A new low for Smart Parts?! Or should I say DLX Technologies...

[snoopay700]

I think you may have linked the wrong thread. I too have heard there is a girl at SP, that may have at one point used the username to post replies. But her name is not Audrey, and she is not the only one using the DLX Audrey account.
If anyone is interested, the Audrey username has been on PBN, just has not posted anything since this all blew up this morning.

Ack, that i did, i must not have hit c when i was copying it.

Here's the right thread:
http://www.mcarterbrown.com/forums/d...copyright.html

And i find it interesting that they haven't posted anything yet. Curious, very curious.

[wyn1370]

and finally the answer

http://www.pbnation.com/showthread.php?t=2766709

[Hexis]

Pretty much what folks suspected. Just plain foolishness.

[snoopay700]

and finally the answer
http://www.pbnation.com/showthread.php?t=2766709

Well it's not that big of a surprise, they need to cover their asses. I still don't buy "oh there was nothing behind me choosing that picture" though. Whatever, at least they were smart enough to admit they were wrong.

[Lohman446]

Careful how you continue this before you look insincere in the "you should have just apologized and moved on camp".

At this point it appears someone has put forth an apology, as well as an apology for how it was handled. Was the entire point simply seeking the truth or was it a vendetta against SP? Remember I'm of the camp that this was not that big of a deal, at least originally.

[Ruler_Mark]

muhahahahhaha I got a reply. this gal is a serious CSR to be on the forums that much.


BTW does anyone know if she has a direct linke phone #?

[snoopay700]

Careful how you continue this before you look insincere in the "you should have just apologized and moved on camp".

At this point it appears someone has put forth an apology, as well as an apology for how it was handled. Was the entire point simply seeking the truth or was it a vendetta against SP? Remember I'm of the camp that this was not that big of a deal, at least originally.

I accepted her apology, i just also voiced my opinion about how i don't buy that the picture was picked for no reason in particular.

[Lohman446]

I accepted her apology, i just also voiced my opinion about how i don't buy that the picture was picked for no reason in particular.

If the reason was it was a good looking female sure.... why not? I mean if you were creating a persona would it not be one that was aesthetically pleasing? I do not really see that as being an evil reason.

Though, a cartoon or anime, or something not real (or any image that one actually owned the rights to) would have been better for commercial use, as others have pointed out. I'm sure they would agree in hindsight.

[raehl]

I accepted her apology, i just also voiced my opinion about how i don't buy that the picture was picked for no reason in particular.

CLEARLY there was a reason. A VERY PARTICULAR REASON.

She wanted a picture.

- Chris

[raehl]

Though, a cartoon or anime, or something not real (or any image that one actually owned the rights to) would have been better for commercial use, as others have pointed out. I'm sure they would agree in hindsight.

Or at least something properly licensed.

- Chris

[snoopay700]

If the reason was it was a good looking female sure.... why not? I mean if you were creating a persona would it not be one that was aesthetically pleasing? I do not really see that as being an evil reason.

Though, a cartoon or anime, or something not real (or any image that one actually owned the rights to) would have been better for commercial use, as others have pointed out. I'm sure they would agree in hindsight.

I'm not saying it's evil, i'm just saying i don't buy that she just picked it because it looked like an Audrey, of course they wanted a good looking female, they wanted someone that guys would have a very easy time talking to, and as much as she says it wasn't, it was still about marketing, that's my point.

[Mayvik]

I'm not saying it's evil, i'm just saying i don't buy that she just picked it because it looked like an Audrey, of course they wanted a good looking female, they wanted someone that guys would have a very easy time talking to, and as much as she says it wasn't, it was still about marketing, that's my point.

For example, her being "single" and flirty in the PBN posts is also something fabricated to enhance "Audrey's" usefulness as a marketing tool. They could have made "Audrey" a fat, 45 year old train-wreck who ran a lathe for 30 years...but instead the personality in question is a mid-20s, flirty, single, hot chick. I'm sure if it was not THAT particular picture, they would have picked another of it's like; a hot chick but believable that it's someone's actual picture and not something from a photoshoot (aside from the watermark. ).

[snoopay700]

For example, her being "single" and flirty in the PBN posts is also something fabricated to enhance "Audrey's" usefulness as a marketing tool. They could have made "Audrey" a fat, 45 year old train-wreck who ran a lathe for 30 years...but instead the personality in question is a mid-20s, flirty, single, hot chick. I'm sure if it was not THAT particular picture, they would have picked another of it's like; a hot chick but believable that it's someone's actual picture and not something from a photoshoot (aside from the watermark. ).

Exactly, and that's the point i was making, she's saying it's got nothing to do with marketing when it obviously does.

[Mayvik]

Exactly, and that's the point i was making, she's saying it's got nothing to do with marketing when it obviously does.

I'm also waiting for her to answer my questions about which payroll she's on, SP, DLX or both...should be interesting insight into how truly separate the two companies are.

[Lohman446]

Of course... look at any billboard.

For most men look at the waitresses that get the best tips - they come off as "available", flirty, and easy on the eyes. Even if they are married