Anyone else blocked from Active Captain?

[twistedtree]

I previously commented on another thread that it was incomplete and in places inaccurate, thus not lot of use. JS responded and posted that Australia/NZ was soon to get better info. I have used it a little now, and see that it is easy to edit incorrect info online. I have not figured out how to add new markers to counter the 'incomplete' aspect.

I wonder if it will get populated the same way that SE Alaska got populated.

 

[rwidman]

The owner can allow or ban whomever they choose for whatever reason they choose.

...........True. The law allows them to do that. Doesn't necessarily make it a smart business decision, and it certainly does not necessarily make it "right."

I'm not sure it does anymore. There was this baker who declined to bake a cake for a customer. The customer sued and the judge decided that the baker was discriminating against the customer and fined him well over a hundred thousand dollars.

 

[sunchaser]

I wonder if it will get populated the same way that SE Alaska got populated.

Which brings to mind the possibility of assuming well intentioned new AC data relocating things in areas with 17 foot tidal ranges and magnetic anomalies. it is not uncommon that I have three different charting systems and three different depth sounders active. As well as paper charts opened up. Speak of paranoid

 

[twistedtree]

Well, some have been blocked from further participation on TF.

For those of us who have been blocked, I would understand it if we had been using AC abusively (like posting fake reviews), or overtly trashing AC in public forums. Note that I consider "trashing" to be very different from objective critiquing like a number of people have done in this thread.

But that's not the case. I think most of these trace back to getting in an argument with the Active Captain founder over some unrelated topic like your food choices, your thoughts on electronics on your boat, or how he treats people when they have a different opinion than his. They have nothing at all to do with Active Captain. Personally I have been complimentary of Active Captain. But I did tell Mr AC that I though his treatment of people on TF was abhorrent, and that seems to be what got me blocked.

To me, this is akin to Furuno disabling my free charts because I got in an argument about restaurants with one of their guys at a trade show. Or getting blocked from the Waterways web site because I got in an argument with someone at Doziers about electric cars.

 

[BandB]

I wonder if it will get populated the same way that SE Alaska got populated.

Don't think they can. That may have been the hold up. I don't think there are any available guidebooks for Australia to have "Hayley" post nearly identical information to.

 

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

I use Coastal Explorer which also include AC. I find AC both as their computer program and with CE which is very helpful for us. It gives us up to date information on anchorages, hazards from folks that visit the area, long before it shows up on electronic charts.

May I suggest if Jeff S is not acting appropriately, deal with that as a separate issues and not attack AC. AC is actually a great product. But then again I have seem some folks here on TF judge others when they should really mind their own business.

 

[dhays]

Ya I try to get on that site could not get it working just gave up. Not worth the time

Depending on where and how you use your boat, I think AC can be an excellent resource. I have found it to be helpful and it has gotten increasingly so as it's participants have added content. For the most part, the website has seemed pretty straightforward to use, unless you are on a tablet.

 

[Shrew]

The OP very matter-of-factly described what happened, and asked if it had happened to anyone else. I would hardly call that "disparaging their product." Not even close!


True. The law allows them to do that. Doesn't necessarily make it a smart business decision, and it certainly does not necessarily make it "right."

This has kind of been covered, however you may not have read through all the posts. Admittedly i could have worded it differently (better?). At the risk of being banned from AC myself.....I guess my point was; you have an owner who is clearly throwing a temper tantrum. Starting such a discussion and outing him on it is not going to help the matter. My intention was a suggestion to try to get the OP back on AC.

I completely agree that this was handled poorly. However, I was also simply pointing out that "It's his cat, he can pet it any way he wants". I don't agree with the business practice, However I was just pointing out that he has the right to do so, regardless of how much we disagree with it.

 

[dhays]

May I suggest if Jeff S is not acting appropriately, deal with that as a separate issues and not attack AC. AC is actually a great product. But then again I have seem some folks here on TF judge others when they should really mind their own business.

Unless I am mistaken, AC is a company wholly owned by one individual. A problem with the individual is much the same as a problem with the company.

If the owner of a bakery is a jerk to everyone, I may chose not to purchase from that bakery even if I like the bread and don't have to deal directly with the owner. Again, personal decision. I see nothing wrong with that any more than something wrong with someone else continuing to purchase from that same bakery despite the behavior of the owner.

 

[BandB]

May I suggest if Jeff S is not acting appropriately, deal with that as a separate issues and not attack AC. AC is actually a great product.

I agree it's a good product. The OP didn't start this thread to attack Jeffrey though. It's about actions taken by Jeffrey as owner of AC. This isn't about the pig roast but about denial of access of AC based on posts made on TF, posts that were not about AC at all.

Ultimately, that's his right. However, it's also a bit of a warning as to how identifiable one wants to be on AC and on eboatcards and the potential that holds for retaliation due to things said elsewhere.

We should be talking here about the business practice, not our personal opinion of the individual. Now, I also believe the business should be making business decisions and not decisions based on personal opinions of their customers either. He can run his business as he sees fit, but people do need to be aware that if they build a lot of data, a lot of routes and other things, within AC and a lot of contacts in eboatcards, there is the potential of losing access to all of that based on something in no way connected to the company.

 

[danderer]

...but people do need to be aware that if they build a lot of data, a lot of routes and other things, within AC and a lot of contacts in eboatcards, there is the potential of losing access to all of that based on something in no way connected to the company.

A very good point.

 

[rwidman]

I posted this above but I don't think anyone read it:


There was this baker who declined to bake a cake for a customer. The customer sued and the judge decided that the baker was discriminating against the customer and fined him well over a hundred thousand dollars.


Something similar apparently happened to a photographer.


Political correctness and the past administration have pretty much taken away a business owner's "right" to chose who he/she does business with. As individual customers, we still have the right to decline to do business with someone we don't like but it doesn't work the other way around.


If business owner locks a person out of his website because he doesn't like him or something he said, that would seem to be against the law.

 

[ksanders]

I posted this above but I don't think anyone read it:


There was this baker who declined to bake a cake for a customer. The customer sued and the judge decided that the baker was discriminating against the customer and fined him well over a hundred thousand dollars.


Something similar apparently happened to a photographer.


Political correctness and the past administration have pretty much taken away a business owner's "right" to chose who he/she does business with. As individual customers, we still have the right to decline to do business with someone we don't like but it doesn't work the other way around.


If business owner locks a person out of his website because he doesn't like him or something he said, that would seem to be against the law.

Those suits were probably based on ethnic, religious, or sexual preference discrimination.

Thats a whole different concept than what the OP and others who have been banned from AC have experienced.

At my business I/we decline to discuss any political religous, or moral subjects with our customers. Nothing controversial.

I know for a fact that some of my customers and I would not agree on "things". I keep conversations neutral, and am happy to have them as customers. I choose where I spend my money, but I'll take that money from anyone that wants to buy from us.

Thats just good business.

 

[sunchaser]

Hardly the case. As I mentioned earlier TF has indeed locked people out and deleted or shut down threads. This is just life on the net. The Internet is not free game especially if you PO the site owner. Jeff's product is appreciated by many and for those that feel neglected, don't like it or use it may I suggest ignoring it. I do, but if I see the need I'll get active in AC.

 

[User915]

....if they build a lot of data, a lot of routes and other things, within AC and a lot of contacts in eboatcards, there is the potential of losing access to all of that based on something in no way connected to the company.

If a product is free, you are the product.

 

[danderer]

I'd say legally AC can block anyone for pretty much any reason. Indeed that is their right. They state that in their terms of service:

Active, in its sole and absolute discretion, may at any time terminate or otherwise restrict access to and use of the Sites or to Providers by you.

Not an unusual provision.

However the relationship between AC and this user base is a bit more complicated than you might have with a bakery or a store or a contractor.

Now I am not privy to any business details of AC but it appears to me that it works like this:

AC is a marketing organization supported by a technology backend. What they sell is access to "us", their users. They sell this access to businesses that want to advertise to us such as their "sponsor" business and Defender.

"We" are not their customers; those businesses are. This isn't an unusual way to do things.

However, without us AC is nothing. We provide the content. We provide the users/hits that AC is selling to those businesses.

It is a symbiotic relationship. So while it is fair to say the owner of the business can do what he/she/they want here there is a real possibility of upsetting that relationship. Symbiosis can be very fragile.

AC itself has argued that in the age of the Internet, well-run businesses prosper and poorly-run ones must listen to the freely-shared feedback of their customers or fail. That argument seems right on point here.

 

[BandB]

I posted this above but I don't think anyone read it:


There was this baker who declined to bake a cake for a customer. The customer sued and the judge decided that the baker was discriminating against the customer and fined him well over a hundred thousand dollars.


Something similar apparently happened to a photographer.


Political correctness and the past administration have pretty much taken away a business owner's "right" to chose who he/she does business with. As individual customers, we still have the right to decline to do business with someone we don't like but it doesn't work the other way around.


If business owner locks a person out of his website because he doesn't like him or something he said, that would seem to be against the law.

I read it the first time and it's completely irrelevant to this situation. You can refuse service to anyone as long as it's not in violation of a law which means it's not discrimination against a protected group. This is in no way such. You can block people you don't like. You can refuse to serve those who are rude to your employees. You can't refuse to serve someone because of their sex or religion or national origin or age (as in over 50) or sexuality.

Two entirely different situations.

 

[BandB]

AC itself has argued that in the age of the Internet, well-run businesses prosper and poorly-run ones must listen to the freely-shared feedback of their customers or fail. That argument seems right on point here.

That just applies to other people though. lol.

 

[Ted]

. However, I was also simply pointing out that "It's his cat, he can pet it any way he wants". .[/QUOTE]


Careful there, the S.P.C.A., could be "hunting" you for that attitude.
Keep it up.

Ted

 

[rwidman]

I read it the first time and it's completely irrelevant to this situation. You can refuse service to anyone as long as it's not in violation of a law which means it's not discrimination against a protected group. This is in no way such. You can block people you don't like. You can refuse to serve those who are rude to your employees. You can't refuse to serve someone because of their sex or religion or national origin or age (as in over 50) or sexuality.

Two entirely different situations.

You didn't read between the lines.

It seems you cannot refuse service to anyone except white, straight males under the age of 50.

 

[twistedtree]

There has been a lot of conjecture as to whether anyone has been blocked from AC based on views expressed outside of AC. To be honest, I don't think the conjecture is helpful.

If AC did block someone for views expressed, that would be a serious problem which could cause a number of users to leave AC. Since it is users that create the content, AC would be crippled (and rightly so). If it is NOT true, then there is the risk that AC could be mistakenly harmed. It might be good to end the conjecture until the OP gets a reply to their inquiry.

I got a reply from my inquiry to Active Captain. I want to keep any he-said, she-said out of this, but suffice it to say my access has not been restored.

Case closed, from my perspective. I know one person/business to avoid in the future.

 

[angus99]

You didn't read between the lines.

It seems you cannot refuse service to anyone except white, straight males under the age of 50.

You can refuse service to anyone based on their behavior, not on who they are. Now can we stop with the ill-informed, reactionary bullshit, please?

 

[psneeld]

You can refuse service to anyone based on their behavior, not on who they are. Now can we stop with the ill-informed, reactionary bullshit, please?

i

 

[sunchaser]

Some clarification please. I gather it is possible to upload your course from a laptop to AC. What is the benefit of doing this?

 

[HeadMistress]

Expressing a different point of view should not result in being banned from anywhere.

Unless you happen to a conservative invited to speak on a college campus.

 

[kthoennes]

I steadfastly believe that life is way too short for flame wars and fights on the 'net, so I almost always just walk away immediately - but I posted once years ago on having my AC contribution edited and partially deleted. Mr. AC attacked me so fiercely you would think I had assaulted his mother. It was downright irrational, but okay. I had my AC account deleted, my three or so reviews removed, and even a few really minor data points deleted (like I noted "yes" our marina did have a gas dock). Whether AC is a good or useful product or service or not, why would I use it after a fierce reaction like that? And how do I know how much of the other information is accurate when it can be edited or deleted every time J gets inflamed at somebody?

 

[BandB]

I steadfastly believe that life is way too short for flame wars and fights on the 'net, so I almost always just walk away immediately - but I posted once years ago on having my AC contribution edited and partially deleted. Mr. AC attacked me so fiercely you would think I had assaulted his mother. It was downright irrational, but okay. I had my AC account deleted, my three or so reviews removed, and even a few really minor data points deleted (like I noted "yes" our marina did have a gas dock). Whether AC is a good or useful product or service or not, why would I use it after a fierce reaction like that? And how do I know how much of the other information is accurate when it can be edited or deleted every time J gets inflamed at somebody?

You're clearly wrong. The value of AC is that it's completely crowd sourced and everyone gets to post their opinions. I'm sure I've read that somewhere.

I will say too that I believe there may be times editing is appropriate, but then that would have been my response and said I'd be glad to discuss the specifics in private.

 

[dhays]

I posted this above but I don't think anyone read it:


There was this baker who declined to bake a cake for a customer. The customer sued and the judge decided that the baker was discriminating against the customer and fined him well over a hundred thousand dollars.


Something similar apparently happened to a photographer.


Political correctness and the past administration have pretty much taken away a business owner's "right" to chose who he/she does business with. As individual customers, we still have the right to decline to do business with someone we don't like but it doesn't work the other way around.


If business owner locks a person out of his website because he doesn't like him or something he said, that would seem to be against the law.

I didn't miss it, but as Kevin said, it was a different situation. The courts found that the baker was being discriminatory in refusing service and that providing the service didn't infringe on the Baker's freedom of speech or freedom of religion.

We are not talking about discrimination of a class of people in this thread. As such, there is nothing illegal at all involved. It is just what actions are not only a good business practice on the one hand, and what types of business practices we want to support on the other.

 

[Lou_tribal]

Expressing a different point of view should not result in being banned from anywhere.

Unless you happen to a conservative invited to speak on a college campus.

Not sure I see the link between a web forum about boat and this, just a very good example of what is a sentence taken out of context.

L.

 

[mcboatface]

Expressing a different point of view should not result in being banned from anywhere.

Unless you happen to a conservative invited to speak on a college campus.

Right, "Head Mistress" that's the problem with our country. Sure glad you nailed that one. Too bad conservatives are never given a voice In our country. Right. You should probably get that microwave out of your house. You never know...

I don't know Jeffrey from a hole in the wall, but this thread has all the makings of a conspiracy theory. I guess that's the state of the union now. Just say any damn crazy thing no matter what the facts are.

As Senator Daniel Moynihan once wisely said, "You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts."

Seriously, I have never, ever, in over thirty years of being online (remember CompuServe?), met a more vicious crowd than this. And to think that most boaters I meet are delightful. I guess most boaters I meet are actually boating and not posting thousands of messages on TF. Really. If you look, the average number of posts by those on this one dreadful thread is in the thousands.

Yes, it's that's bad. I own a trawler and would like to think this is a useful resource, but the amount of hate and arrogance here is astonishing. I would rather teach myself and possibly fail miserably, than spend more time listening to the "experts" here.

I tried to participate back when we bought our boat and was instantly attacked by many of those who seem to live on this forum. It was stunning. But six months later I can clearly see that it's standard operating procedure for TF.

I am certain many of you will spend many hours telling me how wrong I am. Knock yourselves out. I will point out that there is a reason that the vast majority of the posts here are from considerably less than ten percent of the users. No one else stands a chance. As a newcomer, I know I sure didn't.

I would LOVE to be able to participate in engaging, educational, thoughtful, helpful conversation about the boats we all love, but I guess it can't be here. How sad is that?

Having said that, some of the users here share tremendous amounts of useful information and vast experience. I just wish I didn't have to wade through so much crap to get there.

To those who rise above, I thank you. I have learned much. To the rest, I beg you to look in the mirror and consider whether I have stated anything of value here, or if you immediately just start calling me names, which, unfortunately, is far more likely.