(10 Jun 2015, 4:51 am)Dan wrote If I had suggested that a burger I'd purchased [at one of the catering facilities you work(ed) at, which you've mentioned on the forum previously] had a dollop of tomato ketchup thrown on without my consent, and I then perhaps listed how it could have been made better despite having no professional experience with making burgers (which is not far from the situation with Malarkey regarding the new "QuayLink" brand), you'd be the first to moan, and I highly doubt you'd do it in a tongue in cheek manner like citaro5284 did.
As I said before, it's the way in which negative feedback is conveyed that is critical - not the issuing of negative feedback in general (like aureolin, I agree the forum would be boring if we all agreed). Especially as there are so many people on this forum who could have been involved in the creation of the livery (regular posters or not), it would be a lot better if the negative feedback comes across as constructive criticism and not like a slanderous remark is being thrown around... This is, of course, just my personal opinion.
Well for one, I don't make the burgers anywhere I work/worked, however, I think the consumer of the product (that's anyone buying and eating a burger or someone using a bus service) has a right to any opinions they wish, and if they think they could improve the service offered then I think that's fine and I welcome any comments. It's been debated on this forum previously, about people having to walk around looking for chips and someone else not enjoying the working environment. I didn't take these comments wrong if fact I tend to agree with the former.
Any consumer of a product has a right to express a view, negative or positive.
I just think we shouldn't ever try to limit discussion, tounge and cheek or not, when it was mentioned about the positive new liverys no one had witty comments about 'art critics' then so I'm sure you can see where I'm coming from.