[Crunchmeister]

And look at it this way - A business can a great track record for products and delivering the correct products on time. But if they even screw over one customer out of hundreds, it raises questions about their ethics, regardless of the great service everyone else has received. And to me, that one case of screwing over a customer speaks a lot louder than the tons of transactions that went smoothly. Again, I'm not saying that Shootsoft has screwed anyone here. Again, I'm just making a generalization.

Now, let's take this review system in as slightly different context. Let's take the ebay feedback system as an example. I'm sure no one here who shops on ebay does so without first checking the seller's feedback rating.

Let's say tomorrow, ebay were to take away the ability to leave anything but positive feedback on a seller, and remove everyone's negative and neutral feedback. How exactly is one supposed to gauge someone's reputation by that? Sure, the person may have 500 positives from the deals that went down well, but how does anyone know that there weren't another 100 transactions where the buyer got burned? That's the same purpose for these review threads, and I think people SHOULD post any negative reviews as well so that we can get a balanced view of how a seller performs. Posting nothing but good review and putting down the people who post legitimate negative ones serves no useful purpose.

And I'll agree with Brian that it did get a bit out of hand and it's now a nasty public situation that should have been resolved in private instead. I'm still siding with Drache on the terms of the deal though.