Australian Broker forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

Ban anonymous comments on broker news sites: FBAA

Notify me of new replies via email
Australian Broker | 28 Aug 2013, 08:00 AM Agree 0
FBAA president, Peter White, is calling for broker news publications to ban comments from anonymous readers as a way to enable 'more mature' debate
  • Anonymous | 28 Aug 2013, 08:46 AM Agree 0
    I agree
  • Tony | 28 Aug 2013, 09:41 AM Agree 0
    I'm not so sure...I think those of us who have been in the industry for many years understand the difference between mature comment and the rest. In the main, most comment including those that attack, are in some ways reflective of opinion and people may not be as forthcoming if it is not anonymous
  • BONED | 28 Aug 2013, 09:42 AM Agree 0
    Well, I was advised to use an 'Alias' by a 'BDM' as management within my Aggregation Group didn't like my comments - I guess the truth hurt in those few instances where I told it as it was. This would just simply mean that I would not comment any further, and in fact, I'd probably just unsubscribe from all future communications.
  • John Radicchi | 28 Aug 2013, 09:43 AM Agree 0
    Well put Peter - I agree 100%. If you aren't willing to put your name to a comment, it should be disregarded.
  • Todd | 28 Aug 2013, 09:43 AM Agree 0
    Peter grow up... its a world of chat rooms and people will say what they want and be who they want, deal with it. If this is the biggest issue the FBAA has to whinge about, then i think they need a new leader. There are much more precedent issues that need dealing with.
  • Sydney Broker | 28 Aug 2013, 09:49 AM Agree 0
    He is wrong. You will get more honest feedback and open dialogue by allowing people to post anonymously. Some may fear lender repercussion (and it does happen) as well as issues with their aggregator otherwise.
    I think posts that I have read have been "brutally frank" more than rude! Maybe he should harden up?
  • Really? | 28 Aug 2013, 09:51 AM Agree 0
    Unfortunately, if you insist on real names, you'll never get a good, honest debate. It'll be watered down tripe. People will have to 'toe the party line', or at worst, refrain from commenting. By enabling anonymity you can attract good debate.
  • Aarong | 28 Aug 2013, 09:51 AM Agree 0
    That is all fine and good, except the brokers may well be commenting on things involved with particular banks, ASIC, their own aggregators, etc... and the simple fact is they don't want to wind up on a hit list. This article makes the pretence that either this won't happen or if negative action is taken, its somehow worth it because its more noble if you give your proper name. Lets not kid each other, this is an attack on free speech, plain and simple. Does Peter White think the same level of candor will be achieved if brokers are named? Of course not. Any child could see that. So what is the point of having a forum at all then. I particularly like the quote the implies only "well informed' people should be able to comment. The translation of this is people that agree with the establishment. Freedom of speech is an extremely important issue and the entire industry would degrade without it. People and businesses have a natural and human right to free speech. There is NO corresponding right not to be offended. You don't have the right to stop my free speech even if you do find it offensive, and you shouldn't. You just have the right to t
    urn me off and not listen. Someone should point out to Peter White that publications like the Austalian Broker don't simply post anything sent to them. There is already a filter for useless or purely offensive discussion and the Australian Broker already exercises its right to either print or not print content. What gives Peter White the right to tell the Australian Broker how it will publish its articles.
  • Old Joe | 28 Aug 2013, 09:54 AM Agree 0
    you see this was eventually going to make its way. I agree that there are some bad embittered people out there in Loan land but remember some of these comments are true and also have effectively changed some behaviours of lenders and also some brokers. It is important that in a mature society we can differentiate from comments that are put up in good faith or some that are just sprays.
  • Regional Broker | 28 Aug 2013, 10:19 AM Agree 0
    HMMM ! Is he worried about some comments that have been made in the past about the FBAA ? That is not clear . This to be is just not reality ( NOTE I AM NOT an FBAA Member) . If we cannot post the way we do , it will stop honest and frank comments . Just look at the comments of "Boned" . Please can we see something worth commenting on instead of this !
  • Cecil | 28 Aug 2013, 10:23 AM Agree 0
    Peter 0 : Anonymous 10. 'The Defence rests!!!'
    The banks have a great deal of power as well as their lobbying power in Canberra and seemingly elsewhere. Little brokers none.
  • Positive Broker | 28 Aug 2013, 10:25 AM Agree 0
    Hard to say. Anonymous allows you to speak your mind but I must admit some of the regular posters clearly have very little understanding of the industry. I think that is part of Peter's argument that you shouldn't comment if you don't know the facts.
  • China Chops | 28 Aug 2013, 10:43 AM Agree 0
    back to work kids
  • Ray C | 28 Aug 2013, 10:51 AM Agree 0
    I made the following comment under my name and position to the Adviser when they sent details on their advisory panel :- Congratualtions.
    I note your panel may represent the view of the lender, but with NAB ownership of Aggregators and Choice Franchise CEO being ex Choice Aggregator CEO and now owned by NAB I can not see how the panel can represent the voice of the Broker. Brokers have absolutely no say with what the Aggregator, Lender or Franchise Management.

    Again the panel will only achieve what the Lenders want and not what’s needed in the Broker industry, any view now represented by the Adviser will be viewed with much sceptic-ism." The editor other then taking this as fare criticism wrote to my Management and almost cost me my contract. John R and Peter White your jobs in this industry may be safe but Managers in this Industry are mostly ex Bank and cannot in any way or form take criticism without trying to use every devise within their power to remove irritants to their mission. Customers come last in this process.
  • John Whitten | 28 Aug 2013, 10:58 AM Agree 0
    I have never hid behind an anonymous name, and I feel that if someone really believes in what they are saying they should have no problem using their correct names. Surely we are all adults.
    As far as my Aggregator is concerned if I have a problem with them I am not frightened to take it up with them direct. If they don't like it and cause me grief I can always move. However, in saying that, I have always been able to solve any issue I have with my Aggregator with intelligent discussion.
    If you have something worth while to add to a discussion why hide?
  • Rastafarian | 28 Aug 2013, 11:08 AM Agree 0
    Anyone who thinks retribution for comments that make honest criticism of facets of the industry does not occur is either in a position of power and cannot be harmed by it or just not paying attention. The only way to get honest commentary as with elections is by anonymous comments being allowed to continue, we all recognise the ones that do not apply don't we.
  • Regional Broker | 28 Aug 2013, 11:09 AM Agree 0
    Is China Chops , Peter White?
    Great comment from Ray C , says it all really !
  • PeterT | 28 Aug 2013, 11:38 AM Agree 0
    Posts aren't annonymous. IP addresses can be tracked. This site uses cookies which can also be used to track posts.
    If anyone wants to speak directly with me they're welcome to, just post a phone number and I'll call. :)
  • Broker | 28 Aug 2013, 12:09 PM Agree 0
    What , can't handle the truth?
  • Jeff Mazzini - AAMC Training | 28 Aug 2013, 03:25 PM Agree 0
    Whilst I have no issues in people speaking out and yes the writers of any article can be tracked back to the source, I feel though that the Publishers should be bound by a code of conduct / ethics that ensures that slanderous or liable comments should not be allowed to be published. Comments of such nature show the industry over all in poor taste and a turn off to readers from within or outside our profession. So accountability for allowing such unwarranted comments should rest Solely on the shoulders of the editor and or publishers. We are all bound by codes of ethics in our respective professions so it also should be for them also.
  • Broker | 28 Aug 2013, 04:38 PM Agree 0
    I’d actually like to the see the FBAA & MFAA and a few other well known lender personalities and hangeronerers stop telling Brokers what we should be doing, and perhaps focus on what they can do for Brokers, to make our participation within this industry, a tad more enjoyable / rewarding at times, as it’s becoming somewhat tedious reading of late..

    We just seem to go round and round in circles and continue to over engineer what was once a rather simplified process.
  • Shot the messenger | 29 Aug 2013, 07:40 AM Agree 0
    Typical FBAA reaction ....... shot the messenger. The FBAA needs to have a good long look in the mirror and start focusing on its members.
  • Ray C | 29 Aug 2013, 08:28 AM Agree 0
    It's unfortunate that the Editors are human, are in a position of power and control. They too are subject to an "agenda" and that all too often is driven by the advertisers and not the people the publication is claiming to represent. Fair and balanced comment will not always be reported and many times removed due to self interest and not Industry interest.
  • Allan Faint | 29 Aug 2013, 09:16 AM Agree 0
    great in theory and I have never done so but maybe some dont want the phone call from those lenders who may disagree with your opinion, as has happened to myself in the past.
  • David C | 29 Aug 2013, 10:39 AM Agree 0
    To all the anonymous weasels, wouldn't it be easy to hide in a cupboard and make defamatory comments about everybody. People should state their name and status before voicing defamatory opinions with no liability for their actions. Maybe people should post pictures of their wives and allow people to anonymously post stories of thier past and see and see if this is an accurate reflection. The fact Australian Broker allows these comments to be made by anyone who wishes shows their willingness to allow bullying and ridicule with prejudice without fact in the marketplace.
  • Melo | 29 Aug 2013, 11:42 AM Agree 0
    Speak your mind, incognito or not.If you have problem with MFAA,FBAA ,Lender or any provider just let them know?.They all there and get paid to have your business .If not happy ,how about turning up at some of MFaa ,Lenders events ?You be very surprised that biggest whinghers dont turn up ,do little to improve industry and own development.
  • Papery | 29 Aug 2013, 06:19 PM Agree 0
    I read the AB forum almost daily (have done so for a couple of years now) & do participate on occasion. For the most part I find the comments appropriate, interesting, educational & on occassion humorous. Yep, every so often comments do pop up which could be construed as over the top (emotional) & occasionally argumentative...The recent posts concerning valuers/valuations for example.
    This forum compliments what we get fed at Lender & Aggregator PD brings viewpoints in from right across the country & the emotion & passion from all sounds probably cant be helped. Im happy to read past the very small % of idiot comments, which are usually may poorly phrased anyway.
    I have no problem with anonymous comments, or with fully named input.
  • Steve H | 29 Aug 2013, 09:17 PM Agree 0
    I think the comment by David C is the reason why we are reading this story and commenting, He uses just a vague first name similar to those of us he's criticising for not divulging our own name. But then suggesting posting pictures of peoples wives, thats just over the top, sick even. lets keep the comments on topic. I'm ok with pseudonyms, not hurting anyone and if thecomment is really over the top, the editor has the power to remove it.
Post a reply