London Capital and Finance

edited 1 September 2016 at 2:14PM in Savings & Investments
2.1K replies 433K views
1910121415208

Replies

  • eskbankereskbanker Forumite
    21.7K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    robatwork wrote: »
    Sorry that's a real cop out and not good enough.

    When everyone, mostly the long-term and respected variety of poster, is saying that a forum post is dodgy, unhelpful or spammy/scammy it's up to you to respect these members. Between us we have thousands of "thanked" posts and over 100 years of posting history.

    If we all "decide for ourselves" on everything then you wouldn't take down any scam. We've all decided - and you shouldn't be undermining us (and by inference the newer more gullible forum members).
    A bit of devil's advocacy here perhaps, but I think I'd be more inclined to side with Evelyn Beatrice Hall on this, i.e. "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it", in that I'm not convinced that groupthink by itself is a rationale for wiping those posts on the basis of the opinions of some/many/most posters, regardless of perceived status.

    I do feel that those posts are way too long but IMHO that actually means they're less likely to be read by the gullible who are more prone to misunderstand the true nature of the product.

    As above, I do agree that it could be inferred from the style of the pieces that MSE somehow endorses them and clarification on that would help, but I'm not sure that deletion is necessary.

    Yes, investing in LC&F would be much riskier than some gullible folk would believe but I'm not aware of any clear evidence that it's a scam as such, even though their advertising may be on the edge of what's acceptable.

    Likewise, bail-in offers some opinions which are there to be challenged but it is a discussion forum so we're all free to do so. I can't see any reason to call the posts spammy and can't see either bail-in or MSE explicitly or implicitly endorsing LC&F themselves, so is there not some overreacting here? Yes, the posts are verbose, but is anyone able to highlight exactly which forum rules are being broken that would warrant removal by MSE?

    Discuss.... :)
  • TrustyOvenTrustyOven Forumite
    746 Posts
    Seventh Anniversary 500 Posts Combo Breaker
    ✭✭
    eskbanker wrote: »
    Likewise, bail-in offers some opinions which are there to be challenged but it is a discussion forum so we're all free to do so. I can't see any reason to call the posts spammy and can't see either bail-in or MSE explicitly or implicitly endorsing LC&F themselves, so is there not some overreacting here? Yes, the posts are verbose, but is anyone able to highlight exactly which forum rules are being broken that would warrant removal by MSE?

    Discuss.... :)

    I think initially bail-in's posts seemed spammy. It looked like it was copied and pasted from some other format (i.e. not typed up in the MSE forum reply window). At the time we didn't know that it was bail-in's work. Now we do.

    On a slight tangent, I wonder how MSE Andrea's reply applies to the Asset Life Plc threads. I suppose now we have confirmation that posts should stay up:
    - if either negative or positive
    - because readers will do their own research
    - if it's your own content (not plagarised)
    - regardless whether the information is correct or incorrect.
    Goals
    Save £12k in 2017 #016 (£4212.06 / £10k) (42.12%)
    Save £12k in 2016 #041 (£4558.28 / £6k) (75.97%)
    Save £12k in 2014 #192 (£4115.62 / £5k) (82.3%)
  • bigadajbigadaj Forumite
    11.5K Posts
    Ninth Anniversary 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    MSE_Andrea wrote: »
    Hi

    All Forum readers must do their own research and no-one should ever take action based on anything anyone says on the Forum without doing that research first.

    As a Forum Team we've let bail-in post them because they are bail-in's own work. We don't remove content just because it's negative (or overly positive).

    We're not saying the information is correct or incorrect. It's up to people reading any post on the Forum to decide that for themselves.

    Andrea

    Please confirm how I may formally complain about your posts please.
  • robatworkrobatwork Forumite
    6.6K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭
    eskbanker wrote: »
    Likewise, bail-in offers some opinions which are there to be challenged but it is a discussion forum so we're all free to do so. I can't see any reason to call the posts spammy and can't see either bail-in or MSE explicitly or implicitly endorsing LC&F themselves, so is there not some overreacting here? Yes, the posts are verbose, but is anyone able to highlight exactly which forum rules are being broken that would warrant removal by MSE?

    Discuss.... :)

    OK I'll play for a bit. The posts were offensive to me. I realise that "being offended" is a value judgement and it would be up to a mod to find it offensive.

    I would also postulate that the posts would have been removed by Martin pre moneysupermarket takeover.
  • edited 17 October 2017 at 9:26PM
    verybigchrisverybigchris Forumite
    630 Posts
    Part of the Furniture 500 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    ✭✭
    edited 17 October 2017 at 9:26PM
    *edited by forum team* I suppose we'll just have to make the other posts stand out more...

    Don't invest in bonds from London Capital and Finance
  • eskbankereskbanker Forumite
    21.7K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    robatwork wrote: »
    OK I'll play for a bit. The posts were offensive to me. I realise that "being offended" is a value judgement and it would be up to a mod to find it offensive.
    Offensive - really?!

    As per the rules, the forum team don't moderate as such (and hence Andrea's fence-sitting stance) but do review reported posts and act if deemed necessary. Clearly some posters reported bail-in's posts for suspected breach of copyright and these objections were dismissed, presumably after assurances from bail-in, but have you reported the posts if they offend you, and, if so, for what breach of the rules exactly?

    As mentioned earlier, I'm not seeking to defend the content of the posts, and they're undeniably waffly and pompously presented, but I don't see them as dangerous enough to warrant deletion when there don't really seem to be any valid grounds for doing so under the current rules....
  • robatworkrobatwork Forumite
    6.6K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭
    Blimey bail-in is quick enough to thank you for your admirable defence but searingly quiet on the matter himself...
  • eskbankereskbanker Forumite
    21.7K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    robatwork wrote: »
    Blimey bail-in is quick enough to thank you for your admirable defence but searingly quiet on the matter himself...
    And just for the avoidance of doubt, I'm not defending bail-in, and certainly not LC&F, but the principle of free speech (my turn to be pompous now!) :)
  • edited 17 October 2017 at 2:10PM
    Former_MSE_AndreaFormer_MSE_Andrea Former MSE
    9.6K Posts
    1,000 Posts Combo Breaker I've helped Parliament Rampant Recycler
    ✭✭✭✭
    edited 17 October 2017 at 2:10PM
    Hi everyone

    Thanks for your thoughts.

    We haven't changed Forum policy for many years. If you take a look at the forum rules you'll see they're pretty outdated and could do with a good update - it's on the list! :)

    http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/site/forum-faqs

    As explained but not in so much detail, the problem we've had with this is that some of you used the spam button on bail-in's original post and/or complained it broke copyright and it was automatically removed.

    The forum member contacted us and once we were satisfied it didn't break copyright we said bail-in could re post it. We asked bail-in to include a note explaining we'd said it could be posted so it's not reported again.

    We don't generally remove content just because someone doesn't like the format it's been posted in, or feels it's negative or incorrect.

    We might ask them politely to re-post it in a format that's easier for everyone to read, though, so people can understand easier. If this happens again please think about doing that if you could.

    Thank you all for your understanding, it really is appreciated.

    @bigadaj Could you read the very top of our Forum Rules please? Thank you

    Andrea :)
    Could you do with a Money Makeover?


    Follow MSE on other Social Media:
    MSE Facebook, MSE Twitter, MSE Deals Twitter, Instagram
    Join the MSE Forum
    Get the Free MoneySavingExpert Money Tips E-mail
    Report inappropriate posts: click the report button
    Point out a rate/product change
    Flag a news story: [email protected]
  • ChickereeeeeChickereeeee Forumite
    835 Posts
    Ninth Anniversary 500 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    ✭✭✭
    Well, it is not ALL bail-in's own work:

    The first chunk of text from his spiel I googled came up with this (paragraph 3):

    http://www.retailbondexpert.com/Blog/Commentary/2016/09/Investors-Sweat-as-Mini-bond-Issuer-Goes-Bust/

    "Retail Bond Expert and sister site DIY Investor have consistently called for investors to be wary of mini-bonds and to be fully apprised of the risk they may be exposed to and the differences that exist between mini-bonds and other forms of fixed income products such as retail bonds"

    Exact same wording. I sure I could find more if I could be bothered....
Sign In or Register to comment.
Latest MSE News and Guides

Stoozing, sublets & summer sips

This week's MSE Forum highlights

MSE News

Martin Lewis quizzes Rishi Sunak

Watch the cost of living support Q&A here

Join the MSE Forum discussion

48 craft beers for £50 delivered

One-off bundle for newbies. Excludes Northern Ireland

MSE Deals