<![CDATA[Latest posts for the thread "GW gets some sage advice..."]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/54.page JForum - http://www.jforum.net GW gets some sage advice... GW could have used before the whole Spots/Facebook thing.

http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/advisor/3-rules-managing-negative-online-comments-203041494.html

None of this is really new and most of it is just common sense but it is striking to contrast and compare GW's handling of online forums and the recommendations of this article. Also, we can look at PP/Wyrd/etc. and see how well they're doing compared to what the article recommends.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/509712/5320331.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/509712/5320331.page GMT GW gets some sage advice... http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/509712/5320335.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/509712/5320335.page GMT GW gets some sage advice...
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/509712/5320339.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/509712/5320339.page GMT GW gets some sage advice...
 Breotan wrote:
Well, the article did say to ignore that one so I guess Blizzard is safe.


Still seems like a gak move to try and silence people instead of addressing the issue.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/509712/5320352.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/509712/5320352.page GMT GW gets some sage advice... GW there...]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/509712/5320353.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/509712/5320353.page GMT