Prosper is unable to use my blog submission

[Tokyo Joe]

RL loses a little more credibility in the P's.org community. Does he have any left?

He lost any with me over a year ago when he was still trying to charge membership fees to his cluttered, spamclustered website.

By the time we learned he worked for Prosper, I was already at the eye rolling stage.

[AmexFan]

Oh, he was the one that wanted to charge back then?

Oh. Boy.

I had forgotten.

BTW, it is not "unable" to . . . they could have if they wished to do so.

[Epictetus]

I wear money colored glasses.  Just my view of the world...

[bankomatic]

Prosper management is making a huge mistake. By attempting to silence all the criticism they aren't allowing new incomers to make a decision based on all the known facts. The new guys will eventually figure a lot of the problems on their own and they will quit in anger. I can't believe they don't see it's not sustainable, eventually they will run out of the new blood coming in.

[Mark12547]

... By attempting to silence all the criticism they aren't allowing new incomers to make a decision based on all the known facts. ...

There are also two additional problems with suppressing criticisms:

1.	When the SEC has jurisdiction, the SEC wants disclosure of all material facts. Some of the criticisms have been over items that may be considered material by the SEC, such as cherry picking returns for the advertisements targeting lenders, or the default rates that get published, items that would have to be corrected by Prosper or face tighter SEC scrutiny. It's better for Prosper to hear it from us first than to hear it from the regulatory bodies.
2.	If criticisms are allowed to be voiced and at least acknowledge having heard them, their exposure is limited and response, if applicable, can be made. By banning criticisms, the criticisms don't go away, they go someplace else, often much more public, and no longer in a location as easily to respond to. Witness, for example, Prosper.com banning mention of prospers.org from their site, and in two days significant parts of prospers.org, complete with some critical content, is crawled by Google and Yahoo, making criticisms much more public, not less.

Yes, I agree that Prosper Marketplace, Inc., is making a bigger PR mistake than they realize.

[traveler505]

... By attempting to silence all the criticism they aren't allowing new incomers to make a decision based on all the known facts. ...

There are also two additional problems with suppressing criticisms:

1.	When the SEC has jurisdiction, the SEC wants disclosure of all material facts. Some of the criticisms have been over items that may be considered material by the SEC, such as cherry picking returns for the advertisements targeting lenders, or the default rates that get published, items that would have to be corrected by Prosper or face tighter SEC scrutiny. It's better for Prosper to hear it from us first than to hear it from the regulatory bodies.
2.	If criticisms are allowed to be voiced and at least acknowledge having heard them, their exposure is limited and response, if applicable, can be made. By banning criticisms, the criticisms don't go away, they go someplace else, often much more public, and no longer in a location as easily to respond to. Witness, for example, Prosper.com banning mention of prospers.org from their site, and in two days significant parts of prospers.org, complete with some critical content, is crawled by Google and Yahoo, making criticisms much more public, not less.

Yes, I agree that Prosper Marketplace, Inc., is making a bigger PR mistake than they realize.

Witness also that the issues raised in my MNH Report #1 "Misappropriation of Lender Funds by Prosper Marketplace Inc., which had previously been presented only on discussion  forums, are now being disseminated as complaints to federal and state agencies.  Had Prosper left its forums up and running, and not deleted both the original post and its original promise to make lenders whole, I would most likely been content with bumping the thread every two weeks or so, while waiting for my 45 cents to eventually be refunded. 

[Epictetus]

There is indeed a history of consistently poor decision-making by Prosper, which unfortunately shows no sign of abating.

[112233]

There is indeed a history of consistently poor decision-making by Prosper, which unfortunately shows no sign of abating.

there's a good chance poor decision-making will abate ..

it will happen when the curtain finally closes on this tragedy and the lights go dark, and there is nothing left to decide

[Tokyo Joe]

Rateladder pm'd me to say his site wasn't spammy when he was trying to charge for it, and is offended by my post.

I told him he's got a tin ear for how he's coming across at .org

[SGriff]

There is indeed a history of consistently poor decision-making by Prosper, which unfortunately shows no sign of abating.

there's a good chance poor decision-making will abate ..

it will happen when the curtain finally closes on this tragedy and the lights go dark, and there is nothing left to decide

Ah, but Witchel will assuredly go on making bad decisions even after Prosper has gone under...

[Fred93]

Cushie, you're an internet happening. 

Your writeup appeared again in p2pnobank.com today, which traced to this blog entry:  http://prosperousland.blogspot.com/2007/12/cushie06s-christmas-wish.html

Typing cushie06 christmas wish into google gets 7 hits.  The Fred93 and Prosperousland blogs, and various blogs that aggregate other blogs.

[Tokyo Joe]

Meanwhile, Rate_Ladder has taken a fast powder.  I wonder if it had anything to do with the scathing reply I sent his pm.  I felt a little sorry for him afterwards, the way I do when I scold a dog or a small child.  He's not on vacation though; he's busy posting a best-of-his-own-posts series on his blog. 

Cushie's post was great.  Not only did it not deserve to be rejected by RL, it deserves to be printed all over the internet.

Way to go, Cushie.

[lenderguy]

Meanwhile, Rate_Ladder has taken a fast powder.  I wonder if it had anything to do with the scathing reply I sent his pm.  I felt a little sorry for him afterwards, the way I do when I scold a dog or a small child.  He's not on vacation though; he's busy posting a best-of-his-own-posts series on his blog. 

Cushie's post was great.  Not only did it not deserve to be rejected by RL, it deserves to be printed all over the internet.

Way to go, Cushie.

Was your scathing reply ever public?

[Tokyo Joe]

Meanwhile, Rate_Ladder has taken a fast powder.  I wonder if it had anything to do with the scathing reply I sent his pm.  I felt a little sorry for him afterwards, the way I do when I scold a dog or a small child.  He's not on vacation though; he's busy posting a best-of-his-own-posts series on his blog. 

Cushie's post was great.  Not only did it not deserve to be rejected by RL, it deserves to be printed all over the internet.

Way to go, Cushie.

Was your scathing reply ever public?

No, I avoid posting pm's unless it seems absolutely necessary to do so.  However, i can send you what I sent him...

[Cushie]

No, I avoid posting pm's unless it seems absolutely necessary to do so.  However, i can send you what I sent him...

I do the same; I also received a PM from RL after I posted that my blog entry was rejected.

Fred, I'm pretty psyched that my post is moving around the web.  I hope more and more people read it - the message is important for Prosper to hear, even if they don't want to.