(08-17-2016, 12:58 PM)vtmax Wrote: I was caught up in the middle some months back between Barrister & Mann and Cold River Soap Works when someone sent me a pm. Hell broke out on another forum who defended their 'guy' and fanboys entrenched around their 'kid.'
Most were probably young guys telling their roommates or brand new wives they discovered traditional wet shaving.
CRSW & B&M are far overrated and hyped by these crews. There are much better soaps out there in my opinion. They are not junk, just not impressive. That's my review.
Forums only work if they are totally open.
You were caught up in something that didn't actually exist (and, after I contacted an attorney and filed a complaint with the DOJ, disappeared, at least to the best of my knowledge). And I would note that you have claimed in the past to have never used either of our soaps. So, while I'm all for the openness of fora, was this post really necessary beyond a way to voice your disapproval for a manufactured controversy created by people who have nothing better to do with their time?
On the subject at hand, allow me to offer the perspective of a manufacturer. In a perfect world, we would have reviews that are well-reasoned, objective, and take into account individual variations in things like scent preferences. But that's not how the world works, and I definitely do not believe that there are no negative reviews out there. There are plenty of negative reviews, some of them quite personal and petty, that are largely licensed by the anonymity of the Internet. It has been my experience that many people are far more willing to write a negative review when allowed anonymity, and some of these reviews even cross into personal attack territory without much difficulty.
We do need a counterbalance, but it seems to me that perhaps the well-known wet shaving reviewers, who are arguably well-known BECAUSE of the quality of their reviews, keep their negative impressions to themselves because they receive so much pushback and hate mail when they don't. Maybe the anonymity is better for protecting the freedom of speech and opinion that should characterize our community. But perhaps, as a community of self-described "gentlemen," we ought to request a bit more restraint regarding personal attacks and petty nonsense. Reviewers affect our livelihoods quite dramatically, and so reviews that become very personal (such as
this charming little nightmare, which got very ugly in places) should maybe be questioned as potentially being less-than-useful.
There are better ways to voice criticism than petty ugliness. I believe strongly that negative reviews should be protected by anonymity in order to prevent personal pushback against their authors, but I also believe that it's important that those reviewers recognize the power that anonymity gives them and use it accordingly. This is mostly not true for smaller manufacturers, most of whom have day jobs and only make soap as a side thing, but, for the larger companies like B&M, PAA, Stirling, etc., unnecessarily vicious reviews can do untold damage to our livelihoods. I don't come to your job and tell your boss that you're an awful person, and I don't tell him that you're incompetent, stupid, evil, unethical, or anything else, nor would I unless it were true. Except in situations where it IS true, please return the courtesy.
www.barristerandmann.com
