Warning, warning

[BMK]

Hi all,

Moderators are not "Powers to be'.......

I have had a few people speak to me regarding the previous 'Posting' of a 'Thread' titled..Warning, warning

Let me say from the outset, that I firmly believe and also agree with the 'Forum' moderators in their stand on this "Thread" - shuting it down quickly. Therefore protecting users and the Forum.

The position that the "Forum' has always adopted and we as users agree to, is one of not allowing one or two sided - or worse still more - discussions/arguement about suppliers.

This is fully covered in the Consummer section/Thread.

I do not think that it is reasonable that a forum user can come on here and make a statement - be it true or not - concerning a supplier without that person having the opportunity to reply. Particularly if that person is not on the forum and may not even know about the 'Post'.

I do not want to get involved in any debate, other than making the following observations/comments.

There are a number of these forums in operation and most are run by volunteers (moderators) who believe strongly in what they are doing. They do it for the better of the sport. They are not 'powers to be' but in our case, just Cobra owners and enthusiasts like you and I.

Fortunately, some moderators have sound legal background and knowledge, some have sound IT knowledge etc, etc. They fully understand that this forum is a 'public place' that could see some users possibly wind up neck deep in sh!t if they libel or slander a second party on this forum.

I am aware that the best defence to slander or libel is that..'but it's the truth...however it could be expensive to find out it is the truth.

In conclusion, I'm saying that we all need to be mindful of what we write here and be appreciative of the moderators who can quickly see a 'Thread'' may/could cause someone concern. Or worse still, get out of hand and develop into a possible legal battle.

Sure I would like to know who is being identified as a shark. But please just PM me or let me know at the next meeting or event. That way I can make a judgement after hearing all of the facts. Additionally the named party does not need to defend themselves on a public forum.

Just my $0.02 worth..

Take care guys.

Bernie

[Beejay]

Bernie,

I certainly agree that there needs to be some rules to make sure that any comments posted here are factual and do not misrepresent what has happened.

Having said that, the person mentioned in the post is a member here and could have left a reply if everything was not closed - so we might have all got to see the full story.

Cheers,

Ben

[boxhead]

My own observations on this is that there seems to be a bit of a double standard happening.

We are warned about poor business ethics from a supplier who has used this forum for advertising (with no public warnings about buying a banner add from the Moderators).

The same supplier is a member here so he does have the right and ability to reply to the accusations (in saying that, going by passed ramblings then we may well be saving on alot of space by not allowing him the right to reply).

Yet I have seen plenty of threads with warning regarding engine suppliers that went on for many pages and over a very long time period.
Also we see alot of warnings regarding deposits paid and delivery dates not met from SAI
Also there are alot of warnings regarding FFR supplying incomplete kits.

None of these threads where pulled or closed?

What makes this warning any different?

[BMK]

I watched a few years back the saga unfold on the 'Thread" titled.."I want my Cobra before I die" or similiar.

This 'Thread" went on for dozens of pages. In fact I think there was over 300 posts on the "Thread".

Yes, the company was named and some very high profile identities became involved. This "Thread": certainly did little to help the supplier - I will not name the supplier.

However, I think that some "Threads" travel a fine line, but others and possibly this one, went straight for the throat - my words. The little I saw of it was that the person who "posted" apparently named the company.

To this end, I think there is a danger - both legally and morally - if this is discussed openly. Even worse, as I said if the named person was not a "Forum' member and constant monitor of this site.

I think the 'Forum' is above this.

I made the innitial 'Thread' after talking with a few owners at the cycle shop on the weekend. I was asked why moderators were so quick to jump on top of this 'Thread"..

My response then and is still.."The moderators are simply that "moderators" and if they in their wisdom want to shut down a 'Thread" it's their call.



In this case I must say I agree with them as I could see this getting out of hand.

Again, I am not saying the original 'Thread" poster has a case or not - Mmmm perhaps I should have been a Politician

Again, just my thoughts.

However, I think we all need to be mindful that this particular 'Thread' I started does not end up a revisit of what has been stopped/ended..

Have a good break guys.

Bernie

[boxhead]

My only point here Bernie is Why was this thread pulled yet so many others (that also name the supplier) are not pulled?
I would like to hear an answer from a moderator describing the differences?

Even if it is so others know where the boundaries are.

[Jamo]

If I may.

Citing a few examples of where you think a few things got through does not a double standard make.

Anybody watching this site over the past few years knows how much activity the moderators have been engaged with in trying to calm down threads, moving them to appropriate forums, such as the Consumer Watch or the mfg's own forum if it has one, and closing numerous threads when disputes get out of hand. I have to wonder when someone says they believe such actions have not been taken.

With regard to folks promoting themselves within forums, you will obviously never be aware of what goes on behind the scenes. When we do attempt to reign in such over-exuberance, we end up getting flak from those who think the mfg or builder ought to be able to promote themselves.

It is indeed a fine line. We prefer never to intervene whenever possible. We prefer calm winds and clear nights so that we can enjoy this place as much as anyone instead of watching what a particular poster bent on testing our wills intends next.

Because of the size of this place, in many instances we can only react to reported posts. My intervention in this instance was in response to a couple of PMs of folks who were concerned about your Club's forum turning into a battleground. And, in answer to your next question, the PMs were from folks not aligned with either side to the dispute. I do not recall any Reported Posts about the person promoting himself here...did you send one? I've checked my log and see none.

In this instance, the poster in question was warned three times in this forum over the course of a single day, not to mention the exchange taking place with private messages. He was provided with a link to the Consumer Watch area, and a specific link to its guidelines. This was not a case where the person was prevented from making other folks aware of a problem (from his perception)...it was a matter of that person simply ignoring the advice given to him about how to go about it. This advice was given to him despite his remarks here and in private. When he finally did post in Consumer Watch, he flat ignored the guidelines and did so in an unreasonable manner. Before I edited it...the remarks were basically to the effect of calling the other person a name and warning him to "watch out" without giving any details as to the dispute. Much the same occurred in the three threads he started here. Have you read the guidelines in Consumer Watch? If so, what, pray tell, do you find wrong in what they ask folks to do?

It is rather easy to critcize the moderators, especially since you see little of what we do. That's fine...we've never asked for any thanks, and we don't now. But we do ask folks to be considerate of one another.

I suspended the person for a limited period of time to allow him to think it over a bit. I've asked another of your group to discuss the situation with him in an effort to see if the suspension might be lifted early. As a new member, the poster might well have heeded the advice and read the guidelines posted in numerous locations around this site...they were put there by the administration for a reason...rather than telling us how he thinks the site ought to be run and shooting the messenger.

Funny thing...I've received PMs asking why I didn't ban the person outright and sooner, and PMs asking why I took any action. Neither Ron nor I can recall a specific instance where any act of moderation we engaged in was met with everyone in agreement. Nor do we expect that to ever occur.

Now, to the point. The thread(s) were not pulled because the poster named the mfg in question. In fact, we ask that they be identified and contact information be provided so that folks who are interested can ask them for their side of the story...again, read the guidelines in Consumer Watch. Naming someone does not mean a name of your own choosing, such as starting off by calling the person a "shark." Explaining what the dispute is about does not mean simply saying the "shark" owes you money and nothing more. We don't mind a bit of argument, but for crying out loud...tell us what the he!! you're pissed off about.

We have been threatened with legal action from time to time, and the state of the law is such that we do have to be mindful of everyone's position and ability to state their side of the story. That's why we have Consumer Watch.

Sorry to interrupt what is normally a very quiet and fun place at this site. Simply trying to keep it that way. You asked a valid question, and I do hope this provided you with an answer.

[boxhead]

Originally Posted by Jamo

If I may.

Citing a few examples of where you think a few things got through does not a double standard make.
Some of these threads did not "get through" they had involvement from Moderators

Anybody watching this site over the past few years knows how much activity the moderators have been engaged with in trying to calm down threads, moving them to appropriate forums, such as the Consumer Watch or the mfg's own forum if it has one, and closing numerous threads when disputes get out of hand.
I am not doubting any of the Moderators in doing the job they do, I for one am very grateful for this site and the friendships I have made as a direct result of it.

I have to wonder when someone says they believe such actions have not been taken.
I did not say anything in relation to the other threads because I as a purchaser am thankful for any info that may help in the decisions I make as to who I purchase parts or services from, Ultimatly we are all adults and if warned of poor business ethics we are all old enough to do some research before making our decisions.

With regard to folks promoting themselves within forums, you will obviously never be aware of what goes on behind the scenes. When we do attempt to reign in such over-exuberance, we end up getting flak from those who think the mfg or builder ought to be able to promote themselves.
I can understand both sides of what your saying here but have to wonder why some are warned about banner adds (publicly) yet others are not. You are correct in saying we do not know what goes on behind the forum.

It is indeed a fine line. We prefer never to intervene whenever possible. We prefer calm winds and clear nights so that we can enjoy this place as much as anyone instead of watching what a particular poster bent on testing our wills intends next.
I agree with you 100%

Because of the size of this place, in many instances we can only react to reported posts. My intervention in this instance was in response to a couple of PMs of folks who were concerned about your Club's forum turning into a battleground. And, in answer to your next question, the PMs were from folks not aligned with either side to the dispute. I do not recall any Reported Posts about the person promoting himself here...did you send one? I've checked my log and see none.
I did not send you any PM's with concerns, as I have said, I am greatful to hear of any issues and think we are all old enough to make up our own minds.

In this instance, the poster in question was warned three times in this forum over the course of a single day, not to mention the exchange taking place with private messages. He was provided with a link to the Consumer Watch area, and a specific link to its guidelines. This was not a case where the person was prevented from making other folks aware of a problem (from his perception)...it was a matter of that person simply ignoring the advice given to him about how to go about it. This advice was given to him despite his remarks here and in private. When he finally did post in Consumer Watch, he flat ignored the guidelines and did so in an unreasonable manner. Before I edited it...the remarks were basically to the effect of calling the other person a name and warning him to "watch out" without giving any details as to the dispute. Much the same occurred in the three threads he started here. Have you read the guidelines in Consumer Watch? If so, what, pray tell, do you find wrong in what they ask folks to do?
I am not privey to what exchanges took place between the Moderators and the thread poster, from what your saying it does sound like he was given fair warning, and if there was name calling involved and threats made, then I agree with you totaly in closing the thread and removing the remarks.

It is rather easy to critcize the moderators, especially since you see little of what we do. That's fine...we've never asked for any thanks, and we don't now. But we do ask folks to be considerate of one another.
Again I agree with you completly.

I suspended the person for a limited period of time to allow him to think it over a bit. I've asked another of your group to discuss the situation with him in an effort to see if the suspension might be lifted early. As a new member, the poster might well have heeded the advice and read the guidelines posted in numerous locations around this site...they were put there by the administration for a reason...rather than telling us how he thinks the site ought to be run and shooting the messenger.

Funny thing...I've received PMs asking why I didn't ban the person outright and sooner, and PMs asking why I took any action. Neither Ron nor I can recall a specific instance where any act of moderation we engaged in was met with everyone in agreement. Nor do we expect that to ever occur.

Sorry to interrupt what is normally a very quiet and fun place at this site. Simply trying to keep it that way. You asked a valid question, and I do hope this provided you with an answer.

I thank you Jamo for your answers and will (hopefully) continue to enjoy this forum for many years to come.

[Rebel1]

Jamo...with respect, I've got to agree with boxhead.

Firstly, let me say I'm don't appreciate the naming of any supplier when a club member has a dispute with that supplier.

However, I make comment on the consistency of the action and this I feel is the point boxhead questions.

A recent thread in Transmission talk really got stuck into a supplier to the extent that some of the posts turned on the member who posted and he had to admit he had handled the truth rather carelessly.

Tko600 Warning!!!!

In the end the thread was not pulled, still exists in Transmission Talk and has spawned other threads. As it has turned out the problem ( If there really is one) appears to be in the manufacture of the gearbox and not with the supplier.

Yet the supplier WAS named and I'm sure they found the whole situation embarrassing as they were forced to defend themselves.

I'm not criticizing the policy....just the consistent policing of that policy.

[Jamo]

Boxhead

Appreciate the opportunity to respond.

G'day

[Jamo]

Hi Rebel...just saw your post. I was typing War and Peace when it came in.

Yes, I recall that thread well...kept up with it while waiting in the courthouse hallway for my client's case to be called.

First off, and something I should've mentioned in my response to Boxhead as well...we pay a bit more attention to maintaining some peace in Club forums in comparison to general interest forums such as the FE, Small Block and Transmission forums as well as others...including All cobra Talk. Brent intended Club forums to be for exchanging information about gatherings, friendship and general news of a more localized nature.

Secondly, the supplier in question came on rather promptly and did a nice job in presenting his side of the story. Folks like yourself posted every so often to insure everyone paid attention to the full story.

While it could very well have been moved to Consumer Watch, we were mindful of the general technical information being imparted by some knowledgeable folks which certainly fit well within the Transmission forum as the thread progressed. That was simply a judgement call on our part.

Most importantly, while the thread starter was a bit antagonistic, he did not go overboard, and he fully explained in his first post what the issue was in such a way as to allow folks to understand what the concerns were. It allowed the supplier to respond in a point by point manner, and at least some form of resolution was evidently reached. The supplier did a damn good job in responding...more importantly, he was given the opportunity to do so because of the manner in which the thread starter laid out the problem. He may not have been popular...but he did lay it out in a reasonable manner.

Sometimes, threads have multiple personalities, and we simply have to balance them all. Certainly not an exact science, and reasonable persons may certainly disagree. In that particular instance, the technical information which came out about that particular transmission was valuble and is much easier to find in a forum entitled Transmission Forum.

Thanks for the question and I hope I answered it. We'd rather answer concerns than have folks wondering and waiting to stick a knife up our ass and then wonder why.

Have a good one.

[fastraxsg]

Jamo and Ron,
I appreciate the often "thankless" work that you do as moderators on this site. I can see how things need to be reigned in on occasion. I was party to a thread that I started on the UK site that got way out of hand and ended up with a thread for two guys to have a private slug fest. Not very pretty he said-they said type of thing. As for stopping everything or curtailing it all, this site is huge and almost impossible for moderation each and every day, that would mean reading every single post, making countless decisions. No one is doing this for a living to my knowledge. The only way it works cleanly is if we members report when things get out of hand so it can be cleared/cleaned up. We need to work together to do a good job. Hats off to the both of you for keeping it going.

[Rebel1]

Originally Posted by Jamo

Hi Rebel...just saw your post. I was typing War and Peace when it came in.

Yes, I recall that thread well...kept up with it while waiting in the courthouse hallway for my client's case to be called.

Gawd, and I bet ya billed some-one for ya time.

Appreciate the response Jamo but you know us Aussies...... we call a spade a spade.

You and your loved ones have a very cheerful festive season.

[Jamo]

Appreciate it fastraxsg, though not necessary. We get some benefits...like when the server goes down.

[Jamo]

Rebel, "I think...I bill."

If Australia wasn't on this planet to slap the rest of the world upside the head every now and then, we'd be in big trouble.

My best to you and yours as well.

[BMK]

Rebel1

Hey listen mate a spade is not a spade it's a shovel - so lets argue..

Bernie

[BMK]

Jamo

AS always so eloquently put Counsellor..

Hope you and the Cheer Leader have a good one. Please say 'HI' to all the 'GASHOLES' and the gang I met at the Shelby event - SAAC.

Merry Christmas

Bernie

[BMK]

fastraxsg

I think you hit it on the head. It is a difficult task moderating the 'Forums' and I know that there are a number of us who report or wonder sometimes what is going on.

Guess I have been a little slow in doing much of either, as I have been busy at work extending the restaurant etc.

I did however get involved in a long discussion at the cycle shop on this and thought..well I'll "post' a new 'Thread' and clear it up a little.

Thanks to Jamo and Ron it's certainly clearer to me. And no doubt my PM messages that indicate incoming will tell me the whole story..

Damnnnn Aussies causing trouble..

Bernie

[Rebel1]

Originally Posted by Bernie Knight

Rebel1

Hey listen mate a spade is not a spade it's a shovel - so lets argue..

Bernie

Gawd....bluddy fast food vendors know nuffin about their tools.

Bernie...a spade is a small shovel.....a shovel is a big spade. as different as a quarter pounder is to a big mack.

Now...what were ya saying about arguing?

Cheers Bernie...happy chrissy to you and yours Mate.

[BMK]

Rebel1

Thanks have a good one also. It's really crept up on us, as I've still some shopping to do for the Boss... Mmm perhaps she needs a new torque wrench for Christmas..

Bernie

[boxhead]

I still think you should buy the GT40 for the boss there Bernie.

While we are at it, Merry Christmas to everyone out there and hope you all get the presents your hoping for.

I will buy you a Beer when I manage to visit America Jamo.
Take care.