The role of marketing reps on this site | Site suggestions | Discussion forum

I was looking for the rules for the forum. I would think that any marketing reps must at least identify themselves, and additionally not solicit business on the site.

Those are black and white rules on many forums. Forums I have been involved with 'automatically ban' anyone violating such rules.

I love this site and would hate to see it turn into anything other than what it is: a forum for genuine and non-biased consumer-to-consumer dialogue and info exchange. If banks want to view the discussion as a means of listening to their clients, thats great. But to have them promote products and use this site as their marketing tool, no. No. It will turn this place into what it was never meant to be.

Funny thing you should post this now. I was just thinking to myself a couple of days ago if some of the posters here were actually bank reps. Sometimes it's too obvious, isn't it?

I've found out so much good information on this forum that I can't thank you enough, Peter, Loonie and the rest of the gang!

Peter, I agree that they may have some useful info. And as soon as someone tells me about rules I ask "what's your ability to enforce them?" They'll just not identify themselves, go "underground" and leave out the obvious comments that would tag them. Then we'll be reading stuff that has an agenda and we won't know it, and maybe that's worse than just leaving it as is and asking them to identify themselves, as you do now. In general I'm conservative-minded so I'm against censorship or shutting down people whose words or ideas I don't like, I'm quite happy to let everyone have their say and I'll figure out what I want to do.
(Lonnie, I didn't know there's a way someone can email us using this site - how does that work? I agree that's annoying but maybe you can disable that info - ?)

Loonie good point. And to Peter and everyone else I have enjoyed this site hopefully I have provided good info that some one may use. We "may" have to read between the lines and ask more questions to get some ideas, guidance and support for our own personal finances etc.

Do you remember the rep from Hubert that silently faded away? The Alterna responses are ok to me. I only skim them as I don't see any use for Alterna and don't know if a BC resident could apply. I am in a wind down of FI's as well. The rep has identified themselve as a rep in each reply and has good knowledge of clipping the concerns and answering and clarifying some our "assumptions".

Any rep should provide their real name, location, and be authorised by the FI to handle the responses. Is there not a way to set up a signature to show at the bottom of any and all replies?

Lastly who knows....is Alterna really a rep or a fake wannabe?

In addition to Alterna Bank, representatives from Hubert and CDIC have participated here.

I think they should continued to be allowed here if they participate in the same way that the rest of us on the consumer side of the table do. That is, they try to provide useful information about the products with minimal promotional fluff and hype.

The substance behind what people write here is more important than who they work for.

I agree with Norman1 too! There IS some useful information provided by the reps and we're all big girls and boys, we can figure out what we want to pay attention to and what we want to ignore. The answer to being irritated is not censorship, it's to move on. Beside, there's no way to verify anyone's online identity - I could be Justin Trudeau for all you folks know (though my wife would turf me if I was!) so, for example, the "Alterna rep" could actually be from a competitor who's trying to cast aspersions on Alterna by irritating some of us via cheesy marketing clichés, overt promotion, etc., who knows?

No way of knowing any of that, even if they use their institution's email address (that an Administrator/Moderator can see). Anonymous forums are just that, anonymous and content needs to be treated accordingly. No one can vet anything. The only thing one can do is, over time, observe the posting track record of select forum members and put more weight on those accordingly.

Sure, Loonie, Peter can "require" whatever he wants. How to enforce? And I think we're all aware anything posted here hasn't been verified for us by someone else.

There are no viable options that are workable, even with substantial moderator effort. Implementing what you suggest simply drives the reps underground. That is the nature of public discussion forums. The 'only' thing one can enforce is solicitation of business and cheerleading at a level that even the most casual reader can identify.

I have been involved with forums for years. It is the way it is.