Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Perram" data-source="post: 5081369" data-attributes="member: 84740">I'm mostly satisfied with the results of this thread.&nbsp; While I still think Army Builder is a rather generic name, I don't think its a bad name for the product, which as I said before, I think gives it a bit of charm.&nbsp; Simple and to the point.Maybe they shouldn't have gotten the TM on it, maybe they should, that's water under the bridge at this point.&nbsp; Them enforcing this mark against other programs specifically named 'Army Builder' is to be expected.I am afraid there is little they will be able to do about preventing the &quot;Improper&quot; use, though.&nbsp; ButTo those who are dismissing the level of reaction that the community raised against this as simple internet flaming: This is how consumers need to react. If no one ever says anything, nothing gets changed.&nbsp; I doubt we would have seen an apology&nbsp; letter or clarification without a strong and vocal response against the letter and Lone Wolf's stance.I thank the staff of ENWorld for making this issue public and providing a place for these voices to be raised.If you are dissatisfied with a product or company, let people know, and why!&nbsp; The reverse is true, if you are satisfied with a product do the same!&nbsp; The consumer isn't powerless, no business can survive without customers. (Well, traditional businesses at least.)&nbsp; Our best tools are being informed consumers and sharing our experiences so that others can be informed as well.And finally, to Lone Wolf:Please consider better public relations in the future.&nbsp; While I am glad that you came to these forums yourself to participate in the discussion, none of this needed to occur in the first place.&nbsp; This is also the third time I've seen you voice your discomfort that issues were brought out to the public.&nbsp; You should assume that anything you do as a business will be.And also: Let your Lawyer handle your legal business.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Perram, post: 5081369, member: 84740"] I'm mostly satisfied with the results of this thread. While I still think Army Builder is a rather generic name, I don't think its a bad name for the product, which as I said before, I think gives it a bit of charm. Simple and to the point. Maybe they shouldn't have gotten the TM on it, maybe they should, that's water under the bridge at this point. Them enforcing this mark against other programs specifically named 'Army Builder' is to be expected. I am afraid there is little they will be able to do about preventing the "Improper" use, though. [B]But[/B] To those who are dismissing the level of reaction that the community raised against this as simple internet flaming: [I]This is how consumers need to react[/I]. [U][I] If no one ever says anything, nothing gets changed.[/I][/U] I doubt we would have seen an apology letter or clarification without a strong and vocal response against the letter and Lone Wolf's stance. I thank the staff of ENWorld for making this issue public and providing a place for these voices to be raised. If you are dissatisfied with a product or company, let people know, and why! The reverse is true, if you are satisfied with a product do the same! The consumer isn't powerless, no business can survive without customers. (Well, traditional businesses at least.) Our best tools are being informed consumers and sharing our experiences so that others can be informed as well. [B]And finally, to Lone Wolf[/B]: Please consider better public relations in the future. While I am glad that you came to these forums yourself to participate in the discussion, none of this needed to occur in the first place. This is also the third time I've seen you voice your discomfort that issues were brought out to the public. You should assume that anything you do as a business will be. And also: Let your Lawyer handle your legal business. [/QUOTE]

Verification