cornerstone

Since UK Trading Standards is in charge of all criminal sanctions related to the sale of counterfeit goods inside the UK, this may not be in the top ten of great ideas you've ever had.... Anyone pursuing legal avenues over reps is not going to win any popularity contests around here either. The venting and frustration is understandable, but really people will have to cross-fingers and see how it plays out.

All I know is...don

Congratulations!! That's awesome!! Here's to the next 25...

That's nothing. If you're talking rigs.... * 48k of RAM * Rubber Buttons. * Manic Miner on Cassette Tape * Eight minutes listening to that fax machine noise while it loads * Full 15 colour, 256

www.everyhit.com

Right you are. Wow - Vista is even more crap than I'd thought.

Just so you know, XP can't access more than 3Gig of Ram, but later versions of Windows can. The dedicated graphics card will have you running sweet. Get one with HDMI output and it'll be ready to connect to any giant LCD, Plasma... Dedicated cards can be added to systems for sure, but sometimes you have to change a jumper setting on the motherboard to switch the on-board one off I think. It'll be in the motherboard manual, which can be downloaded I'd imagine. If you can identify the motherboard, you'll be sorted.

If you got to the General Discussion forum, and then look at the top right there's a Forum Options drop-down. There's an option in there to unsubscribe from notifications from that forum. There's a chance that might be the ticket.

That 'users' stat includes guests in addition to members I believe - it's the number of different computers hitting the server. So you do see spikes for a variety of reasons - that was a particularly weird one though. With the benefit of hindsight, every time we seem to mention that we have something like the PARIS HILTON CRISTIANO RONALDO SEX TAPES the number of visitors does seem to increase...which is odd It's almost like it could be more popular than this whole 'watch thing' we've been running with [With apologies to nikki6, who has probably just sprayed his morning coffee all over his keyboard...]

Er, yeah, simzger. You seemed to overlook my post there - that was an opportunity to take a seat back. Thread closed.

To explain, Watchmark was given every opportunity to do the right thing. He was actually given a choice at the time and explicitly chose that he'd rather be removed than make it right - he was quite specific about it. He even asked for his RWG account to be deleted. He specifically promised to QC the watch before sending it. It was a lemon. He was asked to exchange the watch, he refused. The one thing he did not offer at any point was a replacement, because that's what was being refused. @houndoggie: I'm not the buyer. I am a 3rd party - I'm just reading the email exchange. If you think I can't read, you're mistaken. I'm just guessing, but for those arguing Watchmark's corner, you're not doing his PR campaign any good by wading in just as he's said that he didn't QC it properly and offering to rectify the matter, by saying you're not sure what happened and who to believe... It's a reasonable conclusion (one I reached) that if a long term member would be treated that way, a newer member would not be treated any better. Indeed Watchmark himself made that very case - this was the same his standard of service he offered to everyone. Well, then, it wasn't very impressive. (Personally, I think it was a PR disaster entirely of his own making. For the sake of a few dollars on a faulty product he'd promised to QC and then sold, he's no doubt forgone many times that. But if his 'principle' was that he doesn't fulfill promises, QC watches or exchange them if they're faulty, no matter the circumstances, and buyer be damned - it was hardly a noble one. Hardly a compelling case to be kept around, and no real benefit for members in that. This isn't the GZ watch sellers union.)

Fair enough. Lesson learned. The reasoning behind it is that we all love watches, and gens are the real thing. Gen owners (of which most of us are too) deserve to enjoy their watches. It's impolite to throw them in face of ADs. The Ingy is fantastic. Enjoy! Incidentally, the Ingy is quite simply the easiest watch bracelet to resize known to mankind. It comes with a little tool that you put in the button at the back of the bracelet, and the pin slides out. The Planet Ocean....less easy

First up - as Offshore says I'm not the person that bought the watch, I've only seen the correspondence. So when you posted about an offer you never made earlier, I felt it important to correct it. 1. Replacing a broken part = repairing the same lemon watch. You didn't offer a replacement watch, you said it should be returned for repair. The watch was a gift, if you'd properly QC'd it to begin with, it wouldn't need repaired. So all your comments about offering to 'replace' the watch are incorrect. Maybe that's a language barrier thing - but he wanted to exchange the broken watch for a working watch. 2. I suspect what you're talking about is the timing. What use is a broken watch (to you or him)? I doubt he was clinging on to it for dear life. The point would have been not to wait until receiving the broken watch before dispatching one for exchange, it's a completely pointless waste of time. They can be exchanged simultaneously. Pay for 1 watch, get 1 working watch. Which is all a moot point because you never offered an exchange or a replacement watch. You refused to exchange it. It's worth reiterating, he paid for 1 watch and received 0 working watches from Watchmark. And you're the one carrying on that you were hard done by. Again maybe there's a language barrier in all this - but you're not understanding the customer's perspective at all. 3. I imagine because the broken promise, non-functioning product and poor customer service he received was indicative of how you treat all customers. You're correct that the key issue was the promise of personal quality control. If this had just been some random order through your web shop, you could easily point to your shop policies. But you made a specific promise before purchase, and then sent out a lemon watch anyway. That watch was a gift to his mother-in-law and you knew that. All he wanted was a QC'd watch to give as a gift. He didn't receive that, and then he wanted to exchange the watch, but you never offered that. Don't make promises if you don't intend to keep them. Lots of dealers don't QC watches, we know that. But then they don't promise to personally QC them either. If you had done a better job of looking after your customers you would have a better reputation - but you didn't look after this customer at all. Except you didn't offer a replacement - you didn't offer to exchange the broken watch for a new one.

No - it still says you'll repair the watch - this being the watch with three problems that you said you had personally QC'd before sending. The watch was a lemon. You specifically state you would not exchange the watch due to your policies. The quality control was critical to the purchase, because it was going to be a gift. You got the sale because of your promise to personally QC before sending it, and happily took and kept the money on that basis. I honestly don't think you even understand what the buyer was suggesting - which was an exchange of watches. The idea was not for them to have two watches, there's a new working watch, and a broken one. They get the working one, you get the broken one you sold the first time. Is it complicated? If you say you're going to personally QC a watch, then QC it before sending it. If you're not, then don't promise customers you will. Saying you're going to QC the watch, sending a broken watch, and then hiding behind store policies that render quality control completely meaningless is bad for the buyer: - BROKEN PROMISE - BAD PRODUCT - POOR CUSTOMER SERVICE - CUSTOMER HAS BROKEN WATCH - WATCHMARK KEEPS MONEY If this is the BS you give experienced members, it's reasonable to assume you put even less effort into new members. At the end of the day, you traded your reputation to make a few bucks.

There's speculation that Lada's controversial Rodent Power Assist technology could be banned though... On the plus side, if it is allowed, I hear Richard Gere has already expressed a strong interest in starting an F1 franchise.

I don't get it either - there's actual news in sport worldwide, and they go out of their way to generate fluff news about AFL and NRL. The headlines on Fox Sports are.... "Fraser ready for Jolly good test": AFL player says upcoming match will be competitive (so not actual news then) "'Very Drunk' Fittler in hot water": Rugby League coach knocks on wrong hotel door by mistake. Wow. Reportedly 'half-naked', which is not really a big deal for a guy when it's the top half and you're wearing shorts. Nothing there about Formula 1 at all. There was next-to-nothing about the World Cup this week either. It's bizarre. Especially when Melbourne hosts the opening Formula 1 Grand Prix, you'd expect a mention. Williams, Force India and Lada could make for an entertaining tournament, you never know

To follow up on Offshore's post I've seen the PMs at the time and this is categorically false. That was exactly what was NOT offered. - Watchmark took the money. - Watchmark wrote he would personally QC the watch. - The watch had a faulty bracelet, and the bezel and second hand fell off. The faulty bracelet caused the watch to fall off. - As the watch had fallen off because of the faulty bracelet, Watchmark deemed this now to be a 'used' watch that he would not exchange for a new watch. - Watchmark offered only to repair watch if two way postage was paid by the buyer. (3 weeks after being told about the problems with the watch). - Watchmark was asked to exchange the watches - send the QC'd watch he was supposed to have sent to begin with, and receive his lemon watch in return. This is the 'second' watch of which he speaks. - Watchmark refused, and was belligerent and unhelpful. - The implication was that all buyers on RWG receive this treatment and level of customer service. Indeed Watchmark made it quite a point of principle - even though he had failed in his initial assurance to QC it, and sent a lemon. - Crap product and crap customer service was the conclusion. - Caveat Emptor. At the end of the day, Watchmark's idea of QC, customer service and standing behind pre-purchase assurances made to buyers fell way short. Or to put it another way, there are other people that would have dealt with the customer differently and made their mistake right. Watchmark didn't.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article6537430.ece http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/557...wild-women.html

Just wait until you get to the 'themed' Max Mosley S&M orgy... http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/for...icle3663230.ece http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/stor...5001021,00.html

The fear has to be that developments in Iran will cast a long, dark shadow over the entire 2009 Kerrang Awards proceedings

The one on the left.

Now you're talkin' ! That's awesome!

Fantastic! Thanks!

I'm going to be honest....this probably isn't going to help much. But nevertheless, if it's running funny....