Coin Dealer Ethics Follow-Up - Discussion Forums
Wednesday July 9, 2008
Last week, I presented a scenario concerning censorship on coin collecting-related online discussion forums. I explained that PCGS has a policy of banning people from their discussion forums because they point out mistakes the company made, or say negative things about the company's employees. An example was given where a member was kicked off the forum because he posted a photo of the heavy-handed moderator of the PCGS forum. I asked whether forum moderators are violating the standards of free speech when they suppress discussions they don't like, or if paying for the discussion service does give the moderators the right to censor the content. (Follow the link to read the entire scenario about censorship on discussion forums and see more of the comments readers left.)
Reader responses were approximately evenly matched between those who feel that PCGS is overstepping the bounds of fairness with their heavy-handed moderation, and those who feel that PCGS has every right to filter what is said at their expense. Whether or not the concept of free speech even applies to these situations was questioned by numerous readers.
Reader responses were approximately evenly matched between those who feel that PCGS is overstepping the bounds of fairness with their heavy-handed moderation, and those who feel that PCGS has every right to filter what is said at their expense. Whether or not the concept of free speech even applies to these situations was questioned by numerous readers.
I hate to see the “free speech” argument come up in discussions about private companies and individuals. Free speech protects people from censorship by the government. This forum is not government-run, so they can censor whom they please.
If I invite you into my living room, and you start talking about dogs, and I hate dogs, I can insist that you leave. It would be weird, and it would probably prevent you from wanting to return, but it would be my right as an individual. -- Sandra
Should not the issue be about whether the forum is open to the public? If PCGS’s forum is a member only forum wherein only members can read and write the posts then I would assume that the free speech issue would not be relevant. On the other hand, if PCGS opens their forum up to the public domain then I would think that they must observe the tenets of free speech and any governing laws. -- Chip
Censorship is not a violation of “Free Speech” laws with regards to individuals or corporations (e.g. I censor what websites my kids visit and the language that they use; my employer does the same to me)...These readers make pretty convincing arguments that the concept of "free speech" does not apply to privately-owned (non-government) discussion forums. So, assuming PCGS is within their rights to censor their forums, how far should they go?
These organizations create these forums to promote their business by driving traffic to their sites. They invest the money to bring up and run the forum, therefore they have control over what goes on it or what is removed from it (in addition to deleting “spam, flaming, libel, and other problem posts.”) -- Jim
There is a difference between what PCGS (or any sponsor of a forum) CAN do and what they SHOULD do. Amplifying Bill’s comment, they CAN act in a heavy-handed manner, but doing so devalues the usefulness of the forum. In the same way, PCGS CAN rate everything they receive as an MS-70 (although the value of a PCGS rating would, however, plummet if they did so), they SHOULD rate things fairly and consistently (which, for the record, I believe they by and large do.) -- GordonAs some readers pointed out, there are clear consequences to a heavy-handed moderation approach:
...If PCGS is purposely removing postings that say anything negative about them, then they are pretending to the world that they are the greatest and can do no wrong. That means to me that I would never use their service nor purchase any coins that have been slabbed by them. This is because I believe they cannot be honest enough to take a negative remark and honestly answer that negative comment with a reply. I guess they just think they are above all that, as if they are the only game in town. -- LC
Years ago I used to post a lot of messages on the PCGS board. Then they banned a number of people whom I respect, and I decided that I would not lend my expertise there on as regular a basis. Before those people were banned I posted over 10,000 messages mostly giving advice. I’m a part time dealer and I’ve been collecting U.S. coins, tokens and some medals extensively for over 45 years. Now I go over there only when things are slow on the NGC message site, and my postings are way down.The comment thread for the original scenario eventually devolved into some off-topic trawling, which seems to emerge primarily in columns where I discuss PCGS and it practices. It wasn't my intention to pick on PCGS when I created this discussion, which was the entire reason why I asked openly for feedback. Although I tend to be very liberal in what I allow people to say in the several forums I own and/or moderate, it seems that I am in a small minority in this regard. I wondered, what is the consensus view when it comes to high-profile and leading coin collecting-related businesses (such as PCGS) engaging in discussion-censoring practices? Well, the consensus is that PCGS has every right to run their forum however they want to, but the way they're doing it might not be the most effective and beneficial way it can be done from a professional and public relations standpoint.
My view is the same as it is for TV programs. If you don’t like what’s on, change the channel. I don’t care for the heavy handed attitude on the PCGS site, so they don’t see very much of me. They are paying the bills so they have right to allow what they want. BUT I also have the option of not giving away my expertise for free. And because of that PCGS pays a price too. -- Bill
Comments
I agree that any forum has a right to limit anything they wish and this is in no way a violation of free speech. I think what is happening at PCGS when it comes to their forum is bigger than just eliminating criticism of PCGS. I have seen negative threads last for weeks without being deleted and positive threads go poof in an instant. What is happening at the CU is a control game and it continues to drive real collectors away who are tired of being harassed by the “attack pack”. There are many other coin forums out there where collectors are still treated with respect. The PCGS CU Forum just happens not to be one of them.
I was banned from the PCGS boards for stating he truth about their customer service lying to me regarding their dipping a coin sent for submission. Also there Director of Sales lied to me. I am a paying member and this is a country founded on free speech. Yeah! I can go some where else and have because they banned me and many other good, knowledgeable collectors just for telling the truth.
In a culture where they can lie but when members tell the truth they go poof, is not a culture that is healthy and that I want to belong to. They are arbitrary, wrongheaded and unconstitutional.
I think one important element that has been entirely overlooked is the liability issue of allowing members to publically defame former members who can no longer defend themselves after they were banned. Sort of like a trial where only the the prosecution is allowed to present evidence and the defense is not allowed to say anything.
It happens all the time. And the forum can be used as a propoganda tool.
PCGS and others had to pay damages in a lawsuit brought against them for defamation of character arising member postings on their forums.
SEE:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
DATED this 11th day of July, 2, 2006
Copy archieved by google at:
http://www.biddlesbank.com/page12.html
BB… the case brought about by ASA Accugrade is not only irrelevant, but was dismissed for lack of grounds. Accugrade sued everyone they could when it was reported that a report published by PNG/ICTA called Accugrade’s service unacceptable when compared to other grading services. All but PNG and ICTA were dismissed because they did not publish the report but the first amendment allows them to report on the findings. PNG and ICTA portions was dismissed since it could not be determined whether the report caused damage to Accugrade’s business.
In total, this case is totally irrelevant to the situation at PCGS.
What has not been said is that PCGS is part of Collectors’ Universe, a publicly traded corporation. Adverse statements published on their systems may have to be reported under the rules of Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX). This could effect the public perception of the corporation and the stock price.
There may be more to the story than “censorship.”
Scott . . perhaps you would like to provide a link where the suit was dismissed?
Is it possible that you are confusing where certain defendants were dropped from the suit. Mainly those who made the offensive posts were dropped but the deep pocket boys were kept in as defendants. PCGS being one of them kept in.
Here is the link to the “3rd amended complaint.” http://www.asa-accugrade.com/lawsuit/ThirdAmendedComplaint.php
Lots of vulgar things were said on those forums and you can find them again highligted in blues at: http://www.biddlesbank.com/page12.html
Scott . . would you be so kind as to provide a link to the dismissal? It was my understanding that there was a sealed settlement.
Many believe it was dismissed because they (some PCGS forum posters) were dropped as defendants for posting vulgar and defaming insults.
However by the filing of the 3rd amended suit only the deep pocket defendants were left including PCGS. (Can’t get much out of mouthy posters.)
Here is the link to the 3rd amended suit; http://www.asa-accugrade.com/lawsuit/ThirdAmendedComplaint.php
So Scott, if you have actual dismissal information you should post it here so the world can see that saying vulgar, vile and defaming matter on web site forums intended for public numismatic consumption is perfectly legal for both the poster and the host.
Thanks Susan for bringing this issue up .
I think PCGS CAN do anything they want
with their money , just not to pretend to be
open internet forum , that they are not !!
If they will start every forum page
with the warning : “you can post here
only the things we will like to read/hear” ,
then , it’s fine with me .
BUT , they don’t do that ,
they pretend to be something we all know ,
but , actually , they behave differently .
In my opinion this is a commerce cheating !
If a dealer will sell you an oven
that only heats certain foods but refuse
to cook other foods (as we all expect it to work) ,
you will have a just case against that dealer .
Why does PCGS have the right to “sell” the
public an “open internet forum” ,
when their product isn’t so ???
Moshe
I’m looking for information on a coin. It’s a $4dollar gold “Flowing hair Stella”. supposedly a trial strike designed by Charles A. Barber and carried the date 1879. Have you heard of it or do you think it’s a boggus coin?
Does anyone besides me ever wonder if this whole industry is built on a house of cards? And all it takes is one PR nightmare to tip the whole thing over.
Makes me understand censorship if not actually support it (excepting cases of defemation).
I agree with #9. It seems the whole capitalist system as it exists now is based on manipulation and proping up markets. The government lies to us about inflation and GDP and buys stocks futures to keep up stock prices.
It use to be you worked hard, you did well. You made a mistake, you lose money. Now everyone wants a bailout.
It’s common knowledge in the coin industry that the Hagar case was thrown out. If you are a member of the PCGS forums you would have seen a long discussion about it.
I agree 100% with #4. Making him “prove it” is childish when it’s well known.
Hi Mardi, I have some information of that Stella, please give me a call at your convenience at toll free 866-550-9095. I have some pictures of it too. If you were interested to acquire one it may very well not be available by the time you see this unfortunately…
Hi Folks!
Just wanted to share my new experience.
If your Windows XP denies to start due to an error related to lost HAL.DLL, invalid Boot.ini or any other critical system boot files you can repair this by using the XP installation CD. Simply boot from your XP Setup CD and enter the Recovery Console. Then run “attrib -H -R -S” on the C:\Boot.ini file and remove it. Run “Bootcfg /Rebuild” and then Fixboot
Regards,
Carl
very nice site
I’m the only one in this world. Can please someone join me in this life? Or maybe death…
Sorry, wrong topic. :ups: