And if so, who are the victims of the scam?
quote [...]
Your role is straightforward and adaptable. You're not required to write >reviews or actively seek out customers to promote products. Instead, you >simply need to click a button to analyze and submit product data. The
system then automatically generates star ratings for the products and >suggests them to their corresponding marketplaces and potential investors.
And if so, who are the victims of the scam?
And if so, who are the victims of the scam?
The Todal <the_todal@icloud.com> wrote:
And if so, who are the victims of the scam?
It sounds like review fraud of some kind. While it may not seem like that
at first glance, it's quite possible the fraud will progress to 'badder' stuff later on. Either submitting fake reviews, or some kind of advance fee fraud (buying stuff with your own funds, etc). Maybe they will overpay your wages by cheque and ask you to pay them back the difference.
They don't have to tell you the punchline to begin with, they'll get you
on the hook first.
Theo
On 30/03/2024 20:36, Theo wrote:
The Todal <the_todal@icloud.com> wrote:
And if so, who are the victims of the scam?
It sounds like review fraud of some kind. While it may not seem like that >> at first glance, it's quite possible the fraud will progress to 'badder'
stuff later on. Either submitting fake reviews, or some kind of advance fee >> fraud (buying stuff with your own funds, etc). Maybe they will overpay your >> wages by cheque and ask you to pay them back the difference.
They don't have to tell you the punchline to begin with, they'll get you
on the hook first.
Theo
Thanks for all the comments. I was presumably selected at random - a SMS message which they presumably send to thousands if not tens of thousands.
I encouraged them to say what sort of job and what sort of salary were offered but, of course, I have no intention of doing it and I don't need
the money.
I wondered if it could be some sort of advance fee fraud (eg they want
me to pay for training) but I have now blocked the person. If it is to
do with creating fake Amazon reviews to increase the visibility of some products, I wonder if all those products are actually rubbish or whether
some of them are good products and the aim is to support struggling
vendors of those products.
On 31/03/2024 10:48, The Todal wrote:
On 30/03/2024 20:36, Theo wrote:
The Todal <the_todal@icloud.com> wrote:Thanks for all the comments. I was presumably selected at random - a
And if so, who are the victims of the scam?
It sounds like review fraud of some kind. While it may not seem like
that at first glance, it's quite possible the fraud will progress to
'badder' stuff later on. Either submitting fake reviews, or some kind
of advance fee fraud (buying stuff with your own funds, etc). Maybe
they will overpay your wages by cheque and ask you to pay them back
the difference.
They don't have to tell you the punchline to begin with, they'll get
you on the hook first.
Theo
SMS message which they presumably send to thousands if not tens of
thousands.
I encouraged them to say what sort of job and what sort of salary were
offered but, of course, I have no intention of doing it and I don't
need the money.
I wondered if it could be some sort of advance fee fraud (eg they want
me to pay for training) but I have now blocked the person. If it is to
do with creating fake Amazon reviews to increase the visibility of some
products, I wonder if all those products are actually rubbish or
whether some of them are good products and the aim is to support
struggling vendors of those products.
I'm not sure you have to create fake reviews for them to be fake. A few
weeks ago I bought a cheap rechargeable torch on Amazon. When it
arrived, the package included an AA battery to put in it. The torch was
*not* rechargeable. When asked for a review, I gave it two stars (well,
it was a torch and it worked!), but pointed out that it was "not as described" as it was not rechargeable as claimed in the description.
After a few days my "review" appeared - as "No customer reviews" and the
sole customer rating with the wording "There are 0 customer reviews and
1 customer rating.". The product remains as "rechargeable" in its description.
And if so, who are the victims of the scam?
On Sun, 31 Mar 2024 11:08:12 +0100, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 31/03/2024 10:48, The Todal wrote:
On 30/03/2024 20:36, Theo wrote:
The Todal <the_todal@icloud.com> wrote:Thanks for all the comments. I was presumably selected at random - a
And if so, who are the victims of the scam?
It sounds like review fraud of some kind. While it may not seem like
that at first glance, it's quite possible the fraud will progress to
'badder' stuff later on. Either submitting fake reviews, or some kind >>>> of advance fee fraud (buying stuff with your own funds, etc). Maybe
they will overpay your wages by cheque and ask you to pay them back
the difference.
They don't have to tell you the punchline to begin with, they'll get
you on the hook first.
Theo
SMS message which they presumably send to thousands if not tens of
thousands.
I encouraged them to say what sort of job and what sort of salary were
offered but, of course, I have no intention of doing it and I don't
need the money.
I wondered if it could be some sort of advance fee fraud (eg they want
me to pay for training) but I have now blocked the person. If it is to
do with creating fake Amazon reviews to increase the visibility of some
products, I wonder if all those products are actually rubbish or
whether some of them are good products and the aim is to support
struggling vendors of those products.
I'm not sure you have to create fake reviews for them to be fake. A few
weeks ago I bought a cheap rechargeable torch on Amazon. When it
arrived, the package included an AA battery to put in it. The torch was
*not* rechargeable. When asked for a review, I gave it two stars (well,
it was a torch and it worked!), but pointed out that it was "not as
described" as it was not rechargeable as claimed in the description.
After a few days my "review" appeared - as "No customer reviews" and the
sole customer rating with the wording "There are 0 customer reviews and
1 customer rating.". The product remains as "rechargeable" in its
description.
Was the battery rechargeable ?
And if so, who are the victims of the scam?
-Receive salary by UK online banking
You'll dedicate about an hour each day to this task, which you can conveniently do
using your phone or computer between 10 AM and 10 PM.
Additionally, you receive a salary of 100 after 2 working days and 500 after 5
working days, totaling a weekly salary of 600.
I'm not sure you have to create fake reviews for them to be fake. A few
weeks ago I bought a cheap rechargeable torch on Amazon. When it
arrived, the package included an AA battery to put in it. The torch was
*not* rechargeable. When asked for a review, I gave it two stars (well,
it was a torch and it worked!), but pointed out that it was "not as described" as it was not rechargeable as claimed in the description.
After a few days my "review" appeared - as "No customer reviews" and the
sole customer rating with the wording "There are 0 customer reviews and
1 customer rating.". The product remains as "rechargeable" in its description.
One feature of many of the best cons, is that you still leave something
for the mark's (victim's) imagination to get working on.
In this instance, if the mark can make Ł600 a week working one hour a day. then why wouldn't they want to work four hours a day and earn Ł2,400 a week instead ?
Or eight hours a day, just sat there clicking buttons, for Ł4,800 a week ?
Its just like the tipster advertisement that maybe still appear in the racing press giving lists of 10/1 winners. Straightaway the mugs are all working
out exactly how much they're going to win with 1000/1 accumulators, until they eventually get banned by the bookies before the bookie goes bust
The dream ! Banned by the bookies !
There is a way to complain about inaccurate descriptions on Amazon if
you can find it.
I've also pointed out a contradictory description in a review.
On 31/03/2024 11:08, Jeff Layman wrote:
I'm not sure you have to create fake reviews for them to be fake. A few
weeks ago I bought a cheap rechargeable torch on Amazon. When it
arrived, the package included an AA battery to put in it. The torch was
*not* rechargeable. When asked for a review, I gave it two stars (well,
it was a torch and it worked!), but pointed out that it was "not as
described" as it was not rechargeable as claimed in the description.
After a few days my "review" appeared - as "No customer reviews" and the
sole customer rating with the wording "There are 0 customer reviews and
1 customer rating.". The product remains as "rechargeable" in its
description.
There is a way to complain about inaccurate descriptions on Amazon if
you can find it.
On 01/04/2024 10:42, Max Demian wrote:
On 31/03/2024 11:08, Jeff Layman wrote:
I'm not sure you have to create fake reviews for them to be fake. A few
weeks ago I bought a cheap rechargeable torch on Amazon. When it
arrived, the package included an AA battery to put in it. The torch was
*not* rechargeable. When asked for a review, I gave it two stars (well,
it was a torch and it worked!), but pointed out that it was "not as
described" as it was not rechargeable as claimed in the description.
After a few days my "review" appeared - as "No customer reviews" and the >>> sole customer rating with the wording "There are 0 customer reviews and
1 customer rating.". The product remains as "rechargeable" in its
description.
There is a way to complain about inaccurate descriptions on Amazon if
you can find it.
As Amazon have control over the reviews, they have already seen my
comment that the product was not as described, and apparently chosen not
only to ignore it, but remove it completely! As they are the ultimate
arbiter of what appears, I fail to see what more can be done.
On 03/04/2024 08:25, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 01/04/2024 10:42, Max Demian wrote:
On 31/03/2024 11:08, Jeff Layman wrote:
I'm not sure you have to create fake reviews for them to be fake. A few >>>> weeks ago I bought a cheap rechargeable torch on Amazon. When it
arrived, the package included an AA battery to put in it. The torch was >>>> *not* rechargeable. When asked for a review, I gave it two stars (well, >>>> it was a torch and it worked!), but pointed out that it was "not as
described" as it was not rechargeable as claimed in the description.
After a few days my "review" appeared - as "No customer reviews" and the >>>> sole customer rating with the wording "There are 0 customer reviews and >>>> 1 customer rating.". The product remains as "rechargeable" in its
description.
There is a way to complain about inaccurate descriptions on Amazon if
you can find it.
As Amazon have control over the reviews, they have already seen my
comment that the product was not as described, and apparently chosen not
only to ignore it, but remove it completely! As they are the ultimate
arbiter of what appears, I fail to see what more can be done.
Click the "Report an issue with this product" link just below the main description, see what happens and report back.
On 03/04/2024 17:25, Max Demian wrote:
On 03/04/2024 08:25, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 01/04/2024 10:42, Max Demian wrote:
On 31/03/2024 11:08, Jeff Layman wrote:
I'm not sure you have to create fake reviews for them to be fake. A few >>>>> weeks ago I bought a cheap rechargeable torch on Amazon. When it
arrived, the package included an AA battery to put in it. The torch was >>>>> *not* rechargeable. When asked for a review, I gave it two stars (well, >>>>> it was a torch and it worked!), but pointed out that it was "not as
described" as it was not rechargeable as claimed in the description. >>>>>
After a few days my "review" appeared - as "No customer reviews" and the >>>>> sole customer rating with the wording "There are 0 customer reviews and >>>>> 1 customer rating.". The product remains as "rechargeable" in its
description.
There is a way to complain about inaccurate descriptions on Amazon if
you can find it.
As Amazon have control over the reviews, they have already seen my
comment that the product was not as described, and apparently chosen not >>> only to ignore it, but remove it completely! As they are the ultimate
arbiter of what appears, I fail to see what more can be done.
Click the "Report an issue with this product" link just below the
main description, see what happens and report back.
I tried that yesterday morning. I'm not hopeful that there will be any >feedback from Amazon.
In message <uuljeb$g8s0$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:04:42 on Thu, 4 Apr
2024, Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> remarked:
On 03/04/2024 17:25, Max Demian wrote:
On 03/04/2024 08:25, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 01/04/2024 10:42, Max Demian wrote:
On 31/03/2024 11:08, Jeff Layman wrote:
I'm not sure you have to create fake reviews for them to be fake.
A few
weeks ago I bought a cheap rechargeable torch on Amazon. When it
arrived, the package included an AA battery to put in it. The
torch was
*not* rechargeable. When asked for a review, I gave it two stars
(well,
it was a torch and it worked!), but pointed out that it was "not as >>>>>> described" as it was not rechargeable as claimed in the description. >>>>>>
After a few days my "review" appeared - as "No customer reviews"
and the
sole customer rating with the wording "There are 0 customer
reviews and
1 customer rating.". The product remains as "rechargeable" in its
description.
There is a way to complain about inaccurate descriptions on Amazon if >>>>> you can find it.
As Amazon have control over the reviews, they have already seen my
comment that the product was not as described, and apparently chosen
not
only to ignore it, but remove it completely! As they are the ultimate
arbiter of what appears, I fail to see what more can be done.
Click the "Report an issue with this product" link just below the
main description, see what happens and report back.
I tried that yesterday morning. I'm not hopeful that there will be any
feedback from Amazon.
I've always found Amazon to be very good at giving no-quibble refunds.
In message <uuljeb$g8s0$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:04:42 on Thu, 4 Apr
2024, Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> remarked:
On 03/04/2024 17:25, Max Demian wrote:
On 03/04/2024 08:25, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 01/04/2024 10:42, Max Demian wrote:
On 31/03/2024 11:08, Jeff Layman wrote:
I'm not sure you have to create fake reviews for them to be fake. A few >>>>>> weeks ago I bought a cheap rechargeable torch on Amazon. When it
arrived, the package included an AA battery to put in it. The torch was >>>>>> *not* rechargeable. When asked for a review, I gave it two stars (well, >>>>>> it was a torch and it worked!), but pointed out that it was "not as >>>>>> described" as it was not rechargeable as claimed in the description. >>>>>>
After a few days my "review" appeared - as "No customer reviews" and the >>>>>> sole customer rating with the wording "There are 0 customer reviews and >>>>>> 1 customer rating.". The product remains as "rechargeable" in its
description.
There is a way to complain about inaccurate descriptions on Amazon if >>>>> you can find it.
As Amazon have control over the reviews, they have already seen my
comment that the product was not as described, and apparently chosen not >>>> only to ignore it, but remove it completely! As they are the ultimate
arbiter of what appears, I fail to see what more can be done.
Click the "Report an issue with this product" link just below the
main description, see what happens and report back.
I tried that yesterday morning. I'm not hopeful that there will be any
feedback from Amazon.
I've always found Amazon to be very good at giving no-quibble refunds.
On 04/04/2024 09:01, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <uuljeb$g8s0$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:04:42 on Thu, 4 Apr
2024, Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> remarked:
On 03/04/2024 17:25, Max Demian wrote:
On 03/04/2024 08:25, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 01/04/2024 10:42, Max Demian wrote:
On 31/03/2024 11:08, Jeff Layman wrote:
I'm not sure you have to create fake reviews for them to be >>>>>>>fake. A few
weeks ago I bought a cheap rechargeable torch on Amazon. When it >>>>>>> arrived, the package included an AA battery to put in it. The >>>>>>>torch was
*not* rechargeable. When asked for a review, I gave it two stars >>>>>>>(well,
it was a torch and it worked!), but pointed out that it was "not as >>>>>>> described" as it was not rechargeable as claimed in the description. >>>>>>>
After a few days my "review" appeared - as "No customer reviews" >>>>>>>and the
sole customer rating with the wording "There are 0 customer >>>>>>>reviews and
1 customer rating.". The product remains as "rechargeable" in its >>>>>>> description.
There is a way to complain about inaccurate descriptions on Amazon if >>>>>> you can find it.
As Amazon have control over the reviews, they have already seen my
comment that the product was not as described, and apparently
chosen not
only to ignore it, but remove it completely! As they are the ultimate >>>>> arbiter of what appears, I fail to see what more can be done.
Click the "Report an issue with this product" link just below the >>>>main description, see what happens and report back.
I tried that yesterday morning. I'm not hopeful that there will be
any feedback from Amazon.
I've always found Amazon to be very good at giving no-quibble
refunds.
This issue concerns inaccurate descriptions, not refunds.
Click the "Report an issue with this product" link just below the
main description, see what happens and report back.
I tried that yesterday morning. I'm not hopeful that there will be any
feedback from Amazon.
I've always found Amazon to be very good at giving no-quibble
refunds.
I'm not concerned about the 7 or whatever it was - I can make use of
the torch. I just want the description corrected so nobody else gets
misled.
In message <uumktf$op8j$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:36:01 on Thu, 4 Apr
2024, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> remarked:
On 04/04/2024 09:01, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <uuljeb$g8s0$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:04:42 on Thu, 4 Apr
2024, Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> remarked:
On 03/04/2024 17:25, Max Demian wrote:
On 03/04/2024 08:25, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 01/04/2024 10:42, Max Demian wrote:
On 31/03/2024 11:08, Jeff Layman wrote:
I'm not sure you have to create fake reviews for them to be
fake. A few
weeks ago I bought a cheap rechargeable torch on Amazon. When it >>>>>>>> arrived, the package included an AA battery to put in it. The
torch was
*not* rechargeable. When asked for a review, I gave it two stars >>>>>>>> (well,
it was a torch and it worked!), but pointed out that it was "not as >>>>>>>> described" as it was not rechargeable as claimed in the description. >>>>>>>>
After a few days my "review" appeared - as "No customer reviews" >>>>>>>> and the
sole customer rating with the wording "There are 0 customer
reviews and
1 customer rating.". The product remains as "rechargeable" in its >>>>>>>> description.
There is a way to complain about inaccurate descriptions on Amazon if >>>>>>> you can find it.
As Amazon have control over the reviews, they have already seen my >>>>>> comment that the product was not as described, and apparently
chosen not
only to ignore it, but remove it completely! As they are the ultimate >>>>>> arbiter of what appears, I fail to see what more can be done.
Click the "Report an issue with this product" link just below the
main description, see what happens and report back.
I tried that yesterday morning. I'm not hopeful that there will be
any feedback from Amazon.
I've always found Amazon to be very good at giving no-quibble
refunds.
This issue concerns inaccurate descriptions, not refunds.
All Amazon will do is issue a refund, they can't/won't force the
supplier to ship you a replacement which does comply with the
description.
On 5 Apr 2024 at 14:56:12 BST, "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote:torch was *not* rechargeable. When asked for a review, I gave it two >>>>>>>>> (well, it was a torch and it worked!), but pointed out that >>>>>>>>>it was "not as described" as it was not rechargeable as >>>>>>>>>claimed in the description.
In message <uumktf$op8j$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:36:01 on Thu, 4 Apr
2024, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> remarked:
On 04/04/2024 09:01, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <uuljeb$g8s0$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:04:42 on Thu, 4 Apr
2024, Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> remarked:
On 03/04/2024 17:25, Max Demian wrote:
On 03/04/2024 08:25, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 01/04/2024 10:42, Max Demian wrote:
On 31/03/2024 11:08, Jeff Layman wrote:
I'm not sure you have to create fake reviews for them to be >>>>>>>>>fake. A few weeks ago I bought a cheap rechargeable torch on >>>>>>>>> arrived, the package included an AA battery to put in it. The
After a few days my "review" appeared - as "No customer
and the sole customer rating with the wording "There are 0 >>>>>>>>> reviews and 1 customer rating.". The product remains as >>>>>>>>>"rechargeable" in its description.
There is a way to complain about inaccurate descriptions on Amazon if >>>>>>>> you can find it.
As Amazon have control over the reviews, they have already seen my >>>>>>> comment that the product was not as described, and apparently
chosen not
only to ignore it, but remove it completely! As they are the ultimate >>>>>>> arbiter of what appears, I fail to see what more can be done.
Click the "Report an issue with this product" link just below the >>>>>> main description, see what happens and report back.
I tried that yesterday morning. I'm not hopeful that there will be
any feedback from Amazon.
I've always found Amazon to be very good at giving no-quibble
refunds.
This issue concerns inaccurate descriptions, not refunds.
All Amazon will do is issue a refund, they can't/won't force the
supplier to ship you a replacement which does comply with the
description.
I think the OP is aiming at the supplier being forced to change the >description for future buyers. His motives seem to be altruistic, or at least >for the common good rather than obtaining any rectification for himself.
On 5 Apr 2024 at 14:56:12 BST, "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <uumktf$op8j$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:36:01 on Thu, 4 Apr
2024, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> remarked:
On 04/04/2024 09:01, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <uuljeb$g8s0$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:04:42 on Thu, 4 Apr
2024, Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> remarked:
On 03/04/2024 17:25, Max Demian wrote:
On 03/04/2024 08:25, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 01/04/2024 10:42, Max Demian wrote:
On 31/03/2024 11:08, Jeff Layman wrote:
After a few days my "review" appeared - as "No customer reviews" >>>>>>>>> and the
sole customer rating with the wording "There are 0 customer
reviews and
1 customer rating.". The product remains as "rechargeable" in its >>>>>>>>> description.
There is a way to complain about inaccurate descriptions on Amazon if >>>>>>>> you can find it.
As Amazon have control over the reviews, they have already seen my >>>>>>> comment that the product was not as described, and apparently
chosen not
only to ignore it, but remove it completely! As they are the ultimate >>>>>>> arbiter of what appears, I fail to see what more can be done.
Click the "Report an issue with this product" link just below the >>>>>> main description, see what happens and report back.
I tried that yesterday morning. I'm not hopeful that there will be
any feedback from Amazon.
I've always found Amazon to be very good at giving no-quibble
refunds.
This issue concerns inaccurate descriptions, not refunds.
All Amazon will do is issue a refund, they can't/won't force the
supplier to ship you a replacement which does comply with the
description.
I think the OP is aiming at the supplier being forced to change the description for future buyers. His motives seem to be altruistic, or at least for the common good rather than obtaining any rectification for himself.
On Sun, 31 Mar 2024 20:25:48 +0100, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 31/03/2024 11:44, Jethro_uk wrote:I see that the options on the feedback page contain these headers:
On Sun, 31 Mar 2024 11:08:12 +0100, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 31/03/2024 10:48, The Todal wrote:
On 30/03/2024 20:36, Theo wrote:
The Todal <the_todal@icloud.com> wrote:Thanks for all the comments. I was presumably selected at random - a >>>>> SMS message which they presumably send to thousands if not tens of
And if so, who are the victims of the scam?
It sounds like review fraud of some kind. While it may not seem
like that at first glance, it's quite possible the fraud will
progress to 'badder' stuff later on. Either submitting fake
reviews, or some kind of advance fee fraud (buying stuff with your >>>>>> own funds, etc). Maybe they will overpay your wages by cheque and >>>>>> ask you to pay them back the difference.
They don't have to tell you the punchline to begin with, they'll get >>>>>> you on the hook first.
Theo
thousands.
I encouraged them to say what sort of job and what sort of salary
were offered but, of course, I have no intention of doing it and I
don't need the money.
I wondered if it could be some sort of advance fee fraud (eg they
want me to pay for training) but I have now blocked the person. If it >>>>> is to do with creating fake Amazon reviews to increase the visibility >>>>> of some products, I wonder if all those products are actually rubbish >>>>> or whether some of them are good products and the aim is to support
struggling vendors of those products.
I'm not sure you have to create fake reviews for them to be fake. A
few weeks ago I bought a cheap rechargeable torch on Amazon. When it
arrived, the package included an AA battery to put in it. The torch
was *not* rechargeable. When asked for a review, I gave it two stars
(well, it was a torch and it worked!), but pointed out that it was
"not as described" as it was not rechargeable as claimed in the
description.
After a few days my "review" appeared - as "No customer reviews" and
the sole customer rating with the wording "There are 0 customer
reviews and 1 customer rating.". The product remains as "rechargeable" >>>> in its description.
"Create Review
Overall rating
Rate features: Longevity Remote Control Value for money
[Just 0-5 star options for each of the above ratings]
Add a headline: What's most important to know?
Add a photo or video
Add a written review:
What did you like or dislike? What did you use this product for?"
Is it just possible that you put your comment in the "headline" section
but none in the "written review" section. That would at least be compatible with the "0 customer reviews and 1 customer rating" that you report.
I've now clicked on "Report an issue with this product" and selected
"Parts of this page don't match".
Comments:
"It says: 'Product details: Language ? : ? English'
Below it says: "NOTICE: Polish Release, cover may contain Polish text/markings. The disk DOES NOT have English audio and subtitles."
There is clearly a contradiction here.'
We'll see what happens.
"Max Demian" <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote in message news:uupjij$1ifbo$1@dont-email.me...
I've now clicked on "Report an issue with this product" and selected
"Parts of this page don't match".
Comments:
"It says: 'Product details: Language ? : ? English'
Below it says: "NOTICE: Polish Release, cover may contain Polish
text/markings. The disk DOES NOT have English audio and subtitles."
There is clearly a contradiction here.'
We'll see what happens.
While I can see what you mean in referring to a contradiction
nevertheless it maybe needs to be asked
"What could a customer reasonably expect on reading the above
listing" ?
Could they expect English audio or subtitles ? Clearly not.
So what could language be referring to in this context? As the
description includes the caveat that the cover "may" include"
Polish text, that seems to imply that while a Polish release
the cover text isn't in fact mainly in Polish, but in another
language. English. Non ?
So that while it isn't made absolutely clear what "language refers
to in this context - not the singing or subtitles definitely - so
therefore presumably it refers to the printed information on the
cover - so there is no contradiction necessarily involved.
* One of the first results of European colonisation of the New
World is that even today Spanish is, behind Chinese, the second
most common first language in the World; ahead of both English
and Hindi. Maybe one to win bets with.
However, as a result of later colonisation of the New World "English"
is by far and away the most spoken language in the World* overall.
And has more second language speakers, 1.077 billion. than Mandarin
Chinese has first language speakers 939 million.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_languages_by_total_number_of_speakers
So its maybe not surprising that any DVD issued almost anywhere might possibly include some English text on the cover.
While the listing on French Amazon gives the language as "Anglais".
So some consolation there art least.
Basically what it means that even people who speak minority
first languages, who nevertheless have access to Amazon, can buy this
DVD safe in the knowledge that the cover details will be in their
second language of choice. Rather than in say French or German,
bb
.
On 06/04/2024 08:43, billy bookcase wrote:
"Max Demian" <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:uupjij$1ifbo$1@dont-email.me...
I've now clicked on "Report an issue with this product" and selected
"Parts of this page don't match".
Comments:
"It says: 'Product details: Language ? : ? English'
Below it says: "NOTICE: Polish Release, cover may contain Polish
text/markings. The disk DOES NOT have English audio and subtitles."
There is clearly a contradiction here.'
We'll see what happens.
While I can see what you mean in referring to a contradiction
nevertheless it maybe needs to be asked
"What could a customer reasonably expect on reading the above
listing" ?
Could they expect English audio or subtitles ? Clearly not.
So what could language be referring to in this context? As the
description includes the caveat that the cover "may" include"
Polish text, that seems to imply that while a Polish release
the cover text isn't in fact mainly in Polish, but in another
language. English. Non ?
So that while it isn't made absolutely clear what "language refers
to in this context - not the singing or subtitles definitely - so
therefore presumably it refers to the printed information on the
cover - so there is no contradiction necessarily involved.
* One of the first results of European colonisation of the New
World is that even today Spanish is, behind Chinese, the second
most common first language in the World; ahead of both English
and Hindi. Maybe one to win bets with.
However, as a result of later colonisation of the New World "English"
is by far and away the most spoken language in the World* overall.
And has more second language speakers, 1.077 billion. than Mandarin
Chinese has first language speakers 939 million.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_languages_by_total_number_of_speakers >>
So its maybe not surprising that any DVD issued almost anywhere might
possibly include some English text on the cover.
While the listing on French Amazon gives the language as "Anglais".
So some consolation there art least.
Basically what it means that even people who speak minority
first languages, who nevertheless have access to Amazon, can buy this
DVD safe in the knowledge that the cover details will be in their
second language of choice. Rather than in say French or German,
I've had DVDs previously where the subtitles were available in
multiple languages on the one DVD. You can see why this would make
sense, as it would reduce the number of different DVD versions needed.
Surely, though, the Amazon description should say that it's in French?
"GB" <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote in message news:uur5ih$20l5l$1@dont-email.me...
On 06/04/2024 08:43, billy bookcase wrote:
"Max Demian" <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:uupjij$1ifbo$1@dont-email.me...
I've now clicked on "Report an issue with this product" and selected
"Parts of this page don't match".
Comments:
"It says: 'Product details: Language ? : ? English'
Below it says: "NOTICE: Polish Release, cover may contain Polish
text/markings. The disk DOES NOT have English audio and subtitles."
There is clearly a contradiction here.'
We'll see what happens.
While I can see what you mean in referring to a contradiction
nevertheless it maybe needs to be asked
"What could a customer reasonably expect on reading the above
listing" ?
Could they expect English audio or subtitles ? Clearly not.
So what could language be referring to in this context? As the
description includes the caveat that the cover "may" include"
Polish text, that seems to imply that while a Polish release
the cover text isn't in fact mainly in Polish, but in another
language. English. Non ?
So that while it isn't made absolutely clear what "language refers
to in this context - not the singing or subtitles definitely - so
therefore presumably it refers to the printed information on the
cover - so there is no contradiction necessarily involved.
* One of the first results of European colonisation of the New
World is that even today Spanish is, behind Chinese, the second
most common first language in the World; ahead of both English
and Hindi. Maybe one to win bets with.
However, as a result of later colonisation of the New World "English"
is by far and away the most spoken language in the World* overall.
And has more second language speakers, 1.077 billion. than Mandarin
Chinese has first language speakers 939 million.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_languages_by_total_number_of_speakers >>>
So its maybe not surprising that any DVD issued almost anywhere might
possibly include some English text on the cover.
While the listing on French Amazon gives the language as "Anglais".
So some consolation there art least.
Basically what it means that even people who speak minority
first languages, who nevertheless have access to Amazon, can buy this
DVD safe in the knowledge that the cover details will be in their
second language of choice. Rather than in say French or German,
I've had DVDs previously where the subtitles were available in
multiple languages on the one DVD. You can see why this would make
sense, as it would reduce the number of different DVD versions needed.
Short answer :opera is a minority interest insofar as DVD's go and so
it simply wouldn't merit the cost of subtitles, in multiple languages.
This is in a world where a large French outfit like the CanalPlus/Optimum(sic)
who own the rights to all of Ealing Studios output, plus classics like
"The Third Man" can't even manage English, HOH, or any other subtitles
on any of their English Language DVD's and Blu Rays. Often transferred
from prints which may already be 70 years old and where the sound quality
may be patchy.
Surely, though, the Amazon description should say that it's in French?
This is very much a minority interest work, in a minority interest category; where most buyers would probably already assume that a work by Berlioz
would be being performed in the original French.
Short answer :opera is a minority interest insofar as DVD's go and so
it simply wouldn't merit the cost of subtitles, in multiple languages.
This is in a world where a large French outfit like the CanalPlus/Optimum(sic) >who own the rights to all of Ealing Studios output, plus classics like
"The Third Man" can't even manage English, HOH, or any other subtitles
on any of their English Language DVD's and Blu Rays. Often transferred
from prints which may already be 70 years old and where the sound quality
may be patchy.
In message <uurth6$26de2$1@dont-email.me>, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> writes
Short answer :opera is a minority interest insofar as DVD's go and so
it simply wouldn't merit the cost of subtitles, in multiple languages.
This is in a world where a large French outfit like the CanalPlus/Optimum(sic)
who own the rights to all of Ealing Studios output, plus classics like
"The Third Man" can't even manage English, HOH, or any other subtitles
on any of their English Language DVD's and Blu Rays. Often transferred
from prints which may already be 70 years old and where the sound quality >>may be patchy.
Just as a point of information, I have just bought a DVD of The Third Man. The original
dialogue was (of course) English, but you could also select it dubbed into French and
German. Furthermore, you could also select effectively a 9-way pick-and-mix of
subtitles in English, French or German. As the original English is sometimes rather
indistinct and hard to follow, the English subtitles make life a lot easier. It cost
only (IIRC) 3.99 from Amazon.
"Ian Jackson" <ianREMOVETHISjackson@g3ohx.co.uk> wrote;
Just as a point of information, I have just bought a DVD of The Third Man. The original
dialogue was (of course) English, but you could also select it dubbed into French and
German. Furthermore, you could also select effectively a 9-way pick-and-mix of
subtitles in English, French or German. As the original English is sometimes rather
indistinct and hard to follow, the English subtitles make life a lot easier. It cost
only (IIRC) ｣3.99 from Amazon.
Do you have a link please ?
On 06/04/2024 08:43, billy bookcase wrote:List_of_languages_by_total_number_of_speakers
"Max Demian" <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:uupjij$1ifbo$1@dont-email.me...
I've now clicked on "Report an issue with this product" and selected
"Parts of this page don't match".
Comments:
"It says: 'Product details: Language ? : ? English'
Below it says: "NOTICE: Polish Release, cover may contain Polish
text/markings. The disk DOES NOT have English audio and subtitles."
There is clearly a contradiction here.'
We'll see what happens.
While I can see what you mean in referring to a contradiction
nevertheless it maybe needs to be asked
"What could a customer reasonably expect on reading the above listing"
?
Could they expect English audio or subtitles ? Clearly not.
So what could language be referring to in this context? As the
description includes the caveat that the cover "may" include"
Polish text, that seems to imply that while a Polish release the cover
text isn't in fact mainly in Polish, but in another language. English.
Non ?
So that while it isn't made absolutely clear what "language refers to
in this context - not the singing or subtitles definitely - so
therefore presumably it refers to the printed information on the cover
- so there is no contradiction necessarily involved.
* One of the first results of European colonisation of the New World
is that even today Spanish is, behind Chinese, the second most common
first language in the World; ahead of both English and Hindi. Maybe one
to win bets with.
However, as a result of later colonisation of the New World "English"
is by far and away the most spoken language in the World* overall.
And has more second language speakers, 1.077 billion. than Mandarin
Chinese has first language speakers 939 million.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
So its maybe not surprising that any DVD issued almost anywhere might
possibly include some English text on the cover.
While the listing on French Amazon gives the language as "Anglais".
So some consolation there art least.
Basically what it means that even people who speak minority first
languages, who nevertheless have access to Amazon, can buy this DVD
safe in the knowledge that the cover details will be in their second
language of choice. Rather than in say French or German,
I've had DVDs previously where the subtitles were available in multiple languages on the one DVD. You can see why this would make sense, as it
would reduce the number of different DVD versions needed.
Surely, though, the Amazon description should say that it's in French?
"Ian Jackson" <ianREMOVETHISjackson@g3ohx.co.uk> wrote in message >news:p2qHt2Ks3ZEmFw1n@brattleho.plus.com...
In message <uurth6$26de2$1@dont-email.me>, billy bookcase
<billy@anon.com> writes
Short answer :opera is a minority interest insofar as DVD's go and so
it simply wouldn't merit the cost of subtitles, in multiple languages.
This is in a world where a large French outfit like the >>>CanalPlus/Optimum(sic)
who own the rights to all of Ealing Studios output, plus classics like >>>"The Third Man" can't even manage English, HOH, or any other subtitles
on any of their English Language DVD's and Blu Rays. Often transferred >>>from prints which may already be 70 years old and where the sound quality >>>may be patchy.
Just as a point of information, I have just bought a DVD of The Third
Man. The original
dialogue was (of course) English, but you could also select it dubbed
into French and
German. Furthermore, you could also select effectively a 9-way >>pick-and-mix of
subtitles in English, French or German. As the original English is >>sometimes rather
indistinct and hard to follow, the English subtitles make life a lot >>easier. It cost
only (IIRC) 3.99 from Amazon.
Do you have a link please ?
In message <uusir2$2beb8$1@dont-email.me>, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> writes
<https://www.amazon.co.uk/Third-Man-DVD-Orson-Welles/dp/B00X7RHM40/ref=tm m_dvd_title_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=>
"Ian Jackson" <ianREMOVETHISjackson@g3ohx.co.uk> wrote in message >>news:p2qHt2Ks3ZEmFw1n@brattleho.plus.com...
In message <uurth6$26de2$1@dont-email.me>, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> writes
Short answer :opera is a minority interest insofar as DVD's go and so >>>>it simply wouldn't merit the cost of subtitles, in multiple languages.
This is in a world where a large French outfit like the CanalPlus/Optimum(sic)
who own the rights to all of Ealing Studios output, plus classics like >>>>"The Third Man" can't even manage English, HOH, or any other subtitles >>>>on any of their English Language DVD's and Blu Rays. Often transferred >>>>from prints which may already be 70 years old and where the sound quality >>>>may be patchy.
Just as a point of information, I have just bought a DVD of The Third Man. The
original
dialogue was (of course) English, but you could also select it dubbed into French and
German. Furthermore, you could also select effectively a 9-way pick-and-mix of
subtitles in English, French or German. As the original English is sometimes rather
indistinct and hard to follow, the English subtitles make life a lot easier. It cost
only (IIRC) 3.99 from Amazon.
Do you have a link please ?
or
https://shorturl.at/bvDJ3
It's the two-disc edition, with 'extras' on disc 2.
I see it was actually paid 5.09 (plus delivery). Beware - there others on Amazon,
costing a lot more.
billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Ian Jackson" <ianREMOVETHISjackson@g3ohx.co.uk> wrote;
Just as a point of information, I have just bought a DVD of The Third Man. The
original
dialogue was (of course) English, but you could also select it dubbed into French and
German. Furthermore, you could also select effectively a 9-way pick-and-mix of
subtitles in English, French or German. As the original English is sometimes rather
indistinct and hard to follow, the English subtitles make life a lot easier. It cost
only (IIRC) ?3.99 from Amazon.
Do you have a link please ?
There's the remastered 4K version on Amazon for a fiver; unfortunately they don't seem to offer a link to it.
There's a Studio Canal Blu Ray which is claimed to have HOH
subtitles ; but also threads on forums claiming they don't work
despite being advertised on the cover. The US region A Studio Canal
Blu Ray has subtitles in Spanish, French, Japanese but not in
English
In any case TTM's reputation is vastly overrated IMHO.
Green's novella was thin on plot, as is the film
which is over-reliant on the darkened ruins and
sewer locations.
As a film-noir exuding menace throughout, in the form of
Attenborough's Pinkie, plus the B/W photography "Brighton
Rock" was and is streets ahead IMO. What was really
remarkable was how untypical it was of the Boulting Brothers
other work.
I suppose we could have an off-topic thread about Most Overrated
Movies. If so, I'd nominate "On The Waterfront". Perhaps it was
daring, in its day, to portray bribery and corruption but now
that we've had Sopranos and Boardwalk Empire and The Wire and any
number of similar dramas, it seems very flimsy. We're supposed to
be moved to > tears by "I coulda been a contender" but if that
really is one of Brando's greatest performances
maybe standards are much higher now.
"The Todal" <the_todal@icloud.com> wrote in message news:l7isovF7cloU1@mid.individual.net...
I suppose we could have an off-topic thread about Most Overrated
Movies. If so, I'd nominate "On The Waterfront". Perhaps it was
daring, in its day, to portray bribery and corruption but now
that we've had Sopranos and Boardwalk Empire and The Wire and any
number of similar dramas, it seems very flimsy. We're supposed to
be moved to > tears by "I coulda been a contender" but if that
really is one of Brando's greatest performances
maybe standards are much higher now.
"On the Waterfront" was directed by Elia Kazan who implicated many
of his former friends and colleages, and cost them their careers in testifying freely before the House Committee on Un-American
Activities in 1952; at the time of the Hollywood blacklist
Among some critics, in "On The Waterfront (1954) Kazan is seek to
identify himself with the Terry character (Brando) in his standing up
to the corruption, thugs, and hoodlums. A real American hero IOW.
IOW anyone who didn't like the film was either a Commie or a Pinko at best.
"Ian Jackson" <ianREMOVETHISjackson@g3ohx.co.uk> wrote in message >news:OEWuh9PcCqEmFwjX@brattleho.plus.com...
<https://www.amazon.co.uk/Third-Man-DVD-Orson-Welles/dp/B00X7RHM40/ref=tm
m_dvd_title_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=>
or
https://shorturl.at/bvDJ3
It's the two-disc edition, with 'extras' on disc 2.
I see it was actually paid 5.09 (plus delivery). Beware - there
others on Amazon,
costing a lot more.
That appears to be the same two disc Studio Canal edition I bought
in an Oxfam music shop for 1.99. Only the cover is different.
As always I stand to be corrected but I can see nothing in that
listing to indicate that there are any subtitles at all.
Neither on the extras.
In fact if you check the one star ratings on the listing, these
confirm the absence of any subtitles.
In message <uv1c9e$3le73$1@dont-email.me>, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> writes
"Ian Jackson" <ianREMOVETHISjackson@g3ohx.co.uk> wrote in message >>news:OEWuh9PcCqEmFwjX@brattleho.plus.com...
<https://www.amazon.co.uk/Third-Man-DVD-Orson-Welles/dp/B00X7RHM40/ref=tm >>> m_dvd_title_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=>
or
https://shorturl.at/bvDJ3
It's the two-disc edition, with 'extras' on disc 2.
I see it was actually paid 5.09 (plus delivery). Beware - there others on Amazon,
costing a lot more.
That appears to be the same two disc Studio Canal edition I bought
in an Oxfam music shop for 1.99. Only the cover is different.
As always I stand to be corrected but I can see nothing in that
listing to indicate that there are any subtitles at all.
Neither on the extras.
In fact if you check the one star ratings on the listing, these
confirm the absence of any subtitles.
The other DVD I bought at the same time (The Red Shoes) didn't have any indication of
subtitles either. Nevertheless, it did have them, (but English only, and no multi-language dialogue dubbing).
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 300 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 55:32:31 |
| Calls: | 6,712 |
| Files: | 12,243 |
| Messages: | 5,355,397 |