rules?

Gackt · 22 Jul 2011 at 22:15

marc1024 said:
its apple hardware/software support not advertising

They talk about apple products and software and where to buy it from. Macs are technically a direct competitor, yet they're still there.

We've been able to say Amazon for a while but now because they have a DD service coming out, which presumably will be big, OcUK are fearing they'll lose business, or what? I don't know. It's just all very silly.

Shamikebab · 22 Jul 2011 at 22:16

macbook is a direct competitor to a laptop.....which OcUK sell. Seriously don't even try and tell me you don't understand that.

jaybee · 22 Jul 2011 at 22:17

There is no argument. Apple is a competitor, yet we have a forum dedicated to them. It's all just a farse and embarrasing to be honest. It's so unprofessional.

Sin_Chase · 22 Jul 2011 at 22:18

Emphacy said:
Since when was OcUK competing against apple in it's current market to sell iPods, iPads, iPhones and Macbooks?

Macbooks to Laptops is less ambiguous a relation than said competitors product range to OCuKs to be perfectly honest.

MagicBoy · 22 Jul 2011 at 22:18

Emphacy said:
Since when was OcUK competing against apple in it's current market to sell iPods, iPads, iPhones and Macbooks?

OcUK were selling RAM advertised as suitable for Apple computers.

kylew · 22 Jul 2011 at 22:19

It's about time this pathetic competitor rule goes anyway. I've always found it ridiculous, it's like pretending that competing companies don't exist and you can only buy computer hardware at OcUK.

It's a really childish rule to have. It's not like you're suddenly going to go out of business the moment you acknowledge the existence of competitors. Competing with other business shouldn't involve pretending competitors exist, it's an open a free market and the no-competitor kinda goes against that. If you're competing fairly you shouldn't need a no-competitor rule anyway, and no before someone has a tantrum, that doesn't mean I'm saying OcUK aren't competing fairly.

The existence of the rule just makes for situations like this, where moderators and shop staff end up making a show of themselves and losing the trust and respect of their customers and forum users, certain shop staff really shouldn't be allowed to ban people because things like this happen.

Grad · 22 Jul 2011 at 22:20

I'd like to hear Spies input on this to ensure there has been no communication issues through the ranks.

CaptainRAVE · 22 Jul 2011 at 22:22

The thing is, I understand it is *their* forums and they can do what they want. It is an incredibly silly rule though.

Anyways, expecting this to be deleted soon :rolleyes:

johnsparton10 · 22 Jul 2011 at 22:22

After reading all 7 pages of this it seems that ocuk did not competitors to be talked about on the ocuk forum...fair play is it not? I think its quite fair for them to say what they feel competitors to be? I dunno, am sure if people appeal to the ban under the conditions that they were unsure that they were in the wrong they will help out :S

trickycurve · 22 Jul 2011 at 22:22

Jaybee's obviously trolling now.

The Rainforest sells the same types of products that Overclocker's sells. This includes things like monitors, software, keyboards and mice, network cables, routers... I could go on. Guess what, Jaybee: this makes The Rainforest a competitor to OcUK.

I don't think it is possible to make that any clearer.

Grad · 22 Jul 2011 at 22:23

johnsparton10 said:
After reading all 7 pages of this it seems that ocuk did not competitors to be talked about on the ocuk forum...fair play is it not? I think its quite fair for them to say what they feel competitors to be? I dunno, am sure if people appeal to the ban under the conditions that they were unsure that they were in the wrong they will help out :S

Absolutely, its fair for them to dictate exactly what they want on their own forums. It would just makes things easier if what they were dictating was explained so there was no ambiguity.

jaybee · 22 Jul 2011 at 22:24

johnsparton10 said:
After reading all 7 pages of this it seems that ocuk did not competitors to be talked about on the ocuk forum...fair play is it not? I think its quite fair for them to say what they feel competitors to be? I dunno, am sure if people appeal to the ban under the conditions that they were unsure that they were in the wrong they will help out :S

The point is nobody knows what a competitor is defined as. That's the thing.

kylew · 22 Jul 2011 at 22:24

jaybee said:
There is no argument. Apple is a competitor, yet we have a forum dedicated to them. It's all just a farse and embarrasing to be honest. It's so unprofessional.

Apple, Acer, Dell, HP, Samsung and various other companies are also competitors according to the ridiculous competitor rules.

It's extremely unprofessional and realistcally the rule really needs to go. OcUK shouldn't bank on people buying their products because they aren't aware of somewhere possibly selling it cheaper, for example, and this is the exact impression given with the competitor rule.

Shamikebab · 22 Jul 2011 at 22:25

tricky, the problem is that the company has been mentioned on here for years and you can still find 40 page threads with the company name in the title on other sub forums.

jaybee · 22 Jul 2011 at 22:25

trickycurve said:
Jaybee's obviously trolling now.

The Rainforest sells the same types of products that Overclocker's sells. This includes things like monitors, software, keyboards and mice, network cables, routers... I could go on. Guess what, Jaybee: this makes The Rainforest a competitor to OcUK.

I don't think it is possible to make that any clearer.

Thanks for that. I really had no idea they were considered a competitor. :rolleyes:

Tombo · 22 Jul 2011 at 22:25

johnsparton10 said:
After reading all 7 pages of this it seems that ocuk did not competitors to be talked about on the ocuk forum...fair play is it not? I think its quite fair for them to say what they feel competitors to be? I dunno, am sure if people appeal to the ban under the conditions that they were unsure that they were in the wrong they will help out :S

The point is they allowed mentioning of places like Amazon as long as it wasn't related to OcUKs core business i.e. computer hardware.

Then Ace Modder makes a horrible post about it and causes a ****storm

orderoftheflame · 22 Jul 2011 at 22:26

trickycurve said:
Jaybee's obviously trolling now.

The Rainforest sells the same types of products that Overclocker's sells. This includes things like monitors, software, keyboards and mice, network cables, routers... I could go on. Guess what, Jaybee: this makes The Rainforest a competitor to OcUK.

I don't think it is possible to make that any clearer.

Some supermarkets sell monitors keyboards and mice, but if a thread comes up in GD asking where to buy the best beans from is that going to be censored? We're no longer allowed to discuss books, films or anything from that site suddenly.

It's still a backtrack on the previous rules.

Murray · 22 Jul 2011 at 22:26

I really don't see why we can't mention Amazon unless we are talking about hardware.

Saviola · 22 Jul 2011 at 22:27

The competitors rule will always be a thorny point, where do you stop.

Tesco's sell PCs, Consoles and accessories. Some stock Hard Drives and RAM, are they a competitor and as such banned?

How can you allow steam, and in turn sell steam work games, and not the 'new digital system'?

Emphacy · 22 Jul 2011 at 22:27

Well everyone's done a pretty good job of not discussing any other competitors for years, so how can this addition of a new competitor, (although previously deemed fine) be any harder to understand?

Yes the original thread confusion with Steam etc, but now your asking who the compeititors are? It's pretty obvious which one they're talking about. They sell hardware products similar to that of OcUK at similar prices = Competition.

And the apple and OcUK competitor rubbish, it's like comparing Nissan to Daves Dodgy Garage. It doesn't work like that.