A Message to Our Readers - Page 3

strannix · 10-15-2004, 10:53 AM

Elvis-

I'm pretty new here, just new enough that I've watched a lot of this unfold. You have to understand that as great as your members make this place, this episode leaves me with a bad impression of the people running it. I don't see how it can't.

The fact of the matter is that we were presented with information and told it was confirmed, when in fact it turned out to be false. I don't see that you're taking appropriate responsibility for that. I understand "proof" is hard to come by, but the bottom line is that if you can't confirm something, don't say it is confirmed. Your best guess doesn't cut it when your credibility is on the line.

You and your staff owe the people on this board an apology, because you didn't do your due diligence. It's quite a cut-and-dried issue; you all said "just trust us", and we did, and we got burned.

Elvis · 10-15-2004, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by brook
Just to clarify... is it your position that you are still unsure whether this was the Edge?

At this time we are not positive if it IS or IS NOT The Edge, or anyone else for that matter.

EPandAmerica · 10-15-2004, 10:57 AM

Okay, lets just assume that I'm smarter than the average bear shall we.
Even though the interview had a strange feel to it, I believed it to be given by somone in the U2 camp to someone in the Interference camp.
BUT after the first few The Edge posts I was more than

, then when he went OFF on Jick that is when I knew that the person posting as The Edge was not the guitar player in the band U2. You would think that Elvis or any of the people involved in the running of this site would have had a CLUE by then, but no Elvis just said "BRAVO" at the post directed towards J.

*edit to say I am referring to the Band interview.

sixtoe · 10-15-2004, 10:59 AM

Not surprised. Take it from a longtime member: This site pulled the same hoax after ATYCLB was released (one of the reasons I stopped coming to the boards). Got them a lot of new members too.

And I'm sure I'm not the first to suggest that paid memberships probably rose dramatically once "The Edge" started posting.

Hey Elvis, this is your site. You can do whatever you want with it. If people want to keep supporting BS like this with their wallets, so be it.

LuminousTimes · 10-15-2004, 11:02 AM

I never believed for a minute that the edge was posting on interference. First of all, how could he possibly have the time to post 50 plus times. Secondly, his verbage was not even close to the way he talks on the Q&A's that U2.com has sponsored. So, I do not feeled deceived because I never bought it.

HOWEVER, the exclusive interview with the band that you had up this past month. The one that was answered by "u2". If that was an exclusive interview done by Interference, how could your staff not been aware that it was not them? How was the interview conducted that your staff had no idea that it was U2 members they were talking to? How could they have been fooled if they conducted the interview?

If you say that you and your staff had no culpability in this deception, please explain how the band interview and later the edge interview were conducted.

Thanks.

ThatGuy · 10-15-2004, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Elvis

We posted the interviews based on the information we had at the time, which was substantial enough for us to not believe otherwise. Again, at this point, what the TRUTH is... is still unsure and remain to be so. The interviews were taken down in good faith - not because we were told to do so.

If I remember correctly, doubts began to surface about the identity of Dalkey Beach before "The Edge" even posted. Since some of us knew weeks ago (including you) that Dalkey Beach and "The Edge" were the same person, why wasn't more scrutiny focused on the identity of this poster? I would suggest that if you did not have unimpeachable evidence that "The Edge" was real it was irresponsible for you to run with it as far as you did. You got a lot of people's hopes up on what you know was disputed evidence, and yes for that I think you do owe the Interference community an apology.

brook · 10-15-2004, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Elvis

After speaking with RMP, U2's publicity agency, and conducting our own thorough investigation, we have come to the conclusion that these interviews, and many forum posts, most likely did not come from members of the band.

Quote:

Originally posted by Elvis

At this time we are not positive if it IS or IS NOT The Edge, or anyone else for that matter.

If you have statements from U2's management or PR firm that this is not from members of the band (or as you've phrased it here, most likely not) - then you should just suck it up and apologize for allowing this to continue.

To suggest that you did not have doubts or were unaware when so many members of this board, both publicly and privately, were offering valid reasons why there was cause for doubt - and often receiving senior staff's admonitions and thread closures in response - is disingenuous. We all know this isn't The Edge.

While there is certainly a possibility that you were duped like the rest of the folks here, your quick insistence that this was in fact The Edge led everyone to believe that you did your homework. When things started to unravel, those who were willing to point out the obvious were met with silence, (or worse, in the case of a couple of people), and sly responses that they should get a life and stop challenging the powers that be. The fact that this has now blown up completely... followed by these vague retractions and semi-apologies... does nothing to restore anyone's confidence in the management of this site.

You owe your members an apology. It's as simple as that.

U2girl · 10-15-2004, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Elvis

Thanks. The fact is, I'm not sure what I can offer an apology for.

How about

- avoiding answers and hiding behind the staff, starting with the interview/Dalkey Beach/Edge identity details
- not checking the identity of The Edge (enough)
- misleading readers by saying repeatedly it WAS him and that things WERE checked
- rejecting any debate by repeatedly closing threads
- attacking those who questioned Edge and saying they were assuming too much

Oh and, I don't buy it ALL the staff were tricked, particularly of interest is (but we'll probably never know) what you and Katey know. Interesting several people, including one ex-mod, did enough research on their own WEEKS ago to find out this was not The Edge.

Nice knowing you.

AvsGirl41 · 10-15-2004, 11:14 AM

I can't believe there is still a "may or may not be" argument going on.

I should think the fact that "The Edge" hasn't posted since the questioning arose, despite pleas from the believers, says it all.

Tip Top Prince · 10-15-2004, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Katey

Now there will be still and are those who questions if this Edge is the real thing, much in the same way that you cant be sure who Elvis is or who I am you just have to perhaps to take that leap of faith. You can believe or not believe that’s really up to each of you. I would not put my reputation on the line nor any of this staff if I was not sure..

Unbelievable - the whole thing.

1. When are you going to FULLY disclose exactly what happened, what correspondence there was and any other pertinent information?

2. Seeing as how you don't seem to want to do question 1, how about this: What "checking" have you done now, that you didn't do earlier. In other words, why were you all certain before, and now you are not? Seems to me like the only thing that has changed is the post in the Don't Expect Suggest forum, from the same IP as "The Edge".

Doozer61 · 10-15-2004, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Elvis

At this time we are not positive if it IS or IS NOT The Edge, or anyone else for that matter.

And still, a month later, you are vague.

LuminousTimes · 10-15-2004, 11:28 AM

I really, really wanna know how the Exclusive Interview with U2 was conducted that your staff thought it was U2. You said that U2 took time out of their busy schedules to talk to your staff.

How could this interview been conducted where they were sure it was U2 but it was not?

Why would you even at the time said the answers were from "U2" instead of a specific member or members?

Sounds kind of hinky to me.

doctorwho · 10-15-2004, 11:57 AM

On @U2, the person known as D. Smith posted:

Quote:

The only thing more I can offer them is yes it was my teenager and the interaction...was started because she posted under "Dalkey" on
that forum and tried come off in her posts as if she knew
something..leading a persistant member of the Interference "staff" to
email her. The convincing part is conjecture. They may have known all
along that this wasnt Edge or may have been
really fooled, thats up to them. She answered all correspondence "Kind Regards" no name
Thats all that I can offer. If you enjoy that website keep enjoying it. If you dont, I dont know what to tell you. I know nothing about the website in question.
This will be my last post on this matter. I have to go about the business of raising a family, paying bills, working and getting on with life. U2 fans, enjoy the new album. They are a terrific rock and roll band and I enjoy their music myself.

D. Smith claims that this was her daughter.

Didn't Angela Harlem post that Dalkey was a girl from the Chicago area based on her IP?! Didn't Angela's claims cause problems? And now we have the admission that Dalkey and "Edge" are the same person.

It seems that Angela Harlem was right all along, if one believes D. Smith.

Hmmm...

sabine U2 · 10-15-2004, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Elvis
We are sorry that any of this has happened, and how it has transpired. We said in our 'message', "Despite accusations, no persons from this staff was or are involved in any misrepresentation or deception on the forums or in interviews", and that's the truth. If this was a hoax, which at this time we are unable to confirm or deny, we were just as fooled as anyone else in the end.
Joel

the refusal of any of the site staff/management to stand up and be accountable for this is truly astounding. it's very convenient to just say that you were fooled just like everyone else.

how many premium memberships did interference get during the past month?

U2SavesTheWorld · 10-15-2004, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by doctorwho
On @U2, the person known as D. Smith posted:

D. Smith claims that this was her daughter.

Didn't Angela Harlem post that Dalkey was a girl from the Chicago area based on her IP?! Didn't Angela's claims cause problems? And now we have the admission that Dalkey and "Edge" are the same person.

It seems that Angela Harlem was right all along, if one believes D. Smith.

Hmmm...

I don't have to believe D. Smith. I believe Angela.

Why didn't anyone else?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

10-15-2004, 10:53 AM	#31
strannix Acrobat Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 340 Local Time: 11:18 AM	Elvis- I'm pretty new here, just new enough that I've watched a lot of this unfold. You have to understand that as great as your members make this place, this episode leaves me with a bad impression of the people running it. I don't see how it can't. The fact of the matter is that we were presented with information and told it was confirmed, when in fact it turned out to be false. I don't see that you're taking appropriate responsibility for that. I understand "proof" is hard to come by, but the bottom line is that if you can't confirm something, don't say it is confirmed. Your best guess doesn't cut it when your credibility is on the line. You and your staff owe the people on this board an apology, because you didn't do your due diligence. It's quite a cut-and-dried issue; you all said "just trust us", and we did, and we got burned.

10-15-2004, 10:57 AM	#33
EPandAmerica New Yorker Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Texas Posts: 2,630 Local Time: 11:18 AM	Okay, lets just assume that I'm smarter than the average bear shall we. Even though the interview had a strange feel to it, I believed it to be given by somone in the U2 camp to someone in the Interference camp. BUT after the first few The Edge posts I was more than , then when he went OFF on Jick that is when I knew that the person posting as The Edge was not the guitar player in the band U2. You would think that Elvis or any of the people involved in the running of this site would have had a CLUE by then, but no Elvis just said "BRAVO" at the post directed towards J. *edit to say I am referring to the Band interview.

10-15-2004, 10:59 AM	#34
sixtoe The Fly Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Philadelphia, PA, US Posts: 55 Local Time: 05:18 PM	Not surprised. Take it from a longtime member: This site pulled the same hoax after ATYCLB was released (one of the reasons I stopped coming to the boards). Got them a lot of new members too. And I'm sure I'm not the first to suggest that paid memberships probably rose dramatically once "The Edge" started posting. Hey Elvis, this is your site. You can do whatever you want with it. If people want to keep supporting BS like this with their wallets, so be it.

10-15-2004, 11:02 AM	#35
LuminousTimes The Fly Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Sunny Southern California Posts: 198 Local Time: 09:18 AM	I never believed for a minute that the edge was posting on interference. First of all, how could he possibly have the time to post 50 plus times. Secondly, his verbage was not even close to the way he talks on the Q&A's that U2.com has sponsored. So, I do not feeled deceived because I never bought it. HOWEVER, the exclusive interview with the band that you had up this past month. The one that was answered by "u2". If that was an exclusive interview done by Interference, how could your staff not been aware that it was not them? How was the interview conducted that your staff had no idea that it was U2 members they were talking to? How could they have been fooled if they conducted the interview? If you say that you and your staff had no culpability in this deception, please explain how the band interview and later the edge interview were conducted. Thanks.

10-15-2004, 11:14 AM	#39
AvsGirl41 New Yorker Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Denver, Colorado Posts: 2,948 Local Time: 10:18 AM	I can't believe there is still a "may or may not be" argument going on. I should think the fact that "The Edge" hasn't posted since the questioning arose, despite pleas from the believers, says it all.

10-15-2004, 11:28 AM	#42
LuminousTimes The Fly Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Sunny Southern California Posts: 198 Local Time: 09:18 AM	I really, really wanna know how the Exclusive Interview with U2 was conducted that your staff thought it was U2. You said that U2 took time out of their busy schedules to talk to your staff. How could this interview been conducted where they were sure it was U2 but it was not? Why would you even at the time said the answers were from "U2" instead of a specific member or members? Sounds kind of hinky to me.