posted: May. 22, 2006 @ 4:18p
Sorry for not checking the finance section before posting - I missed the boat on that one.
- In the words of the great Homer Simpson, "Doh!"
To my, ahem 'credit' (bad pun intended)
My original post was in 'free stuff' - (I did search first to make sure this was not a repost.)
I'm new at posting, and yes, I can see how this belongs in the finance section, however
I will admit that when I first found FW, the 'free stuff' section was the only area I visited - once I got more comfortable and saw that FW was credible, I checked out the other resources here. I'm sure that's true of many people. Hopefully, my misplaced post was useful to newbies, or someone just perusing the freebies who hasn't thought about their credit score in a while.
It is unfair to give this post a bad rating I may have put it in the wrong section (freebie vs. finance) BUT
~ it IS a valid post
~ you DO receive your free credit reports instantly from all three credit bureaus
~ it is easy and requires minimal effort.
Members could make FW more useful if the rating tool was used as a 'rating system'. It does, after all say 'Rate this Topic'. However, many times a 'poor' rating is given to instruct, chastise, say 'repost' or otherwise send a message to the OP, rather than actually rate the topic.
If ratings were focused on the post's accuracy and validity of content, those red & green flags would have a lot more credibility.
Don't you agree that It makes more sense to reserve 'poor' ratings for posts with
~ an invalid or broken link
~ 'freebies' - that are not truly free (must pay shipping, etc.)
~ the linked site has endless forms to fill out/ hoops to jump through
~ post contains incorrect/incomplete information
or to serve as a warning the site offers but never delivers the goods.?
Freedom of expression, voicing opinions, and criticizing posts, etc. is great - but
RATING and SCORING are meant to be Objective not Subjective.