I don't know about TP but Bloviation has a FarceBuck page.
From what I understand, Bloviation don't allow public comments on their page.
That would suggest that they are afraid of what people are saying about them.
However, TP is a huge organisation / facility covering more than just Nick Ross.
Not every user of TP is as outrageously dishonest and unethical as Nick Ross.
However, their system is most certainly wide open to abuse.
I could, for example, create a TP account, shaft all of my customers (not just a proportion of them, like Nick - Hypothetically, I don't care about being able to point at customers who are genuinely happy with my service in order to give the impression of being a legitimate businessman rather than an out-and-out con-merchant) and when I receive a negative review, I simply flag it (via a friend, sympathetic supplier or proxy-server). I get friends or employees, use a proxy server or employ an agency to write fake reviews and I provide false order numbers. Along comes a disgruntled customer who has sussed what is going on and starts flagging the positive reviews which he understandably suspects to be fake (as I have seen happening with Nick's reviews) - I simply provide the reviewers with order numbers to supply to TP. Their reviews are reinstated. Thus, it is utterly pointless in flagging suspected false reviews. They will simply provide the order numbers given to them by the rogue-trader.
When one of my victims starts contacting other victims and letting them know what to expect, pointing them at a thread in a forum which contains a repost of the majority of the reviews which have been flagged and hidden, I simply ask TP to block his PM privileges. TP have no idea what is going on and my claim that "it is just one or two competitors who are trying to scupper my business" is more than enough for them to give me the benefit of the doubt - especially as I am paying for their service - I am their customer, paying their wages and with a good business, the customer is always right.
This leaves facilities such as TrustPilot wide open to abuse by the likes of Nick Ross and no amount of rational discussion, explanation or petitioning is ever going to resolve this problem. Caveat Emptor - Learn to spot the frauds and conmen - learn to spot the TP review pages which have lots and lots of flagged reviews. Do proper internet searches and try to find a forum like this one where people are able to discuss their experiences without manipulation from the rogue traders.
On the flip-side, we have organisations such as the Trading Standards Authority who are tasked with ensuring that traders behave themselves - of course, they are about as much use as a parachute in a submarine. They make contact, ask nicely, accept any old horse manure and the rogue trader is free to carry on regardless.
The only real weapon we have in the fight against fraudsters is criminal law.
That requires establishing a pattern and demonstrating intent.
How many people so far have had a quiet word in Nick's shell-like ?
How many of those people have basically been told to put their advice somewhere smelly, sideways? (I'd guess all of them, politely or otherwise).
Nick knows what is expected of him as an ethical businessman.
Nick knows why he has earned himself the label - "lying, thieving crook" and the only way he knows to defend against that label is to pretend that he has an on-going defamation case against those who might strive to amalgamate his victims and to abuse facilities such as TrustPilot.
He could choose to be an honest and ethical businessman - he has been given more than enough time to get his act together. He could choose to look after the people who have given him money in good faith. He could choose to advertise for sale only those products which he, personally, can ship within a reasonable period of time. In the two years of history which is documented here in this thread, I am quite sure that we have established prior knowledge and intent.
I really cannot interpret this evidence in any other way. Initially, I was prepared to accept that he was just a small businessman who had simply bitten off a bit more than he could chew which is why I gave him six months before I got on his case. This is not simply the performance of a guy who has just bitten off a bit more than he can chew - I really cannot believe that for a moment - this is the behaviour of a guy who knowingly is obtaining money by deception. This is the behaviour of a criminal and no other word can credibly be used to describe Nick's performance when we take into account the history of his organisation, his use of organisation logos, his abuse of TP, his treatment of customers, his excuses, his persistent claims of stock (when there is none), his bribery, his "trade-association" of which only he is a member - and founder, his persistent ignorance of complaints (until they are made public) and his dismissal of those who have legitimate complaint.
Two years of history - that's what has been documented in this thread.
That should be more than enough to show foreknowledge and intent in a criminal case.
If only one single customer has written off an out-of-pocket expense to Nick, then he has obtained money by deception. I know that there are more than one who have done exactly that. That makes Nick Ross a con-artist by every definition of the word. He deceives other people into parting with money by making them believe something false.
Trade associations, review pages, payment protection plans and advertising authorities are not the course for redress in this case. It is time to bring Nick Ross to justice for fraud and see him try to answer criminal charges.
Of course, this is my opinion and it may not tally with your own. For a whole year, I have been waiting for Nick to get his act together. It seems that he thinks he doesn't have to do so. An emphatic "NO" from those who have fallen foul of his dishonest practices would go a long way to either forcing him to change his ways or shutting him down for good. Personally, I don't think that he wants to change his ways - He's had more than enough time. That leaves the latter option and I've gone up against (and seen the fall of) far bigger than him.
Paul..