Complaints

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:04/09/2025

  Type:Customer Service Issues
  Status:

  UnansweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I am submitting this complaint in response to the poor customer service I received from the moderation team at the ********* forums, which are operated by Future ********, a subsidiary of Future PLC.A thread on their forum contains a post quoting material I originally authored on another platform. While I still stand by the views expressed in my original writing, a third-party reporter took those views out of context years ago to unfairly frame and misrepresent my intent. This AnandTech thread amplified that misrepresentation by citing or discussing the reporters framing, rather than my original words or context.I respectfully asked the moderators to remove the thread on the grounds that it spreads a distorted version of my views and continues to do reputational harm. Despite explaining the situation clearly and in good faith, the moderators refused to take action, dismissing the request as not actionable. They acknowledged the posts age and source but were unwilling to exercise discretion, even though forum moderators do have full authority to remove or edit posts at their own judgment.I followed up multiple times, always respectfully, and was met with cold, dismissive replies. At no point did the moderators express any empathy or offer alternative solutions, such as anonymization or partial redaction.This is not a matter of removing uncomfortable truths its a matter of not perpetuating a misrepresentation that originated with a bad-faith reporter and is now being hosted indefinitely on a forum I have no control over. The fact that this content is still live, years later, against my will, and that the moderators wont even consider a reasonable and compassionate solution, reflects deeply unprofessional customer service and poor community stewardship.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 05/06/2025

  Better Business Bureau:

   

  At this time, I have not been contacted directly by Future US, **** or Future PLC regarding complaint ID ********.

   

  However, Ive noticed that shortly after my filing, a thread on the AnandTech forums the same one connected to my complaint was quietly updated. While no formal acknowledgment has been made, the timing suggests the company may have reviewed my filing internally without choosing to engage through this process.

   

  Id like to reiterate and clarify the central issue of my complaint.

   

  Future US, through their AnandTech moderators, claims they do not allow users to delete posts in order to preserve the historical record of forum discussions. However, this rationale falls apart upon closer examination:

   

  They permanently ban users, cutting off any ability to respond to or clarify their contributions

   

  They selectively delete replies, including one of mine that was respectful and did not break any rules but leave the surrounding thread intact

   

  They refuse to delete even self-authored posts containing personally identifiable information (PII) that I voluntarily submitted at the time, under good faith

   

  They offer no recourse or communication channel once a user has been banned, even if the remaining content continues to have reputational impact

   

   

  This creates a clear double standard. They are not preserving history they are freezing a users words while silencing that persons ability to speak further or update context. This is not accountability or transparency its narrative control.

   

  I stand by the original content that was quoted from me years ago. What I do not stand by is the idea that my request to remove or anonymize my past posts which were created in good faith to address that issue should now themselves be permanently hosted on the forum without any way to respond or clarify. That content, especially under my real name, is now locked in place while I have been locked out entirely.

   

  Any modern platform should allow users to:

   

  Remove their own self-authored posts, especially if they include identifying details

   

  Or, if it refuses deletion to preserve the record, then it must preserve the users ongoing right to respond or clarify those records

   

  What exists now is neither just selective visibility and a denial of basic user dignity

   

   

  I continue to respectfully request that Future US:

   

  Remove or anonymize any forum content tied to the username bobklosak, especially content I personally authored

   

  Reconsider their policy of universally denying user-requested deletions while enforcing permanent bans

   

  Provide a written explanation as to why they believe this policy is appropriate for modern standards of community care and digital safety

   

   

  Thank you again for your oversight in this matter. I hope this expanded context makes the contradictions in their approach clearer and underscores why *** continued to pursue this in good faith.

   

  Sincerely,

  ****** ******