used to say blogs are free and worth the price.
W walla2winewomanMember
quote:
Originally posted by VT2IT:
I’m curious. What exactly are the qualifications needed to have a blog? I always assumed it was access to a computer and a couple of acquaintances that will claim to care about the drivel you write. Are there anything more than those? No I don’t think so. That being so nobody cares if any blogger is insulted as you are completely without worth. As cdr's sig used to say blogs are free and worth the price.


And the difference between a blogger's so-called drivel and your drivel is that the majority of the bloggers, especially wine bloggers, do not hide behind convenient anonymity such as yourself. Sure, it's easy for you to spout off such "drivel" because you are an anonymous coward that won't take responsibility for your words.

So therefore, I think your comments are basically worthless. If you don't like what I have posted regarding your poltroon anonymity, at least you are welcome to send me an email, which you will find available on my blog if you want to discuss the topic of "blogger drivel" any further. That is certainly more integrity than you have given to this discussion.
pinotlvrpinotlvrMember
Like Seaquam, I can't believe this has turned into what it has. Frankly, it appear these blogger "post and run" types are only trying to incite to enhance their "linking" ability. I always find bloggers a great source of humor. Not really as an authoritarian source, but one that tries (like in this case) to find ways to throw stones and hold everybody else to a much higher standard than they hold themselves.

Hell, no different than the typical politician...they are good at playing the blame game while not understanding their own inadequacies.

I used to thing that the National Enquirer was the biggest source of gossip...then they actually broke some "real" stories...now bloggers have taken gossip and innuendo to a new level.

For me, bloggers are "stupid" until proved otherwise...cause since we aren't in judicial system, I don't need to think otherwise.
W 1winedudeMember
quote:
Originally posted by Maverick:
1WineDude -

YES. You're looking for "15 minutes of fame". You're getting a lot more than 15 minutes, but it's what you want. I'm not anonymous. My name is Samuel Maverick, just like the cowboy of TV/movie fame. I don't have a blog though. YES, I told you politely to STFU. Stop This Flagrant Un-civility. How is that any different from you calling me a troll? Also, if you're "not going to respond to me directly", then why do you keep responding to me directly? I guess this is "impacting you in the slightest" just a bit. YES. Your posts scream of entitlement with your responses to the editors, your non-acceptance of their answers, and your general attitude. Plus your claim for the need of "one on one discussion" with a "PR contact". Elitist entitlement. You're doing this to keep your name on the current page of this thread, hoping to gain hits on your blog. YES. I am clever in my "pronouncements". You can't get past what I say because you are you. I'm sorry for that. YES. I'm absolutely sure that's what I'm saying. Are you sure of what you're saying?

The rest of the 1-time posters are mostly gone. Some new ones have popped up since. I haven't treated anyone else like I have you because they were all here for their 1-time shot of negativity, and now they're gone. You, like I said before, just keep extending your exposure, trying to support your elitist entitled "brand" as a certified, blogging wine expert (with lots of "driving forces"). You have no interest in the awards. You have interest in calling out WS for what has happened.

No, Sammy.

You're simply wrong, disturbingly so.

I've stated a few times in this thread that I am looking for the WS editors to detail what aspects of the awards process they might re-examine. They said they'd offer tat up at a later time. The rest of the time, I've been trying to convince the trolls why I'm here (yourself included).

That's it. End of story. You can think whatever you like, there's nothing else to this.

You're continuing to post because you're a bully who needs an outlet.

And I am continuing to post to call you out on it, in a vain attempt to get you to back off.

And neither of us is adding anything productive to this thread at this point.

If that was your intention, then well done. You've added a total distraction to an already overburdened thread.

You may think that you're in the public eye a part of this forum, but that's not true. You may decry blogging in general, but I think it takes a courage that you lack to put yourself on the line publicly almost every day.

If you're intention is to angrily run me off of the forum, you can't possibly succeed (sorry). I'm adding you to my blocked list (your future posts will be falling on deaf ears) and I'm getting off this particular post so I can explain on my blog why no one in the right mind would consider posting in this hostile environment when they allow folks like you to troll about like it's their personal snake-pit.

I'll be around somewhere on these forums. But not for you.

You want to continue any of your "discussions" with me, look me up on twitter, or my blog, or the OWC.
B brunellodrinkerMember
After following this since day one, I'm very surprised that the WS editors have let this thread devolve to the current state. The discourse for the past dozen pages is at the very best, an extremely poor example of both fly-by and veteran contributions to a pissing contest.

A wise move would be to shut it down and not give these personalites a podium to continually debase the integrity and value that I would hope the WS editors attempt to maintain in their online forums.
W walla2winewomanMember
1winedude, Unfortunately, we have been trying to have a thoughtful discussion with WS management, but it's been difficult with members who prefer not to keep to the matter at hand and instead use name-calling to slam wine bloggers while doing it anonymously.

And James Molesworth says that bloggers are a lazy person's journalism? These anonymous spewing name-calling members of this board are the epitome. hahaha! Roll Eyes
V vt2itMember
quote:
Originally posted by Walla2WineWoman:
quote:
Originally posted by VT2IT:
I’m curious. What exactly are the qualifications needed to have a blog? I always assumed it was access to a computer and a couple of acquaintances that will claim to care about the drivel you write. Are there anything more than those? No I don’t think so. That being so nobody cares if any blogger is insulted as you are completely without worth. As cdr's sig used to say blogs are free and worth the price.


And the difference between a blogger's so-called drivel and your drivel is that the majority of the bloggers, especially wine bloggers, do not hide behind convenient anonymity such as yourself. Sure, it's easy for you to spout off such "drivel" because you are an anonymous coward that won't take responsibility for your words.

So therefore, I think your comments are basically worthless. If you don't like what I have posted regarding your poltroon anonymity, at least you are welcome to send me an email, which you will find available on my blog if you want to discuss the topic of "blogger drivel" any further. That is certainly more integrity than you have given to this discussion.
Kindly explain how anonymity has any relevance to credibility, or why anybody should give a damn what you think.
V vt2itMember
quote:
Originally posted by Walla2WineWoman:
1winedude, Unfortunately, we have been trying to have a thoughtful discussion with WS management, but it's been difficult with members who prefer not to keep to the matter at hand and instead use name-calling to slam wine bloggers while doing it anonymously.

And James Molesworth says that bloggers are a lazy person's journalism? These anonymous spewing name-calling members of this board are the epitome. hahaha! Roll Eyes
No nimwit, we do not purport to calling ourselves journalists just because we have internet access.
W walla2winewomanMember
quote:
Originally posted by VT2IT:
Kindly explain how anonymity has any relevance to credibility, or why anybody should give a damn what you think.


You're kidding right, about relevance and credibility? Do you not get out much? Do you read many editorials? Is your knowledge of current events stuck in this forum? Free speech is not anonymous speech.

And why anybody should give a damn what I think? Well, whether you agree with me or not, obviously you gave a damn about what I thought or you would have never responded to a word I had to say.

Be gone with you and enjoy your fourth glass of Two Buck Chuck!
W walla2winewomanMember
Like I said before:

quote:
thank you - for proving my point! I knew you would come through for me.


...and you call me an idiot with no sense of reason? Let's try this again.

It's so easy for you to call people names and make idiotic comments because you are anonymous. Let's see you stand behind your same words using your real name and email. You can't - you're a coward.

And this exercise has reminded me why I don't post here very often. Give me some form of human intelligence that isn't of the mindset of characters from the movie Deliverance! Please Wine Spectator management, you deserve better!
Last edited by walla2winewoman
Y yhnMember
quote:
Originally posted by Walla2WineWoman:
quote:
Originally posted by VT2IT:
I’m curious. What exactly are the qualifications needed to have a blog? I always assumed it was access to a computer and a couple of acquaintances that will claim to care about the drivel you write. Are there anything more than those? No I don’t think so. That being so nobody cares if any blogger is insulted as you are completely without worth. As cdr's sig used to say blogs are free and worth the price.


And the difference between a blogger's so-called drivel and your drivel is that the majority of the bloggers, especially wine bloggers, do not hide behind convenient anonymity such as yourself. Sure, it's easy for you to spout off such "drivel" because you are an anonymous coward that won't take responsibility for your words.

So therefore, I think your comments are basically worthless. If you don't like what I have posted regarding your poltroon anonymity, at least you are welcome to send me an email, which you will find available on my blog if you want to discuss the topic of "blogger drivel" any further. That is certainly more integrity than you have given to this discussion.


I should remind you that you, too, are using an alias. That is not the same thing as being anonymous. You just assumed that, ironically.

Many of us post under our real names on another forum. Many of us have met in person. Many have links to their blog, winery, etc.
W walla2winewomanMember
[QUOTE]Originally posted by yhn:
I should remind you that you, too, are using an alias. That is not the same thing as being anonymous.
QUOTE]

duhrrr...and your point? This may be an alias, but I also keep a signature on the bottom of my WS posts. Therefore, you can go to my blog and get my name and email. So, what is it exactly that you have to remind me of? And duh...I know that alias and anonymous are not the same thing.

However, on many of those doing the name calling, etc such as VT2IT does not have any kind of info or signature that informs other members who he/she is. Of course, VT2IT is an alias, but also strictly anonymous unlike myself. So exactly what is the point you are trying to make? I don't need any reminding - - it is very clear to me.

Anonymity is crucial to journalism? What book of journalism did you read that in? That's news to me and I bet that the editors of the WS would find bit of info new to them as well. I don't think we would have a lot of respect for WS management if they left their editorials, reviews and articles all anonymous.

Wow - I'm outta here for now. I think maybe I need to catch up on my wine drinking like the rest of you, because being sober is no way to read this topic.
V vinMember
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Walla2WineWoman:
...and you call me an idiot with no sense of reason? Let's try this again.
QUOTE]

Please don't. WS editors have released all the information that they need/want to on this topic. I agree w/ them for not telling more. It seems like a lot of people feel that they are entitled to knowing every little detail on the issue. They're not. Are you going to start asking when their last movement was and the texture of it. These details are none of your business. If you're not happy w/ their response then oh well, get over it. Is that not reason enough? We don't always get what we want in life. This drum has been beat to death and it is time for a new rythm, such as wine. I have a wine question for you. A gentleman who worked for me this summer just finished his last day @ work and brought me in a bottle of 2005 Columbia Crest Reserve Syrah (wish more of my employees brought me bottles of wine). How much age do you think the bottle needs to really start to open up. I was thinking about laying it down for two years before popping. Any suggestion or comments on the wine?
W walla2winewomanMember
Vin, you misread me. When I commented about:
"Let's try this again." I was NOT referring to the WS situation and the award scam. I was referring to insults regarding bloggers from some of the anonymous readers and trying to make some clarity of it.

The 2005 Columbia Crest Reserve Syrah? You could lay it down for about 2-5 years - - if you wish. And then again, Columbia Crest wines are known to be approachable now.
M maverickMember
1WineDude -

LOL. My name is Samuel, not Sammy. You can call me Mr.Maverick.

You want "the WS editors to detail what aspects of the awards process they might re-examine". OK. How long has this problem been out, a week? OK. They should get right back to you with their changes ASAP. Elitist entitlement. You're here for exposure (read: free advertisement). I've been here since 2005, I'm not a troll. You've been here since Thursday (3 Days), looking to cash in on one(1) topic, this one. Out of everyone here, you'd be the troll. Please, educate me all about that "courage" that it takes "to put yourself on the line publicly almost every day" being a blogger. When bloggers die do they put flags on their coffins for all their courageous actions? Please get back to me when our government declares a national holiday commemorating all the courage shown by bloggers. Elitist entitlement. (I just wanted to say that again.) This is not at all a "hostile environment". You're still here, I'm still here, all the other 1-timers could still be here. All God's children, with the exceptions of Serge and Francis, have the opportunity to be here. You can't go to any other forum and call out the hosts, like you did, and still be welcome there (not booted off), like you still are here. You're a crybaby w/ elitist entitlement syndrome. Please, block me and get off this post. Go try to be constructive anywhere else on this forum. Maybe we could even start over and get along then. Just please don't stay on this one thread ragging on WS and it's editors, expecting any type of acceptance. I looked at your blog, it's cute. I'm older than 14, so I don't do twitter. You've told me I wouldn't last 3 minutes on any forum you ran so I guess the OWC is out. OK. I think that just about does it.

HEY VIN GREAT POST.

HEY 1WineDude, I'm going out after this to enjoy a bottle of juice with a friend. Have you got any TNs on the Pillar Box Reserve?


.
Y yhnMember
quote:
Originally posted by Walla2WineWoman:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by yhn:
I should remind you that you, too, are using an alias. That is not the same thing as being anonymous.
QUOTE]

duhrrr...and your point? This may be an alias, but I also keep a signature on the bottom of my WS posts. Therefore, you can go to my blog and get my name and email. So, what is it exactly that you have to remind me of? And duh...I know that alias and anonymous are not the same thing.

However, on many of those doing the name calling, etc such as VT2IT does not have any kind of info or signature that informs other members who he/she is. Of course, VT2IT is an alias, but also strictly anonymous unlike myself. So exactly what is the point you are trying to make? I don't need any reminding - - it is very clear to me.

Anonymity is crucial to journalism? What book of journalism did you read that in? That's news to me and I bet that the editors of the WS would find bit of info new to them as well. I don't think we would have a lot of respect for WS management if they left their editorials, reviews and articles all anonymous.

Wow - I'm outta here for now. I think maybe I need to catch up on my wine drinking like the rest of you, because being sober is no way to read this topic.


My point is your signature linking your blog may or may not link your identity. I would have to assume either way *or* go through some effort and check. YOU, while using an alias, ASSumed that a long-time user here, also using an alias, is anonymous. You DID NOT go through any effort to check. You declared an assumption.

The problem is you are so caught up in your little argument over a perceived slight - a point you have actually added weight to - that you can't see straight.

Okay, apparently you need some enlightenment. In the real world there is often retaliation for free speech. Would Deep Throat have come forward without the benefit of anonymity?

Like whistle blowers, forum users may have legitimate reasons for wanting to remain anonymous. Say, someone who works at a winery and has negative things to say about the industry. It may be simply to avoid the appearance of speaking for one's employer.
W walla2winewomanMember
quote:
Originally posted by yhn:

My point is your signature linking your blog may or may not link your identity. I would have to assume either way *or* go through some effort and check. .


Ummm..you are wrong. And unlike you, I DID check the anonymous blogging-bashers and never found any blogs or other links. So don't tell me what I did or did not do and speak for yourself about assumptions.

quote:
Originally posted by yhn:
Okay, apparently you need some enlightenment. In the real world there is often retaliation for free speech... Would Deep Throat have come forward without the benefit of anonymity?

Like whistle blowers, forum users may have legitimate reasons for wanting to remain anonymous. Say, someone who works at a winery and has negative things to say about the industry. It may be simply to avoid the appearance of speaking for one's employer


Ooooo...how clandestine...oooooooo....now we are comparing the WS forum to the likes of Watergate and Norma Ray? Grow up, get in the real world and cop a clue to your own enlightenment. If one has to hide to "avoid the appearance of speaking for one's employer" as you suggested, then perhaps they have no business speaking out at all.
Roll Eyes ooooo....
mimikmimikMember
quote:
Originally posted by Lentini:
My worst mistake of 2008 -

Posting on page 1 or 2 of this thread and subsequently receiving all the posts that came after.

I'm embarrassed for WS folks that WS folks are responding to the moronic posts, however well-worded their responses might be. And for Heaven's sake, shut this thread down. It is worthless.


I hear you Lentini. The problem with this post is that it remains at the top of the Wine Conversations regardless of whether someone is posting on it or not.
L larryschafferMember
I truly, honestly hope they close this thread sooner than later.

I enjoyed the thread for awhile - different points of view were shared in a relatively civil manner.

Not any more . . .

FWIW, I really don't care how many posts someone has. If they are new to a board, civil, and respectful, I will listen . . .

And this goes for those that have been on this board for awhile, as well. Tenure does not give you the right to be nasty to others . . .

Just my $.02 - back to watching the rest of the olympics, cleaning my garage, and enjoying a glass of 01 Lesec Cotes du Rhones Beaumes with some chinese food . . .

Cheers!
G g-manMember
quote:
Originally posted by larry schaffer:

Just my $.02 - back to watching the rest of the olympics, cleaning my garage, and enjoying a glass of 01 Lesec Cotes du Rhones Beaumes with some chinese food . . .

Cheers!


I'm trying to turn a few people over with a pairing of szechwan with vintage ports, or even some young ruby ports.

I feel the full body and sweetness matches very well with the oil or spicy chinese food =)
B brianloringMember
quote:
Originally posted by Walla2WineWoman:
I was referring to insults regarding bloggers from some of the anonymous readers and trying to make some clarity of it.

I find this really ironic.

I'll assume you're mad because the people are posting with impunity - i.e. because you don't know their name they have nothing to lose.

Yet you help Goldstein do EXACTLY the same thing to Wine Spectator. He acted with impunity (provided no legal action is possible). Granted, he didn't do it anonymously, but he had nothing to lose. He ran into someone's backyard, stuck a flag in the ground, and proclaimed himself king. And you decided to help him put the crown on his head.

And now you complain when it happens to you.
Last edited by brianloring
mimikmimikMember
quote:
Originally posted by Red guy in a blue state:
And the band played on.
So, round and around and around we go.
Where the world's headed, nobody knows.

Oh, great googalooga, can't you hear me talking to you.
Just a ball of confusion.
Oh yeah, that's what the world is today.
Woo, hey, hey.

Popcorn


The Temptations or the Love and Rockets cover? I prefer the latter.
M meMember
I have to say that I am blogger (booo!) and I'm posting anonymously because I don't want folks accusing me of achieving 15 minutes of fame or looking to drive traffic to my site. I could care less about these aspects.

But...enough already! Stop spending your energy on such useless and negative commentary. Your punishment is to write about the differences between Germany's QbA and QmP categories.

In all seriousness, we've gravely swayed off the subject at hand. This isn’t a debate about WS vs. the wine blogging community – both communities share many similar goals and the diversity and uniqueness that each bring to the table is critical and invaluable - and we have room for both entities.

Let's get back to the subject at hand which is to focus on the deceitful exploitation that will inevitably affect the WS award system process.

I had an opportunity to read the story of both Goldstein and WS. I also (briefly) scanned the comments left on this forum. Initially, I couldn’t help but laugh at the prank, but after further consideration, it is evident that Goldstein did something deceitful at the expense of WS. It’s a shame that WS has to defend their actions against such an attack. On one hand, many praised Goldstein's little devious attempts to debunk the awards. Why would anyone support this behavior? His explicatory actions damaged the industry as a whole - and who gained from it? Certainly not the wine industry.

The bottom line is that there are appropriate avenues that one might seize to promote and recommend changes to an awards system; shame on Goldstein for initiating such a prank to prove a point (for which I am still uncertain of his intent).

As WS stipulates, this will only force them to "put in additional safeguards" in fear of being manipulated or circumvented in the future. One can only assume their discussion(s) and decision(s) will take a bit of time to resolve.

...and I tend to agree with Molesworth on the "blogger" subject - bloggers need to "up" their game - it's constructive criticism for which every blogger should embrace. Reporting goes beyond regurgitating a second hand story - validate the facts before posting erroneous material - and my word of advice? Build upon the untold story.
PreviousNext
Post

Membership Required

We're sorry. You must be signed in to continue. Sign In or Register
×
Are you sure you want to remove from your Block List?
×
Loading...
×
When you block a person, they can no longer invite you to a private message or post to your profile wall. Replies and comments they make will be collapsed/hidden by default. Finally, you'll never receive email notifications about content they create or likes they designate for your content.
Note: if you proceed, you will no longer be following .
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×