Forum independance?

[jkbarnes]

Let me make this as clear as possible.

There will be no direct discussion or reference to any models previewed by members who attended the (any) preview or who may have discovered leaks on the internet, regardless of how they got there, until either a model is launched and/or the press embargo is lifted.

I run this forum without editorial influence from CW. Any posts that may have been deleted by myself or the Admin Team were done following my orders. In most cases a pm is sent with an explanation.

In this circumstance we know how the leak came about and it was quelled within 2 hours. It was not the fault of CW. The internet being what it is, the story was picked up by others. All but one responded to CW by removing said article. If you found it, enjoy, but it will not be discussed or referenced here.

I have agreed, on behalf of this forum, to abide by the press embargo. Failure to do so can revoke all future privilege's. There are some reviewers, outlets and groups that have already paid this price and I am unwilling to sacrifice future benefits for this forum so that a few can get jump on a launch. CW trusts me and this forum and I intend to keep it that way.

[Kip]

At the commencement of this post I should state that I have no 'inside information or company secrets' and anything that I have posted has simply been my own views or gathered from reading open source material, usually just by searching google. (Neither have I logged into the forum launch previews).

I came to the forum via just such a web search, but following a post taken down today I searched and found a link to the forum from the official CW Web site. I'm sure this isn't news to most of you. It says the following ;

"Founded soon after we launched, the forum is editorially independent and free of influence from Christopher Ward."

Since I've been a member I've been caught up in the hype and excitement surrounding new releases. Nowadays I assume this is just part of marketing strategy. Around the launch of the sealander range i engaged in forum conversation that I consider innocuous and received a PM from the moderator for discussing new unlaunched models. Yesterday I read here that following a Forbes launch article (which may or may not be planned) pirctures of the latest CW watch were on Google. I had a look and also noticed a detailed news article on another website, which I mentioned in a post this morning.

I notice that the OP referring to the pics and my post were both deleted very quickly.

I must say that this all seems very sinister behaviour from a small company that clearly is heavily controlling this forum. Whilst I can appreciate that CW might not want their launch information leaked in advance, it seems very petty to be attempting to censor a few enthusiasts when this information is easily available for anyone to view.

If CW is truly concerned that a few dozen watch fans might google a new release once they've teased a release date then they either need a better marketing strategy to capture that hype or maybe they shouldnt be operating a discussion forum ? Just my two-penneth but horses and stable doors come to mind....

I hope my explanation above explains that this is not a "sinister" operation.

[Richard D]

Interesting use of ‘independance’ rather than independence.

I’ll never get why people insist on nitpicking spelling and grammar rather than engaging on the topic at hand or just ignoring it. You clearly understood the intent of the post.

It’s the teacher in me.

Back to topic, I’ve had posts deleted by admin and moderators. At the time it has angered me, their reasoning did not help. I can see why people challenge the forum’s independence. However, I am reminded of the forum rules.

[asqwerth]

I mean, it's as simple as, "we promised".

We, as in the people in charge of the forum who got us the preview.

[jkbarnes]

Since we’re beating dead horses here….

Hey hey, Ho ho, That stupid word mark’s got to go!



I’ll get my coat and show myself out.

[TheBeatles]

My OCD is kicking in!

Can somebody amend thread title?

Even if not reading or commenting I can see the incorrect spelling!

[Thunder1]

Jeez, talk about 1st world problems!!..

[ajax87]

I like the spelling. It indicates that maintaining a good relationship with CW while remaining independent is a delicate dance. It was obviously done on purpose

[jkbarnes]

On a serious note, I’ll add this. Over on the Dune preview thread, the comments started turning towards speculation. I edited my own comments in that regard knowing that 1) the forum had been given a preview (I didn’t partake) and 2) info was available on line if one searched for it (I didn’t do this either). Even though any comments I might have offered would have been pure speculation, based in part on what was teased in Loupe, I chose not to comment any further because of how it might appear.

There’s an element of this discussion that reflects actions that might not violate the letter of the law but clearly go against the spirit of the law. In my case, I chose to self-edit rather than post anything that might be construed as violating the spirit of the law, regardless of whether or not they actually did.

[TheBeatles]

Jeez, talk about 1st world problems!!..

My post or the thread?

I like the spelling. It indicates that maintaining a good relationship with CW while remaining independent is a delicate dance. It was obviously done on purpose

Clever, but still annoying

[NationOfLaws]

Jeez, talk about 1st world problems!!..

You are on a luxury watch forum dude.

[Viognier]

We have this debate after every preview,.

We do and I really don’t see what is so hard.

CW grant previews and early accesses to a forum of valuable enthusiasts. In exchange for this, CW ask that we don’t discuss things openly until the embargo is lifted. - A perfectly reasonable request. Like a friend telling another close friend something and asking them to keep it to themselves for a short time. Just because the details are leaked by somebody else and are available online does not mean we abandon the favour asked of us. If we respect our friend and want to retain their confidence we do what they have asked. Just because we can do something, doesn’t mean we should.

If we want to maintain these privileges we need to keep our side of the bargain, EVEN if others do not keep their word. If we don’t CW will make new friends and share things with them instead. I really value the relationship between the Forum and CW and I wouldn’t want to lose it.

It’s really that simple.

^^ Brilliantly stated and a strong +1

[exHowfener]

Surely it's quite normal for any company launching a new product not to want that launch to be preempted by others? And to ask that people attending the preview don't jump the gun?

I've watched a few online reviews where the reviewer has stated that they got the product in advance of the launch, but had been asked to hold off publishing the review until the launch date. I don'y see that as being sinister or controlling.

Personally, I've had one post removed very early in my time on the forum. It was because I had breached a rule and was done courteously and with an explanation as to why. I've seen one thread where discussion was stifled because - in my opinion - the moderator didn't quite understand the topic and erred on the side of caution which is fair enough. The moderators are human and do - again in my opinion - a fantastic job.

If someone tells me something and asks me not to reveal it until they have had a chance to tell others, surely it's only good manners to do as they ask?

[tikkathree]

To join in, or not to join in? Strokes beard, grabs black bold font marker and....go!

Let me make this as clear as possible.

There will be no direct discussion or reference to any models previewed by members who attended the (any) preview or who may have discovered leaks on the internet, regardless of how they got there, until either a model is launched and/or the press embargo is lifted.

That's the deal: house rules.

I run this forum without editorial influence from CW. Any posts that may have been deleted by myself or the Admin Team were done following my orders. In most cases a pm is sent with an explanation.

In this circumstance we know how the leak came about and it was quelled within 2 hours. It was not the fault of CW. The internet being what it is, the story was picked up by others. All but one responded to CW by removing said article. If you found it, enjoy, but it will not be discussed or referenced here.

I have agreed, on behalf of this forum, to abide by the press embargo. Failure to do so can revoke all future privilege's. There are some reviewers, outlets and groups that have already paid this price and I am unwilling to sacrifice future benefits for this forum so that a few can get jump on a launch. CW trusts me and this forum and I intend to keep it that way.

And I don't think that anyone here really would have any interest in upsetting the apple cart. There have been times in the past (and may well be so again in the future) when facebook-based watch groups have been blithely discussing something, some new CW launch, when we here are abiding by an agreed embargo and honestly, I've wondered whether there may have been collusion with CW to "let something slip" and I've always remembered that conspiracy theories generate a lot more interest than do simple cock-ups.

Interesting use of ‘independance’ rather than independence.

I’ll never get why people insist on nitpicking spelling and grammar rather than engaging on the topic at hand or just ignoring it. You clearly understood the intent of the post.

Well all I can ask is that you please try to find it in your heart to accept that some people hold to the view that there's usually a correct spelling and that any other spelling is either "not yet widely known" or just plain wrong.

[tikkathree]

Jeez, talk about 1st world problems!!..

My post or the thread?

I like the spelling. It indicates that maintaining a good relationship with CW while remaining independent is a delicate dance. It was obviously done on purpose

Clever, but still annoying

Not often do I wonder if we have politicians hiding among us.