Objections to the editorial

Is there going to be similarly sticky posts about all fintechs?

1 Like

Well, I must admit I think the whole beauty of Fintechtalk was that it was independent from passing judgement and acting as an authority on good/bad, allowing people to share opinions without them feeling like there was some overarching force

It’s a shame to see the objective stance of this site go to ruin

Yes, every financial firm has its problems, no I don’t think we’ve ever had an official post from the super user to discuss Monzo’s rapid account closing or Revolut’s woes with fraudulent transaction flagging


Agreed. Of course, I am sure that in the spirit of fairness, we can expect to see a similar article warning people from joining Monzo due to their poor customer service, their predilection for closing peoples’ accounts without giving any reason, their failure to implement cheque imaging despite promising it, the unsuitability of PayPoint as a means for paying cash into one’s account - and charging for it!… etc etc


Please @Liam could you at least alter the title, so it doesn’t state that is an editorial from Fintech Talk forum, as if we all agree with your post?

It’s not an editorial. It’s a personal piece posted on a forum.


Was never implied that it was on behalf of forum members.


I think you’re missing the reason you set this forum up, aren’t you?

It was to be an unpartisan party that allowed people to express their own opinions, after Starling decided they didn’t care

Not for it to be represented as the “truth” of Fintechtalk, if you wanted to post this, why post it on the super user account and not via your personal one? This isn’t Which, it’s a discussion forum

Edit; I see you’ve transferred it to your account, which is my main criticism; the only other one I really have is that critique of your post should remain on the original thread rather than being pushed to the middle of nowhere for no reason


This place is called Fintech Talk.

Pretty strong implication that your ‘editorial’ speaks for the whole place.


So you think that when a newspaper publishers an editorial it claims to be speaking for its readers?

Think you’re trying to make mischief from nothing.


Think this is supposed to be a forum, but you seem to be trying to silence those with an opinion other than your own…


Who have I silenced. Give me one name. Just one.

1 Like

I’ve always had a lot of respect for you, but surely you recognise that you’ve made a specious argument.

There’s a huge difference between a published newspaper which provides content and a platform such as FTT where the ‘audience’ produces the content.


I’ve never used Starling and have no interest in using it. But it feels wrong to me that this critical thread on Starling has been given special prominence (banner and sticky) and contains the statement below

I’d suggest at least modifying the statement to make clear it reflects the view of one member (albeit the owner) rather than the site/community as a whole.


That’s a good point, well made. Will reflect and adjust the wording

I think most can also distinguish between the (virtual) ‘establishment’ and its ‘patrons’.

But I already changed the owner of the post to myself from the site before you posted. I’ll take a look at the wording.

1 Like

As long as Starling Bank don’t ever piss me off, I’m more than happy to be a customer. Really very bloody simple to use, love the instant notifications etc. I’m always happy to recommend an account to my friends and family. No one I know personnally has ever opened an account with them though or even switched. I was talking to a decades old friend o mine just the other day and I mentioned Starling to them and they just said ‘Why? I’ve been with Lloyds for 35 years, why do I need to even think about changing banks?’ I have to admit, I find that attitude somewhat odd, but then banks to me, are just disposable items if something better comes along.

1 Like

I appreciate I don’t post here very often but either this place is a place for discussion or it’s a soap box for the site owner. Posting a rant (and you can dress it up anyway you like but it’s a rant) and then moving any objections to another thread is just sad plain and simple.

This is just childish btw…

You’ve clearly not had a great experience with Starling and this a great place to discuss that. I thoroughly enjoy reading the conversations, but I don’t post because of holier than thou bullcrap like this.

FWIW I’ve not had a great experience with Starling either but I feel like commenting on it would simply be feeding the super ego in charge of this site.

Anyway there is a certain irony I guess that I’ve posted this post that I am sure will get me banned on the day the community promoted me.

If it means anything at all Liam I would look up the definition of libel before I published an editorial saying that choosing a bank is reckless based purely on your own poor experience.


@Liam, this place is either a platform where all members can contribute, expressing their point of view (as just that, their own view) or it’s something akin to a news site where the owner sets the rules about what content can be included and publishes it as the content provider.

Obviously, this is your site to do with as you will, but I’m sure you see that using the phrase ‘an editorial from Fintech Talk’ implies it represents the views of the platform and, by extension, its members.

I would have absolutely no issue with you saying that it was a positional post by you. You make valid points in your post.


So following that through to its logical conclusion, I can either post on a forum or own one. Not both.

I am moving posts because I do not want the purpose of the post to get buried because some people are aggrieved that I had the audacity to express an opinion.

The two discussions and debates can happen, but they are two separate debates.


My reading of most responses is that they welcome you recording your opinions.

It’s the manner it’s been done in which bothers me.


And I have agreed to take a look at that.