RichinPeoria

A shill is an associate of a person selling goods or services or a political group, who pretends no association to the seller/group and assumes the air of an enthusiastic customer. The intention of the shill is, using crowd psychology, to encourage others unaware of the set-up to purchase said goods or services or support the political group's ideological claims. Shills are often employed by confidence artists. The term plant is also used. Shill bidding, found on many auction sites such as eBay is punishable by law and may result in fines and or prosecution.
Shilling is illegal in many circumstances and in many jurisdictions because of the frequently fraudulent and damaging character of their actions. However, if a shill does not place uninformed parties at a risk of loss, but merely generates "buzz", the shill's actions may be legal. For example, a person planted in an audience to laugh and applaud when appropriate (see "claque"), or to participate in on-stage activities as a "random member of the audience", is a type of legal shill.
"Shill" can also be used pejoratively to describe a critic who appears either all-too-eager to heap glowing praise upon mediocre offerings, or who acts as an apologist for glaring flaws. In this sense, they would be an implicit "shill" for the industry at large, as their income is tied to its prosperity.
-Wiki

ShooterK2

I'm still pretty new around here, but I do understand what a shill is, and I don't understand why people take it so seriously. If someone starts a thread and is shilling for a company, you read the statements, weigh the options, and make a MORE INFORMED opinion than you would have previously been able to without such threads. Threads of this manner always draw positive as well as negative responses.

And as far as being dishonest, I don't see much difference in shilling and telling your buddy to "put in a good word for me" with his hot, blonde friend. Is that not the same thing? Getting someone to notice something (or, in that case, someONE) that may normally go unnoticed?

Not trying to offend anyone by this post, I just don't understand all the fuss. If folks don't like those types of threads, I don't know why they insist on participating in them.

sced

I think freedom of speech is less free in Peoria.

merlinextraligh

Most of the shills are pretty obvious. They follow the same pattern, are new members, have low post counts, and often haven't posted in any other thread.

I think its a positive for Manufactuers to participate in the Forum. There are several that do so openly, and they provide helpful information, that can be fairly evaluated. (such as the Quarq and Zipp reps.)

The ones that participate on an undisclosed basis really are being unethical. However, because they're so bad at it for the most part, they're actually hurting their own cause.

So message to Shills: Just participate openly and honestly and we will all be better off.

merlinextraligh

There's no free speech right to take money from people by fraudulent speech.

Besides, the Government doesn't run the forum, so there's no Free Speech right involved at all.

TCR

Where's the "I Love Bikes Direct" option?

tombailey

The problem with the shilling that clearly goes on here is that the threads are designed to catch search engines used outside of BF. This is why the shill threads will clearly spell out the make, model, price etc of the bike being shilled. So when someone who doesn't understand the underhand marketing types that make/model into google they come across a thread in an apparently public forum which espouses the great value of the bike. Likewise for people who join BF just to do a search on a particular brand.

That to me is morally corrupt.

merlinextraligh

^ Good point. I think that makes a good case for calling out the shills in the threads, so that the new or unitiated can evaluate the merits of the information presented with that insight.

I called a guy a shill in the Tandem Forum (a much more genteel forum) and he cleary was, but a several others chastised me for discouraging a new member.

sced

Given the criminal and civil statutes that govern American's freedom of speech rights to prevent harm to others, are you saying that these do not apply on internet forums and that the owners of the forums can operate them however they like?

Ih8lucky13

I think discouraging a fraudulant practice, does not limit anybody's rights.

sced

I think that on the forums the term is ubiquitous and used so loosely and speculatively that it is only a form of name-calling driven by primitive behaviors.

Ih8lucky13

What primitive behavior?? I have never heard of the fight, or flight, and attack shill response.

TCR

Personally, I don't see a problem with it. I mean, come on, who really does stuff like that?

merlinextraligh

No, I'm saying there are lots of limitations on "Free Speech" and you don't have a "Free Speech Right" to say things that are fraudulent.

But the broader point, because it is an internet forum, that is not run by the Government, the Forum owners can choose to limit speech any way they want, without concern for the First Amendment, which limits the Federal Government's (and the States by way of the 14th amendment) ability to restrict speech.

sced

I think it's the BF equivalent of the "n" word, jew, pollack, *****, grease spot....some people have a need to feel superior.

Pharmr

where's the "I don't give a crap" option?

sced

I am speculating, but I would be surprised if there aren't civil statutes that apply and that subject a forum owner to a law suit under some circumstances.

umd

I think you would be wrong.

merlinextraligh

To have a claim for violation of your "free speech" there has to be state action. (Congress shall make no law...)

Here there simply is no state action.To my knowledge Bike Forums takes no federal funds, and is a private for profit business.

First Amendment claims against for profit Internet companies have been routinely dismissed due to the lack of the required state action. See e.g. Kinderstart.com v. Google Inc., 2007 U.S. Dist. Lexis 22637; Langdon v. Google Inc. 474 F.Supp.2d 622.

This doesn't mean that there aren't all sorts of laws that apply to internet providers. It does mean, however you don't have a constitutionally protected right to say whatever you want on BikeForums.

sced

I take it you are a lawyer. Any examples related to the concept of free speech that are not related to criminality?

d2create

+1

I think bikeforums software should ban the word "shill", automatically changing it to "Hello Kitty" in posts.

urbanknight

Your poll is flawed. It should allow multiple choices.

I don't trust a shill company and am wear of their product because it shows they are dishonest. This goes way back before I joined BF, when I moderated a car forum and had to deal with shills and all the complaints of one company's crappy products.

merlinextraligh

Children's Internet Protection Act, Can Spam Act (anti spam) come to mind.

And all the various laws that apply to anyone, such as defamation.

DScott

"On BF, they came first for the Shills, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Shill;

And then they came for the 'bent riders, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a 'bent rider;

And then they came for the Freds, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Fred;

And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up."

sced

So a forum owner needs to show diligence to prevent the forum from being a vehicle for violation of these laws, but is otherwise completely free to arbitrarily restrict the content?