Job Discussion Forums

[Douglas]

The remarks of this forum is a way help advise people the good, the bad, the ugly of all schools and language centres. But when advice speeks the truth of bad companys. They are removed from being posted .
My question is what concern does this forum have when they remove teachers warnings on this forum that could prevent overseas teachers being hurt or worse?

Is it just money that prevents you from allowing words of big chain schools who treat overseas teachers like garbage..
I am so shocked that the forum does not allow people to express danger locations to avoid. In hopes that prevention is its purpose of this forum.
Mr Sperling must have lost his thoughts as to what it is like to work overseas under poor conditions, fear, forced employment, cheated wages etc etc.
As for I. I looked at Mr Sperling as being a concerned person for us the overseas teacher. But his actions express not concern for us as a group but the people who pay his wage.
what is the purpose when a teachers ask fellow teachers for direction and advice, when all the bad is removed leaving just the good??????

[chinasyndrome]

Mate, go to the Job Information Journal on this site and click on Asia. Have a look around and see if your comments fit in there. Thanks for the heads-up and really sorry you had a bad time but flaming Dave is just going to get this thread torn down. Off-forum by PM and email Dave's been pretty good and waaaaay tolerant to more than a few of us.

Cheers,

CS

[JamesD]

While the forum may have changed a bit, it did seem that too many posters were just spouting unsubstantiated criticism and promoting personal vendettas.

I remember posts that simply said, "The "XYZ" School of English is full of bottom feeding scum." No real info and probably from a disgruntled teacher who rebelled against the idea of actually having to work. You can still find criticism of schools here but note that now it is specific and backed up with facts rather than subjective ranting.

[kimo]

Douglas, we all sympathize with your plight and hope those scumbags rot in pergatory. However, Dave's is simply a business and nothing wrong with that. A paying client can call the shots sometimes, if indeed that is the case or just the moderators' judgement. Perhaps, a more tactful way would be to write your story here again without mentioning any names or companies specifically other than location and then directing people to the real meat in the Jobs Information Journal. "Douglas' Story in ShaGuaLand" might be a good title. Leave the bitterness behind, write convincingly and you can at least help some people, but there will always be a sucker for those types of schools. As well, you MIGHT not be erased from this forum. Finally, there are some non-commercial pages, not really competitors to Dave's, that will let you write just about anything you want. Do a search. The planet's big and there are enough people for every site.

Good luck!

[Roger]

Douglas,
I am interested in personal experiences such as yours, but there is a limit to what a public forum can bear. There is a clear border between slandering and criticising. Even if I have a real grievance to air, I would hold back on names until facts are proven beyond doubt.
By the way, some of these employers might want to air their own opinions too. In some cases, they might expose unsavoury characteristics of TEFLers. Would you want your full name and nationality to be posted on a website that can be accessed by all and sundry???

[MyTurnNow]

[kimo]

MTN, what you say makes sense. Dave does not want a lawsuit more than anyone else. But, isn't he opening himself up for a lawsuit from those who might be led to believe that an outfit is worthy of working for when all it ever seems to get is negative comments here that stem from more than just a small group of disgruntled people?

[MyTurnNow]

Not following, kimo...
if all a school gets is negative comments from lots of people, why would people believe it's worthy of working for?

I can see a problem if all we're allowed to see is positive comments and the school turns out to be An Execrable Suckhole, but it's probably hard for Dave S to get sued for trying to avoid a "slander" suit.

If anyone gets sued for this, perhaps it should be the schools who force Dave S to remove the criticisms.

MT

[kimo]

Obviously, we are not communicating MT. How laws cross international boundaries when the internet is concerned, I do not know, but if Stooge School, a frequent advertiser, exerts pressure and threatens legal action against a proprietor and the proprietor removes all negative comments about Stooge School to avoid legal action from Stooge School, might not a good lawyer of an opposing party when his/her client is harmed by Stooge School be able to use the law and claim that the proprietor knowingly and deliberately hid information from the public about Stooge School? Is there not some sort of liability on both sides of the coin?

Personally, I would not accept money from any organization whose reputation is perennially negative from source after source. I would advise such an organization that it is threatening my businesses credibility with other clients and those my clients wish to reach. I could not business with it. I think on that we agree.

[Gray000]

I see where you're going kimo. I don't think Dave has any LEGAL responsibility for anything that happens if we rely on the information contained herein. I mean, for all we know any given post is written by an autistic 5 year old alcoholic martian. Yes? So if we rely on it, too bad. Makes since - I mean, how could dave verify whether a post is true or not? Think about the crap you see advertised every day.

Slander (or is it libel when written?) could be a different case. Can't do research from here, and Dave's being sued for hosting a forum is way beyond my capacity to analyze cold. However, you could take google and the scientologists as an analogy. There was some compelling reason for google to pull its links to anti-scientology sites. It could well be that when a bigger fish with more money to throw at you decides to sue you, that's generally the end of your enterprise, regardless of the merits of the case.

I think the chain schools in question would do this whether or not they were advertisers. I GUESS anyway, and Dave ain't sayin...

[MyTurnNow]

After some early communications problems we are very much on the same wavelength now!

And hi Gray; nice to see ya again!

MT

[Gray000]

Hey, I been around. Where have you been lurking? No, don't answer that.