So Are We Going to Allow Feedback on Framebuilders Or Not

[Uncle Jam's Army]

I was offline all this morning as I had to actually tend to business for a change only to find out that a new Paul Taylor thread (ok, it was only marginally about Paul Taylor) had been locked. There is a feedback thread for buyers and sellers in the classifieds and I think that is extremely useful. I know that I have been the beneficiary of feedback on that thread, and have been told that a person decided to deal with me on the strength of that feedback. So I am very grateful for that ability for forum members to provide feedback and to benefit from it as well.

I think forum members should also have the ability to provide feedback on their framebuilder experiences. If allowed, I would be happy to contribute to such a thread, both the good and the bad, so that people can use that feedback in making their custom frameset purchasing decisions. I know this has been discussed before but never went anywhere, but I respectfully request that the mods add such a thread in the builder spotlight subforum so that these discussions can occur openly and freely, assuming this forum's posting rules are followed.

[vqdriver]

hmmm.. interesting. i think the idea, when it was first brought up, was shot down because we were still under the serotta umbrella. i wonder what the mods think of this now.

i personally think it would be a great resource. by biggest fear would be that it could get insanely out of control with one sided posts because i can't imagine a lot of framebuilders chiming in to defend themselves.

fwiw, i've solicitied information from past customers re a handful of framebuilders and the feedback, both positive and negative, was very insightful. the information is out there, i just had to ask.

[dekindy]

How much more freely and openly can you get than 2 threads, hundreds of responses, and 12,000+ views? Granted, it might be easier to find in a separate sub-forum, but searches should identify threads readily enough.

[christian]

There's no rules against it, but I don't see why the moderators should start it. If you have something to say, just say it. Others can chime in as they see fit.

[Bruce K]

We're kicking it around.

It would require folks to maintain a reasonable level of civility no matter how unhappy they are

You could b@@@ch - just b@@@ch nicely;)

More soon

BK

[MattTuck]

I think there is a tension between providing curated content (such as reviews) and the spirit of discussion/debate/exchange of ideas that makes up most of the discussion here.

If I were thinking about a particular builder, I'd reach out individually to owners that I trusted on here. My concern is that an objective 'review' on here, would turn into a discussion, which I don't think is what UJA has in mind (could be wrong?).

[fuzzalow]

Feedback is good but IMO the devil is in the details. The person writing the review is being counted upon to be even handed, somewhat knowledgeable and willing to do the write up. A write up can't be done in 2 paragraphs, well not for me anyway.

I wrote a lengthy review of getting a Bruce Gordon custom, the post is in the custom bike gallery. It was more work than I think most would want to do. But I'm a reader so I do wish more content in long form forum journalism was contributed.

[christian]

I agree with Fuzzalow. I think it should also be predicated on the writers owning and riding the bikes for at least a few months before commenting.

I frankly think reviews of design elements is tricky too; it is hard to judge third-hand who, the builder or the client, is ultimately responsible for less-than-ideal solutions that come from unique requests, and as far as ride quality goes, one man's trash is another man's treasure.

Failure to deliver is one thing, but should one complain if the builder uses hooded dropouts, if no specific dropout style was discussed, and the client assumed slotted dropouts? What about fluted vs capped seat stays?

[Louis]

What about fluted vs capped seat stays?

Fluted? Off with the builder's head.

[christian]

Capped? Like an electro-welded Schwinn? That's not what I paid for.

[MattTuck]

I agree with Fuzzalow. I think it should also be predicated on the writers owning and riding the bikes for at least a few months before commenting.

I frankly think reviews of design elements is tricky too; it is hard to judge third-hand who, the builder or the client, is ultimately responsible for less-than-ideal solutions that come from unique requests, and as far as ride quality goes, one man's trash is another man's treasure.

Failure to deliver is one thing, but should one complain if the builder uses hooded dropouts, if no specific dropout style was discussed, and the client assumed slotted dropouts? What about fluted vs capped seat stays?

It can get very subjective, and beyond that, what are you reviewing? the frame as a piece of art? the experience of working with the builder? the fully built bicycle that may be affected by many things aside from the frame...

There's a difference between sharing an experience for the sake of the community and trying to 'get even' due to a bad experience. If someone is going to take the time to write something thoughtful, I think it should be allowed.

I have no problem with a member posting a thread, "Thinking about a [Builder's Name], can anyone share their experiences with him?" Feel free to respond publicly or privately.

[54ny77]

when i was [10?] or so i had a glitter green varsity, electro-welded and everything, and i think it weighed more than i did.

those giant stem mounted shifters with the little "S" cast on 'em, ahhh.....youth!

Capped? Like an electro-welded Schwinn? That's not what I paid for.

[Louis]

If someone is going to take the time to write something thoughtful, I think it should be allowed.

Who in the world ever said that this was not acceptable? Seems to me that we're making mountains out of molehills. (surprise, surprise, given that this is the interwebs)

[yngpunk]

I would think that if you're worried about your reputation online, you'd set up some sort of early warning system (google alerts is a nice, easy option) that crawls the web looking for mention of your name.

I suspect that Richard Sachs, in addition to monitoring his site traffic and having his ears itch when his name is taken in vain, monitor mentions of his name online so he can respond if he chooses to.

One can always do what news agencies do...ask the other party for comment...I know more work for the moderator to get the other side...and simply state that the other party did not respond to requests for comment, but how many frame builder reviews do we expect?

Lastly, apparently, those old Schwinns can fetch quite a bit

Cheers

[MattTuck]

Who in the world ever said that this was not acceptable? Seems to me that we're making mountains out of molehills. (surprise, surprise, given that this is the interwebs)

Yeah, that wasn't as clear as it could have been. That was in reference to Uncle Jam's Army's original post referring to when this was a Serotta forum, and there may have been some editorial control... or atleast editorial influence through the mods not wanting to offend the sponsor with a review.

Also was in reference to the idea of a thread describing an experience with a builder vs. an official 'review' that would sit in its own silo of the forum.

[slidey]

I'd love to see this feedback on framebuilders sticky materialize...especially since we're more about the members and not beholden to any particular framebuilder. As for the suitability level of the posts, if people have been holding back on reviews thus far, then I'd argue that members on here are in general quite civil/coy when it comes to sharing their reviews. If all else fails, then the Mods can always step in and do their monitoring.

[mjb266]

Isn't the gallery effectively a feedback thread? Folks in there gush over their new bikes (or new to them bikes) and I'll add myself in as a party that looks to those threads as a means of learning about builders.

This question seems to be more about criticism than feedback.

[christian]

Isn't the gallery effectively a feedback thread?No, I don't think so. It seems self evident that people rarely post the bikes they're unhappy with in there.

[Len J]

How about you get one bitch per frame. builder per thread?

The repetition gets tedious.

Len

[Louis]

How about you get one bitch per farm builder per thread?

I asked for 40 acres and a mule, and only got 39.5 acres and no mule.

[Len J]

I asked for 40 acres and a mule, and only got 39.5 acres and no mule.

Lol. Damn autocorrect. ;-)

[jr59]

Isn't the gallery effectively a feedback thread? Folks in there gush over their new bikes (or new to them bikes) and I'll add myself in as a party that looks to those threads as a means of learning about builders.

This question seems to be more about criticism than feedback.

No, I don't think so. It seems self evident that people rarely post the bikes they're unhappy with in there.


I can not think of one time I have EVER read, seen or even heard about, where somebody posted a bike and said; "Hey guys, look at this POS I just bought from builder xyz, and it only took me (x) number of years to get! Aint it great!"

That simply does not happen, and the builders that tell you to contact those in his gallery knows this. Or should!

[JAGI410]

There's a big difference between feedback on a $40 item that ships in a week and a $4000 item that takes a year to receive. A feedback forum for frame builders makes a lot of sense.

[weiwentg]

How about you get one bitch per frame. builder per thread?

The repetition gets tedious.

Len

oy veh. you could start 1,000 threads about one framebuilder.

[danl1]

There's a big difference between feedback on a $40 item that ships in a week and a $4000 item that takes a year to receive. A feedback forum for frame builders makes a lot of sense.

It can. IME, the trick is that one side posts gripes that may or may not be legit, and the backside is full of people posting based on reputation or web presence, but not real personal experience.

If both "sides" only spoke honestly and from direct experience, it would be very valuable. But based on what I've seen here and elsewhere, that's a pretty rare occurrence.

Mostly, people read the good and the bad, take the part that agrees with what they already believed, and leave the rest.

[verticaldoug]

IMHO, it is a really really bad idea which only breeds ill will.

[Doug Fattic]

I'm a framebuilder (although I mostly teach others) and don't see how some kind of review process on this forum of my colleagues work is going to be totally fair and objective. Problems start with screen names instead of real names which for all practical purposes are anonymous postings. I hang out here a bit and I have no idea who almost any of you are. You regular guys may know each other but I don't and neither do I see how I can find out. Anonymity vs. a name at a street address with a phone number is not an even amount of power in a conflict that has the capacity to damage the one's ability to make a living.

[DRZRM]

Seems to me that if the Feedback/Review section was limited to people who actually purchased frames from builders, and excluded the support, critique, analysis and piling on from the peanut gallery, this could be quite valuable.

[Louis]

And if an illustrious super-star like Richard Sachs can be hammered here (as he was earlier today, with innuendo and all sorts of insults) I can only imagine what might happen to the guys lower down on the food chain who would be much less able to dismiss the attacks. Unlike Sachs, who can afford to look the other way, they'd feel obliged to rebut and it would turn into an ungodly mess.

Edit: Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Paceliners shouldn't be able to say what they think about a given framebuilder or tell us about their experiences, but as we've seen recently, it can turn ugly very quickly. I don't know what the best middle-road would be, but we need to be careful about this.

[firerescuefin]

And if an illustrious super-star like Richard Sachs can be hammered here (as he was earlier today, with innuendo and all sorts of insults) I can only imagine what might happen to the guys lower down on the food chain who would be much less able to dismiss the attacks. Unlike Sachs, who can afford to look the other way, they'd feel obliged to rebut and it would turn into an ungodly mess.

Edit: Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Paceliners shouldn't be able to say what they think about a given framebuilder or tell us about their experiences, but as we've seen recently, it could turn ugly very quickly.

Louis...Richard loves the drama. His persona has been developed ( not by chance) and he encourages the give and take. In my 3 years here, I've seen 2 guys taken to task...and both seem to have had it coming...one is rehabbing his rep...one, not so much. I haven't seen a bunch of bogus agendas.

[Louis]

Louis...Richard loves the drama.

Perhaps, but that's not the impression I got. If he enjoyed / wanted the whole affair he would have certainly stepped in and said something. The fact that he did not respond tells me otherwise.

[coylifut]

I think it's a **** show in the making.
It puts more pressure and responsibility on the mods to ensure that the feedback is fair. An already thankless job.
At the very least, the reviewer needs to provide their full name and the city they reside.
Oh and yes. I think they should have at least ridden the bike.

[professerr]

And if an illustrious super-star like Richard Sachs can be hammered here (as he was earlier today, with innuendo and all sorts of insults) I can only imagine what might happen to the guys lower down on the food chain who would be much less able to dismiss the attacks. Unlike Sachs, who can afford to look the other way, they'd feel obliged to rebut and it would turn into an ungodly mess.

Edit: Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Paceliners shouldn't be able to say what they think about a given framebuilder or tell us about their experiences, but as we've seen recently, it can turn ugly very quickly. I don't know what the best middle-road would be, but we need to be careful about this.

You don’t see anyone here trashing Kellogg, or Strong, or Hampsten, and I think that is a reflection of not only how well they build bikes but also how well they treat people, even anonymous guys on the web. How often has one of their posts left a sour taste in your mouth? I bet never. Probably the same for flashier names like Pegoretti, who seems prefer a smile to a sneer to promote his brand. I think it is also a reflection of a critical mass of decent folks here that discourages gratuitous trashing of builders, so I think a builder review section is worth a shot.

[slidey]

This is one of the most important reasons why a feedback section is necessary; to provide a platform to the newbie builders to realise that there is a merit-based platform for their recognition, as opposed to a hype-based one. I tend to believe that regardless of how small a builder one is, their frame and their customer service will do the talking. This section could be a place where the new builders get inspiration and wider coverage by virtue of their positive reviews, or can seek to learn where they were lacking from some negative reviews. Framebuilders could collectively help identify long-standing problems with certain area of their process by seeing a variant of the problems they face cropping up in the feedback given to most other builders as well, etc. It could be quite constructive, and helpful.

And if an illustrious super-star like Richard Sachs can be hammered here (as he was earlier today, with innuendo and all sorts of insults) I can only imagine what might happen to the guys lower down on the food chain who would be much less able to dismiss the attacks.

[Louis]

I think it is also a reflection of a critical mass of decent folks here that discourages gratuitous trashing of builders, so I think a builder review section is worth a shot.

We already have an image gallery. I suppose that could be broadened from images to include commentary (which the owners already do post, if they feel so inclined). It would help things if someone were commenting (positively, or negatively) on a frame they actually have.

When the idea of using the Image Gallery for this was discussed up-thread someone said something like "well, folks tend not to say negative things about the the bikes they post there" which is true and understandable, but what are we to do about that? Have a new dedicated section called "Negative Reviews of Bikes" to induce them to come out as unhappy customers of framebuilder XYZ? Clearly that's absurd, but let's face it, that would in part be the motivation for setting up this new "Builder Review" section - apparently people didn't seem inclined to say negative things in the Image Gallery, they were only saying nice things (!!!). So we're going to create a new section for them to air all their laundry - the clean (which they already share with us) and now also the dirty, so we can all watch ensuing the soap operas. (Please pardon the mixed metaphors, but it's getting late.)

Whatever.

I've had two custom-bike purchasing experiences, one with Waterford (2200) and one with Dave Kirk (Terraplane). Both worked out terrifically and I would encourage anyone to purchase from either of them.

[Louis]

there is a merit-based platform for their recognition, as opposed to a hype-based one.

1) I think we already have that.

2) Are you insinuating that Sach's reputation is based purely on hype? I think the vast majority of his customers are delighted with his bikes. If you have real data that says otherwise, I stand corrected. The guy does a great job selling himself on the web, I think we can all agree there, but that's hardly a reason to put down his products. Are 101% of his customers perfectly satisfied? Maybe not. Maybe his bikes aren't everyone's cup of tea. Yes they're all steel, and maybe you don't go for that, OK, but that doesn't mean he's not one of the top custom framebuilders around.

[BumbleBeeDave]

I'm a framebuilder . . . and don't see how some kind of review process on this forum of my colleagues work is going to be totally fair and objective.

Mods ARE discussing this issue but it doesn't look good at this point. With anonymity goes lack of accountability for the reviews--and a nightmare of liability and maintenance for mods.

The last few days are a good example . . . phone calls and e-mails back and forth and mod section threads as we try to make sure somebody is watching "problem" threads at all times. We are all trying to take care of our "real" lives, but making sure things stay civil enough to achieve our goal of civil, at times strident, but overall educational discourse.

My own personal opinion is that scenario would be FAR more frequent if we were also trying to monitor a feedback section.

BBD

[dekindy]

How about a thread with a poll with standard preset questions per builder. No replies to thread allowed. Poll could use feature to display who answered the poll and then members could pm poll responders to get details. Get input from builders regarding questions.

[rugbysecondrow]

I hope the mods think about the following as I, and many others, think the idea has merit.

It seems that feedback itself is not an issue nor is it an issue to facilitate feedback. It seems this issues raised are:

Anonymity

proper/professional review, no bitching, legit reviews

Managing threads.



My opinion is that people here are good people and they will not maliciously go after another person. Our own classified feedback section shows this well.

If there is a good idea, you don't throw it out because there are secondary issues, you deal with the secondary issues so they idea can thrive. Remove the obstacles or build bridges.

For instance:

an actual name for contact and legitimacy purposes. No name, no feedback allowed.

Feedback/reviews should be factually written, straight forward and maybe limited to a set format of questions to limit diversions and rants. If there are purposeful questions, then I think only people who really care to leave a review will do so. The rants will be easily weeded out.

threads should be closed once the initial post is made unless the builder chooses to respond. Let the review stand as it is written and move on. If the Mods believe it is an illegitimate review, they can prompt the poster to edit it, clarify it or it will be deleted. If the thread is closed immediatly, then I think the management of the threads will be much easier and little for the Mods to do after the fact.

Sure, some people will leave less than positive feedback, but MANY others will do the opposite.

All in all, I think this would be a good tool, but like any tool, it has to be purposeful. I like the analogy of a pipe wrench, it is really good at its intended purpose and nearly useless for anything else.

[jr59]

Mods ARE discussing this issue but it doesn't look good at this point. With anonymity goes lack of accountability for the reviews--and a and maintenance for mods.

The last few days are a good example . . . phone calls and e-mails back and forth and mod section threads as we try to make sure somebody is watching "problem" threads at all times. We are all trying to take care of our "real" lives, but making sure things stay civil enough to achieve our goal of civil, at times strident, but overall educational discourse.

My own personal opinion is that scenario would be FAR more frequent if we were also trying to monitor a feedback section.

BBD

I understand that being a Mod is no fun, and a thankless job. Sorry about that.
But what you state here just promotes the existing omerta that is happening today. And it is real.

I don't have any answers, as how to make the job of a Mod easier. But maybe someone in the legal field can explain the "nightmare of liability" to me. It's just a forum on the internet. As far as I know there are no internet police that assure everything you read on it are correct. If so, I need to call them on a few things that are not about bikes.


I would think it's a needed platform, but how to do it and who mods it to make it as fair as possible is another story all together.

[William]

I would think it's a needed platform, but how to do it and who mods it to make it as fair as possible is another story all together.


Very true. No one said it was off the table yet, just that such an animal can be problematic and as such needs much consideration and deliberation.






William

[rugbysecondrow]

I understand that being a Mod is no fun, and a thankless job. Sorry about that.
But what you state here just promotes the existing omerta that is happening today. And it is real.

I don't have any answers, as how to make the job of a Mod easier. But maybe someone in the legal field can explain the "nightmare of liability" to me. It's just a forum on the internet. As far as I know there are no internet police that assure everything you read on it are correct. If so, I need to call them on a few things that are not about bikes.


I would think it's a needed platform, but how to do it and who mods it to make it as fair as possible is another story all together.

With approximately 58,000 views in the Builder Spotlight section, the forum is promoting custom frames and custom builders. It then make sense to allow feedback as well.

[zennmotion]

When was the last time you took a review from Bicycling, Velonews, Bicycle Quarterly, CX Magazine and the like seriously? Individual components, maybe, but a frame? These reviews are written by an identified person, who one assumes has a minimum stake in the opinion (they haven't bought the bike/frame with their own funds) and is attempting a balanced thoughtful review. These are all 'professional' reviewers- or at least self-described that way, most of whom have tested a good number of bikes. And their reviews are still mostly useless to the point of being laughable. At most you get a few thoughts on design features that may or may not fit your ideal. Add the fact that we're talking about made to measure/custom/bespoke (whatever term the builder is using) frames, that are not produced en masse on a factory floor. Add the fact that a "reviewer" in Paceline is a customer who has already invested with skin in the game, who has an individual and unique set of criteria, who, as has been pointed out by others, can hide behind an interweb personae, for a more or less one-off frame/build. You want ridiculous? Go look at the customer reviews on roadbikereview.com or MTBreview. Do people really think they would be any better from the highly sophisticated crowd here? I've raced, toured, commuted countless bikes since it became an ongoing passion for me since the mid 70's. I have a pretty good handle on what works for me, and I'm a pretty good writer. But no way do I think I could fairly review one of my customs in any way that would be fair and useful for somebody else- my opinion is worthless beyond the distance between my saddle and stem. If people want to write up their thoughts on their new sleds, fine, and if they're fun to read even better- the situation we have now works for entertainment purposes and showcasing some of what (or rather who) is on offer out there. But it would be naive to take them seriously- if you want a custom, there is no substitute for talking to the builder about YOUR needs and YOUR bike and their approach. If you want to do a little due diligence on business practices and delivery dates etc. then ask questions of previous customers- they're not hard to find. A formalized venue in this forum for reviews is a dumb idea IMO. The information would be of questionable value, and it poses potential harm to hardworking builders already stretching to make a living. Keep these people building and earning, not wasting time checking on their reps from anonymous talking heads in the peanunt gallery (and I count myself among that ilk). Don't trash the place, don't turn it into another roadbikereview!

[fuzzalow]

Very true. No one said it was off the table yet, just that such an animal can be problematic and as such needs much consideration and deliberation.

William

IMO you Mods have it tough and I applaud you folks for running it through the gauntlet rather than the easy way out and just putting the kibosh on it.

My point of view is that to formalize a review section is not a great idea and I'm reluctant to say that. It has too many wildcards in the deck to make it really worthwhile and valuable.

A good review is much too dependent on:


the quality of the reviewer. For example: for a novice client there is a down-side in having too many choices and too much control in spec'ing a bike. A good builder will reel this in somewhat but, in a game of centimeters with an insistent client, splitting the difference is not the optimum way to go. There is a an acquired knowledge experience to working well collaboratively and not intrusively with a builder.


the fit: I have always cliche'd that it is easy to take a good bike and screw it up with a bad fit. If you don't sit right on a bike, if you don't have the weight positioned correctly along the wheelbase, if the rider position is goofy, etc, etc, etc...


How many clients actually accept that they might be a sticking point? The argument that a rider often gives is "Been riding for xx-Years" as a statement they know what they are doing. Maybe they were doing it wrong for xx-Years.


builder is the most blame-able link in the chain: rider gets a fit from a fitter who isn't well versed. Specs from fit sent to builder. Bike gets built; handling stinks because fitter don't know ding; builder gets clocked for a lousy handling bike. The fitter works closely to the client so they are both not likely to look at themselves together and say "We screwed up".

There's more but I don't want to bore.

I support custom builders, every builder I have had the privilege to work with has been fantastic. Whatever mistakes were made were mine. Because the bike was built custom for me and reflected what I knew then and where I was along my own timeline of cycling for life.

[rugbysecondrow]

So, in essence, the customer is too unsophisticated to write a review and so we ought to just not say anything at all. I disagree.

I have had contrasting experiences, so I certainly think I could tell the difference between the two and provide feedback. I am certain you know this, but it is not just about a frame, it is the experience, customer service, deadlines, budget, communication, follow through on details desired, if there was a problem and how it was handled, was a frame delivered, did it meet your needs etc etc. Most customers could handle this.

When was the last time you took a review from Bicycling, Velonews, Bicycle Quarterly, CX Magazine and the like seriously? Individual components, maybe, but a frame? These reviews are written by an identified person, who one assumes has a minimum stake in the opinion (they haven't bought the bike/frame with their own funds) and is attempting a balanced thoughtful review. These are all 'professional' reviewers- or at least self-described that way, most of whom have tested a good number of bikes. And their reviews are still mostly useless to the point of being laughable. At most you get a few thoughts on design features that may or may not fit your ideal. Add the fact that we're talking about made to measure/custom/bespoke (whatever term the builder is using) frames, that are not produced en masse on a factory floor. Add the fact that a "reviewer" in Paceline is a customer who has already invested with skin in the game, who has an individual and unique set of criteria, who, as has been pointed out by others, can hide behind an interweb personae, for a more or less one-off frame/build. You want ridiculous? Go look at the customer reviews on roadbikereview.com or MTBreview. Do people really think they would be any better from the highly sophisticated crowd here? I've raced, toured, commuted countless bikes since it became an ongoing passion for me since the mid 70's. I have a pretty good handle on what works for me, and I'm a pretty good writer. But no way do I think I could fairly review one of my customs in any way that would be fair and useful for somebody else- my opinion is worthless beyond the distance between my saddle and stem. If people want to write up their thoughts on their new sleds, fine, and if they're fun to read even better- the situation we have now works for entertainment purposes and showcasing some of what (or rather who) is on offer out there. But it would be naive to take them seriously- if you want a custom, there is no substitute for talking to the builder about YOUR needs and YOUR bike and their approach. If you want to do a little due diligence on business practices and delivery dates etc. then ask questions of previous customers- they're not hard to find. A formalized venue in this forum for reviews is a dumb idea IMO. The information would be of questionable value, and it poses potential harm to hardworking builders already stretching to make a living. Keep these people building and earning, not wasting time checking on their reps from anonymous talking heads in the peanunt gallery (and I count myself among that ilk). Don't trash the place, don't turn it into another roadbikereview!

[Mikej]

What about a rating system that allows the important details to be answered - like a consumer reports "star" system, maybe no comments - you know:
1: did builder deliver on time? 1-5 stars 5 being good, 1 not good-
2: Got everything I wanted
3. etc
This would allow a rating at least, and it would also prevent a $hit storm of I hate that guy 'cuz he wouldnt do a braze on where I wanted...

[rugbysecondrow]

What about a rating system that allows the important details to be answered - like a consumer reports "star" system, maybe no comments - you know:
1: did builder deliver on time? 1-5 stars 5 being good, 1 not good-
2: Got everything I wanted
3. etc
This would allow a rating at least, and it would also prevent a $hit storm of I hate that guy 'cuz he wouldnt do a braze on where I wanted...

I think what you and Dekindy have suggested might be a great compromise. A way to communicate information without the ****storm.

[echelon_john]

I would like to point out what I think is an important distinction between the types of reviews that seem to be on the table. The first is a review of the custom bike/frame. The second is a review of the builder/process. Obviously, the Taylor thread that flared up had nothing to do with riding; it had to do with the business shortcomings (to put it very charitably) of a builder who habitually didn't deliver the goods.

I think both types of reviews can prove valuable to other Forum members and potential customers for the builder's work. In fact, I would LOVE to read more real-world reviews of various custom bikes in terms of ride quality, handling, what you might have done/asked for differently or tweaked, etc. Reviews like this, in the form of ride reports/bike reviews, would have value for me.

As far as reviews of experiences with frame builders, I do think it could provide a service to other potential customers. Not just the negative, but the positive as well. It would be a relatively level playing field, as even new/small builders who are meeting & exceeding expectations would make the 'radar screen.' I have been through several buying experiences that, when people ask, I am completely candid about, and if they then move ahead, they're doing it with another data point to ensure their process is successful.

Finally, I think this place is more permissive and open than most on the webz, for which the mods deserve a great deal of credit. Yes, there are issues and flameouts, but the level of civility and general bonhomie are what keep me coming back here. Thanks to all who make it happen--mods and sods alike.

[54ny77]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Z1eFdUSnaQM

[zennmotion]

So, in essence, the customer is too unsophisticated to write a review and so we ought to just not say anything at all. I disagree.

I have had contrasting experiences, so I certainly think I could tell the difference between the two and provide feedback. I am certain you know this, but it is not just about a frame, it is the experience, customer service, deadlines, budget, communication, follow through on details desired, if there was a problem and how it was handled, was a frame delivered, did it meet your needs etc etc. Most customers could handle this.

No, not exactly. I've had contrasting experiences between builders too, but my point is that the context of those experiences is unique (me, my needs, the builders approach to my needs, the builders prices and queue at the time etc) are not particularly useful or relevant to someone else. What I'm saying is that it's a bad idea to attempt to formalize or standardize the reviews by attempting to establish parameters, ratings and guidelines for reviews that give them an artificial air of authority by virtue of being posted here. There are too many variables and too few potential checks and balances to do it responsibly in this forum. I am troubled by opinions from anonymous posters in a public forum who could seriously and unfairly affect a builder's ability to make a living. I don't want this place to turn into bikedrama central, with builders obligated to defend themselves in back and forth "discussion" of both sides to what should be a private story, it's toxic to read. Conversely, if I'm making a purchase decision I would want to know something substantive about the person whose review I'm reading- their riding experience, style, preferences, physical size, age, etc. Without that background information, their review is worse than useless to me, it's potentially misleading. I'm saying to go ahead and write about your experience, but it should be kept free form and informal as it is now, and not in some special thread or sticky with ratings and scales and the ridiculous BS that you find in other ratings forums- it's not appropriate for bespoke bikes. Little to gain and significantly more to lose.

[fuzzalow]

So, in essence, the customer is too unsophisticated to write a review and so we ought to just not say anything at all. I disagree.

In some circumstance, "yes" to the first part of your statement and "no" to the second part.

As long as we can protect the builder from being unfairly and singularly maligned in what is essentially a loosely collaborative endeavor with a client.

I think that good, honest, credible information is always a good thing. But it has got to have checks & balance for both client and builder in maintaining a level playing field. And those details are easy to get lost because getting to a great bike can be exasperating and the bullseye will be slightly different for each client.

[rugbysecondrow]

No, not exactly. I've had contrasting experiences between builders too, but my point is that the context of those experiences is unique (me, my needs, the builders approach to my needs, the builders prices and queue at the time etc) are not particularly useful or relevant to someone else. What I'm saying is that it's a bad idea to attempt to formalize or standardize the reviews by attempting to establish parameters, ratings and guidelines for reviews that give them an artificial air of authority by virtue of being posted here. There are too many variables and too few potential checks and balances to do it responsibly in this forum. I am troubled by opinions from anonymous posters in a public forum who could seriously and unfairly affect a builder's ability to make a living. I don't want this place to turn into bikedrama central, with builders obligated to defend themselves in back and forth "discussion" of both sides to what should be a private story, it's toxic to read. Conversely, if I'm making a purchase decision I would want to know something substantive about the person whose review I'm reading- their riding experience, style, preferences, physical size, age, etc. Without that background information, their review is worse than useless to me, it's potentially misleading. I'm saying to go ahead and write about your experience, but it should be kept free form and informal as it is now, and not in some special thread or sticky with ratings and scales and the ridiculous BS that you find in other ratings forums- it's not appropriate for bespoke bikes. Little to gain and significantly more to lose.


I agree and I think it goes to what Ergott mentioned in his thread which was to own your comment. If one is going to make a comment about a builder, or any business person, then they need to put their real name next to it. Anonymous comments are too easy to lob with irresponsibility.

You addressed many of the same concerns I share.

[sparky33]

I don't want this place to turn into bikedrama central...go ahead and write about your experience, but it should be kept free form and informal as it is now, and not in some special thread or sticky with ratings and scales and the ridiculous BS

Yep^^^

Let's keep this a happy place.

[palincss]

When was the last time you took a review from Bicycling, Velonews, Bicycle Quarterly, CX Magazine and the like seriously? Individual components, maybe, but a frame? These reviews are written by an identified person, who one assumes has a minimum stake in the opinion (they haven't bought the bike/frame with their own funds) and is attempting a balanced thoughtful review. These are all 'professional' reviewers- or at least self-described that way, most of whom have tested a good number of bikes. And their reviews are still mostly useless to the point of being laughable.


Actually, I couldn't disagree more. I take BQ's reviews quite seriously and have found them to be helpful and accurate. I own two bikes BQ has reviewed: a Johnny Coast-built Velo Orange Randonneur and a M.A.P. Randonneur Project. Both frames are exactly as described in the reviews. Both are "semi-custom," in that geometry was standard, feature set limited to a handful of choices (which included everything I wanted) and a limited range of colors (which included what I wanted) with sizing and choice of tubing made to measure/selected for me.

I think this is a far superior alternative to the "every frame starts with a blank sheet of paper" approach, where every detail has to be negotiated from scratch, subject to misunderstanding and misinterpretation, or to the "the customer is the designer" approach to geometry.


I have a pretty good handle on what works for me, and I'm a pretty good writer. But no way do I think I could fairly review one of my customs in any way that would be fair and useful for somebody else- my opinion is worthless beyond the distance between my saddle and stem.


Either there's an unstated assumption of a very narrow universe of possibilities (i.e., there are no bikes other than racing bikes, no tire size other than 700x23C, etc.) or you grossly underestimate your own abilities.

[palincss]

I am troubled by opinions from anonymous posters in a public forum who could seriously and unfairly affect a builder's ability to make a living. I don't want this place to turn into bikedrama central, with builders obligated to defend themselves in back and forth "discussion" of both sides to what should be a private story, it's toxic to read.


Agree -- and in some cases, there are definitely two "stories," and all the characterizations of nightmare customers that have been posted by a certain well known frame builder definitely do exist. It can get even worse than what was described if the builder allows an ignorant, bone-headed and stubborn customer to become the designer and things work out poorly. I'm not associated with the business, just a long-time rider, and I've seen a couple of examples of this with people I've known.


Conversely, if I'm making a purchase decision I would want to know something substantive about the person whose review I'm reading- their riding experience, style, preferences, physical size, age, etc. Without that background information, their review is worse than useless to me, it's potentially misleading.


And this is why I don't understand your take on BQ's reviews. You know absolutely everything there is to know about Jan's riding experience, size, age, riding style, preferences - you name it, it's all out there. As with the best movie reviewers, you know exactly where he's coming from, and even if you completely disagree with him the reviews can still be enormously helpful ("If he likes it, I can be sure there's no way I will!"). As for those anonymous "reviewers" on many web sites - who knows what kind of jerks they might be? They could even be outright shills.

[Chris]

I personally think too much can be read into posts on the internet and, as we have seen ad nauseum, those words can be taken way out of context. In my experience, the only people who post reviews of products like cars, etc, are those who think the product changed their life or is the worst thing they have ever bought. My suggestion to those who want to buy a custom frame is peruse the image galleries (there are some Taylor's in there too) and then PM the owner and ask them about their experience getting the frame. You want to know about Speedvagen or Moots or Serotta? PM me and I am happy to have a private conversation. I am not going to post something here in public that will last forever, have the possibility of being taken out of context and may give the impression that my experiences in 2000, 2006 or 2010 remains an accurate reflection of how things are at the time the potential customer read my post.

[gdw]

How would the review section handle issues like a broken or defective frame? I know of 4 custom frames which have developed cracks and had to be retired/replaced within a year of their delivery. I'm not the owner but know the riders, how they used the frame, and how the framebuilders dealt with the problem. Would that information be allowed in a feedback section? It's certainly more valuable than a review written within a few weeks or a month of the owner receiving the frame.

[Joachim]

Too bad its worthless posting about a builder who does not build anymore....Yeah you know who you are. D$%k.

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . then PM me. We have legal counsel and the issues are real. It's most assuredly not "just a forum on the internet" if you are the owner.

That being said, the rating scale idea, with no actual commentary, seems to have merit.

As William said, the idea is NOT off the table. Wer'e still discussing and trying to figure out how to make it work for everyone. The ideas are appreciated.

BBD

I understand that being a Mod is no fun, and a thankless job. Sorry about that.
But what you state here just promotes the existing omerta that is happening today. And it is real.

I don't have any answers, as how to make the job of a Mod easier. But maybe someone in the legal field can explain the "nightmare of liability" to me. It's just a forum on the internet. As far as I know there are no internet police that assure everything you read on it are correct. If so, I need to call them on a few things that are not about bikes.


I would think it's a needed platform, but how to do it and who mods it to make it as fair as possible is another story all together.

[zennmotion]

And this is why I don't understand your take on BQ's reviews. You know absolutely everything there is to know about Jan's riding experience, size, age, riding style, preferences - you name it, it's all out there. As with the best movie reviewers, you know exactly where he's coming from, and even if you completely disagree with him the reviews can still be enormously helpful ("If he likes it, I can be sure there's no way I will!"). As for those anonymous "reviewers" on many web sites - who knows what kind of jerks they might be? They could even be outright shills.

OK, let me back away from BQ as an example- I was a former subscriber for a few years, still keep them and read them. All respect to Jan who has forgotten more than I'll ever know about design- though I still disagree with some of his assertions. You're right that BQ is different than the other sources (Bicycling, Velonews etc) in that you know something about who's writing the reviews. But it also underlines my point that without the background/context on the reviewer the review itself has limited value and is even potentially misleading. And we don't have that potential to really know the reviewers here in the forum- that's the important point. I think we can agree there. For myself, although I acknowledge that I do read published reviews (from all the mentioned sources) and am influenced by them- but if I'm really being honest and objective, I really don't place much stock in them, and we may disagree there- OK, just an opinion. Mostly for me, if it's a cross bike with 2 wheels it's a good bike. If it's also green then it's awesome:bike:.

[christian]

The only meaningful bicycle review I've ever read was "The Magnificent Seven" in the May 1996 issue of Bicycle Guide.

Other than that, i'd suggest they're worse than useless. Impressions colored by personal biases more like it.

[texbike]

I think that frame builders (as all business owners) should be held accountable for their designs and practices. However, it seems that a feedback thread would be difficult, unmanageable, and deteriorate the fabric of the forum with the potential negativity that it could generate.

However, if it did move forward, I would suggest the following:

1. A single thread started for each individual builder (not multiple threads to sort through) - this would make it easier for potential buyers to do research on specific builders that they were considering. It would also make it easier for the builders to monitor.

2. ONLY those that have purchased a frameset from the builder AND the respective builder can post (as a rebuttal) to the thread.

3. The individuals that post (not the builders) need to supply some basic profile info (not a name or specific address) that allows potential reviewers to judge the posters credibility. As an example: years riding, bikes owned, # of custom bikes, etc.

I think that this would at least make the reviews/feedback more helpful to the user base and make it somewhat fair by allowing the builder to present their side and keep the threads from being piled on with potentially irrelevant and damaging commentary.

Just my $.04 worth (adjusted to accommodate decreasing FRN value).

Texbike

[Ahneida Ride]

It puts more pressure and responsibility on the mods to ensure that the feedback is fair. An already thankless job.


Amen

[BumbleBeeDave]

But it also underlines my point that without the background/context on the reviewer the review itself has limited value and is even potentially misleading.

With the anonymity goes lack of context and reviwer accountability.

BBD

[AngryScientist]

Thanks for the suggestions and thoughts everyone. We (the mods) are evaluating and processing all of your feedback and we'll act accordingly. Cheers.