Posted by NVLSlady/VA on 6/17/13 9:30am
Msg #473632

SS Need to be held to a Higher Standard

Could site mandate ONLY true name (no aliases) for Signing Companies? And in different color- always Linked - to stand out in the posts?

Reply by Lisa Cirillo on 6/17/13 9:53am
Msg #473640

This is a great idea. Sure would save a lot of time and guessing whether or not some of them are the same.

Reply by 101livescan on 6/17/13 9:59am
Msg #473641

This is a great idea, until you come to the issue of SSs who inflate their own ratings. It's a start.

Reply by Darlin_AL on 6/17/13 11:30am
Msg #473646

Also..

since many company names are drawn from a generic word/term pool and geographics, it would help to definitely identify the folks we don't want to work with.

Reply by Les_CO on 6/17/13 11:55am
Msg #473647

I guess I don’t understand? I would think almost all Signing Companies, or Title Companies use “Aliases” or ‘Trade Names’ or some LLC or Corporate name? Do you mean the actual ‘owners’ real ‘legal’ name be included in the listing, as in “Supreme Stupendous Signing, owned by Bernard Madoff”? That would be helpful. How about just requiring words ‘liar’ ‘deadbeat’ ‘felon’ ‘offshore’ 'no-pay' 'low-baller', or ‘honest’ ‘knowledgeable’ ‘well-funded’ and ‘always pays’ be included in their listing their listing?

Reply by Luckydog on 6/17/13 12:46pm
Msg #473652

Most businesses run under an LLC, a fictitious name, hidden identity. Realty companies, grocery stores, construction companies, everything... not getting your point here. It is called protection.

Reply by NVLSlady/VA on 6/17/13 1:07pm
Msg #473656

Trade name/ biz name is FINE. Should only be allowed to use

THAT name - and all the 'world' will know who we're dealing with. No screen to hide behind for "protection."

Reply by John Tennant on 6/17/13 1:53pm
Msg #473661

Re: Trade name/ biz name is FINE. Should only be allowed to use

If they are honest, pay fairly and on time, why do they need "protection"? I also believe that there should be no "protection" on this forum. Shouldn't everyone be able to know whom we are dealing with? My name and my alias are linked so you all know who I am.

JMHO

Reply by Les_CO on 6/17/13 3:15pm
Msg #473678

Re: Trade name/ biz name is FINE. Should only be allowed to use

Agreed John, but many here post anonymously. And in Signing Central some ‘rate’ and post anonymously, both good and bad, some about companies they have never worked for. It’s a flawed system, but it’s Harry’s, and no one ‘must’ be here. JMO

Reply by ApplePie on 6/17/13 2:17pm
Msg #473667

According to your ealier post you don't think SSs should be

rated. You said it is against the law to rate companies. Yet, you could not quote the law.

So, why are you chiming in now?

Reply by ApplePie on 6/17/13 2:17pm
Msg #473668

Above post to Luckydog. n/m

Reply by John Tennant on 6/17/13 2:23pm
Msg #473670

Re: Above post to Luckydog.

Sorry ApplePie, responded thinking you were addressing the message to me. Started typing my response before this clarification was posted.

Reply by John Tennant on 6/17/13 2:21pm
Msg #473669

Re: According to your ealier post you don't think SSs should be

I believe you are quoting the wrong person. I have never said that it is against the law to rate companies. That was "luckydog". I asked the poster to "cite that law". The poster could not. I firmly believe that SS's, T/C's, and yes, ourselves be rated. I respectfully suggest you go back and read the complete thread so that you can be clear on whom said what.

Reply by Luckydog on 6/17/13 7:02pm
Msg #473718

Re: According to your ealier post you don't think SSs should be

Applepie...never said against the law to rate companies, I said it "should" be against the law to ADD a company on Signing Central without their consent or knowledge to be rated unsolicited. BIG DIFFERENCE. Lets add Applepie to a sight without her knowing about it, and rate her on her notary skills, or anything else that pertains to her, address, phone number to boot made public. Do you really think it is fair? That is what you and the majority want done on here. I am glad Harry doesn't do that, and I am sure for his reasons does not want to open that proverbial "can of worms".
Rate all you want for the companies that sign up to be, talk about all you want on a forum, "I" myself and for the 20th time said as my opinion feel everyone and every company deserves privacy at their discretion, not anyone elses.

Reply by Belinda/CA on 6/17/13 7:39pm
Msg #473723

This is YOUR quote LuckyDog, saying against federal law.

Referring to ratings... "but any website using unauthorized use of names or companies names to be rated based on personal opinions if they chose not to be listed is breaking federal privacy laws." Msg #473482

John asked you to quote the law and you never did. Have you found it yet? I am sure everyone on this board would like to see if they are breaking the law. Harry in particular since it is his site that would be in violation.

Reply by Luckydog on 6/17/13 8:06pm
Msg #473724

Re: This is YOUR quote LuckyDog, saying against federal law.

And Belinda, Did you not read the many times I retracted it and said was "My opinion" or that doesn't count, you just like to read what you want to? Damn, you get persecuted and nailed to the cross because someone makes a mistake and cannot recite a privacy law or none may exist. I acknowledge that, and no I do not know all the privacy laws but seems like there should def. be some regarding people creating links to other people personal lives and businesses. Retractions apparently count for crap on here if they are not popular. Everyone has an opinion like an ass**le, but damn, let it be unpopular and you all let it be known forever. Must be some legality to it or Harry would let anyone add whatever they feel like it on here justified or not, lets just do a free for all and list everyone, every company we want and be judge and jury and prosecute everyone you feel did you wrong. Sounds like a great time.

Reply by John Tennant on 6/17/13 11:00pm
Msg #473748

Adding a company.

As far as I know most, if not all, of the companies in Signing Central were added by a notary. It is simple to do by clicking on the add button. No, there is no permission needed from any company that I know of. Perhaps you did not know that.

Reply by jba/fl on 6/17/13 11:26pm
Msg #473755

Re: Adding a company.

I think the NR staff verifies the info...seems I read that here.

Reply by John Tennant on 6/18/13 10:32am
Msg #473800

Re: Adding a company.

Yes, they verify the accuracy of the information that is added by the notary. It does not indicate that they are getting any permission from the company.

Reply by jba/fl on 6/17/13 11:01pm
Msg #473749

When a company goes into business, doesn't it go public?

I don't mean with stock offerings - I mean with their presence. Don't they announce in some manner that they are in business?

As a consumer am I to just accept that a company is inviolate regarding their personna and I am not free to disclose my personal dealings publicly?

Reply by MW/VA on 6/17/13 5:26pm
Msg #473704

I thought ss were only allowed to post on the forum with

permission. Many are notaries, and use that as a way around it. Otherwise, some have been trying to use posts as an "advertising" trick.

Reply by NVLSlady/VA on 6/17/13 8:23pm
Msg #473728

New World: Emerging Voice of Social Media

From Forbes: This is becoming the Age of Transparency and it is the essence of the new business model . . . where the Consumer is in control of the conversation.


http://www.forbes.com/sites/avidan/2013/03/18/the-most-important-job-facing-cmos-in-a-newly-complicated-world-is-the-creation-of-a-more-transparent-business-model/


It is the difference of opinion that makes horse races. -Mark Twain