The rules. Sorry - it's a long one!
- Thread starter pauljmcnulty
- Start date
Indi9xx
New member
The moderators have a tough job here to keep it from turning into some of the other Porsche forums which become a hotbed of advertising, almost turning them into an independent single company fan club.
PCGB needs to maintain a certain level of independence from non authorised businesses to ensure they maintain their position... allowing advertising openly in forums could tarnish that position..
If PCGB or any other media, recieve copy for a prospective advert in their publication you can bet your life its moderated without only pre set rules but with common sense. So there isnt anything wrong with the forum being any different.... The moderators decision should really be the end of it... it could be discussed with them off forum, but the moderators should have a rule that says if they feel someone is taking advantage of blatent advertising, the post should be deleted.
I have had a couple of posts edited or deleted... did I bitch and whine? Nope, I took it on the chin, realised I overstepped the mark and got on with my day....
If someone posts a reply or topic, which has an advertising bent, and then when its edited or deleted they get offended and start shouting about it... its probably because that post was part of their advertising program and therefore needed to be edited or deleted. Otherwise it would not have mattered enough for them to get hot under the collar about.
I think its a good idea to allow signature web addresses... as long as its just that, no long winded tag lines explaining why their pants are better than other pants... Just their name and URL perhaps.,.. maybe an email address...
Advertising... well I think the forum works quite well as it is.... is it the end of the world if we allow the moderators to keep this place an enthusiast haven?
PCGB needs to maintain a certain level of independence from non authorised businesses to ensure they maintain their position... allowing advertising openly in forums could tarnish that position..
If PCGB or any other media, recieve copy for a prospective advert in their publication you can bet your life its moderated without only pre set rules but with common sense. So there isnt anything wrong with the forum being any different.... The moderators decision should really be the end of it... it could be discussed with them off forum, but the moderators should have a rule that says if they feel someone is taking advantage of blatent advertising, the post should be deleted.
I have had a couple of posts edited or deleted... did I bitch and whine? Nope, I took it on the chin, realised I overstepped the mark and got on with my day....
If someone posts a reply or topic, which has an advertising bent, and then when its edited or deleted they get offended and start shouting about it... its probably because that post was part of their advertising program and therefore needed to be edited or deleted. Otherwise it would not have mattered enough for them to get hot under the collar about.
I think its a good idea to allow signature web addresses... as long as its just that, no long winded tag lines explaining why their pants are better than other pants... Just their name and URL perhaps.,.. maybe an email address...
Advertising... well I think the forum works quite well as it is.... is it the end of the world if we allow the moderators to keep this place an enthusiast haven?
DivineE
New member
ORIGINAL: Riverside
Been there, bought the T-shirt, smelled pretty good, I'd use them again[]
I have had others contact me who have sung his praises and then later been badly scowlded but I hope you never have to learn this because I hate seeing people fall victim to bad apples.
Ben
p.s. this does not go for others who work with said offender as they seem genuinely quite nice at the very least.
Suffolk944
Moderator
Don't want to get embroiled in the detail but do just want to say am very happy with my level two "t-shirt". []
Would also welcome some relaxation of the rules as long as it doesn't lead to this truely great forum being open to abuse - Hopefully we can all be able to share our enthusiasms for the 944 without overt hostilities breaking out, despite differences of opinions.
]Would also welcome some relaxation of the rules as long as it doesn't lead to this truely great forum being open to abuse - Hopefully we can all be able to share our enthusiasms for the 944 without overt hostilities breaking out, despite differences of opinions.
924nutter
PCGB Member
Now for my two penny worth, and directed at no-one in particular.
Gentlemen, step back a pace and look at the overall picture, we had someone saying that "them's the rules" ( I politely forget who it was) was not a good enough answer, and three moderators wasting time trying to justify them being the rules.
This all from just discussing whether the rules are right or wrong.
Now cast your mind back to the very rude and personal attacks made on a thread about polishing your car where ultimately I suggested to a person that if they had no objection to having their post(s) deleted because of the content, he might do us all a faovour and delete them himslef.
Last but not least, if I were not to pick them up daily, my hallway would be bestrewn with junkmail (unsolicited advertising) and begging letters. You phone the OPC and you get brand awareness rammed down your ear. There are now three comercial breaks in an hour-long programme on terrestrial television. Some advertising hoardings have had to be removed due to the distractions to motorists.
Ah, the Porshce forum. The last bastion of the refugee from cheap advertising. Don't you realise that by allowing advertising, the club would, by association, be condoning the content, good or bad, and therefore condoning slanging matches such as we have already witnessed. When I read posts like that, it makes me feel embarrased to be a member of the club.
If anyone's business sinks or swims by the revenue generated from the forum, they might need to investgate a better business model because IMHO (an sometimes not so humble) something is amiss with the one said businesses have in place.
It also places moderators who have comercial interests at an unfair advantage as they can moderate and delete advertisements from all the competition. By far, the fairest way to every business is to have a blanket rule, no BLOODY averts, and damn the F**k filter.
Perhaps thats why thems is the rules.
Gentlemen, step back a pace and look at the overall picture, we had someone saying that "them's the rules" ( I politely forget who it was) was not a good enough answer, and three moderators wasting time trying to justify them being the rules.
This all from just discussing whether the rules are right or wrong.
Now cast your mind back to the very rude and personal attacks made on a thread about polishing your car where ultimately I suggested to a person that if they had no objection to having their post(s) deleted because of the content, he might do us all a faovour and delete them himslef.
Last but not least, if I were not to pick them up daily, my hallway would be bestrewn with junkmail (unsolicited advertising) and begging letters. You phone the OPC and you get brand awareness rammed down your ear. There are now three comercial breaks in an hour-long programme on terrestrial television. Some advertising hoardings have had to be removed due to the distractions to motorists.
Ah, the Porshce forum. The last bastion of the refugee from cheap advertising. Don't you realise that by allowing advertising, the club would, by association, be condoning the content, good or bad, and therefore condoning slanging matches such as we have already witnessed. When I read posts like that, it makes me feel embarrased to be a member of the club.
If anyone's business sinks or swims by the revenue generated from the forum, they might need to investgate a better business model because IMHO (an sometimes not so humble) something is amiss with the one said businesses have in place.
It also places moderators who have comercial interests at an unfair advantage as they can moderate and delete advertisements from all the competition. By far, the fairest way to every business is to have a blanket rule, no BLOODY averts, and damn the F**k filter.
Perhaps thats why thems is the rules.
Neil Haughey
New member
I agree John. Maybe its an Irish thing but we don't like to see someone being singled out, it just doesn't seem very tasteful at times even if there is good reasons. Personally the only Porsche specialist I have had issues with advertises like mad and has a big following with some of the 911 owners. Do I go on about how their idiot work almost killed me by giving me a back an unsafe car? No I accept it may have been a mistake and the proprietor of that business is an OK bloke who supports the many 911 enthusiasts and was at Eynsham last year (he is never on here so you can stop guessing). We all know who the 2 ppl this is all about and whilst I have more issues with the one you all seem to be in love in with, it doesn't stop me from having the utmost respect for both of em. I have used both and will continue to in the future. Fen is also a top bloke who has made a big contribution over the years so I don't want this long running episode to seemingly detract from the genuinely good nature amongst 944 owners whenever we meet up or are online.
pauljmcnulty
Active member
Not quite sure why this has popped up again.....
Basically we've left things be since November, and it's been fine. At least - there's not been a single complaint about blatant mis-use of the forum.
The person who had caused complaints is still with us, and posting things which are of benefit to the members. So that's ok then. There are a few company web and e-mail links in people's signatures, but again that seems fine, and to me allows us to see where they are coming from.
I go back to my original idea that as long as any person with a commercial interest is happy that their posts are open to the criticism of others and it is obvious that they are affiliated with a business then we should be flexible within the rules we as moderators have. If anyone thinks the forum has become less open and objective this year, let us know!
Basically we've left things be since November, and it's been fine. At least - there's not been a single complaint about blatant mis-use of the forum.
The person who had caused complaints is still with us, and posting things which are of benefit to the members. So that's ok then. There are a few company web and e-mail links in people's signatures, but again that seems fine, and to me allows us to see where they are coming from.
I go back to my original idea that as long as any person with a commercial interest is happy that their posts are open to the criticism of others and it is obvious that they are affiliated with a business then we should be flexible within the rules we as moderators have. If anyone thinks the forum has become less open and objective this year, let us know!
cococola
New member
I dont think there is anything wrong with a reccomendation from somebody who has had good service/supply from a company, however there is always a possibility of a personal tie I suppose??[8|]
I would be drawn by my own instincts and needs.
I do get alot of benefits from the Club.....It is after all what input you put in and get out of it that counts.[]
I would be drawn by my own instincts and needs.
I do get alot of benefits from the Club.....It is after all what input you put in and get out of it that counts.[
]
924nutter
PCGB Member
Perhaps I need to rephrase one of my paragraphs as after re-reading it I could be seen as a dig at forum moderators.[][&:] What I am trying to illustrate is that forum moderators COULD if they were less than scrupulous, and lacking in integrity, moderate other posts to their advantage. Once again the suggestion is not that this is happening, more that it gives opportunity for it to happen, and offering it as a possible reason for having the forum rules set out as they are, which I believe is where we started from.
][&:] What I am trying to illustrate is that forum moderators COULD if they were less than scrupulous, and lacking in integrity, moderate other posts to their advantage. Once again the suggestion is not that this is happening, more that it gives opportunity for it to happen, and offering it as a possible reason for having the forum rules set out as they are, which I believe is where we started from.
pauljmcnulty
Active member
Don't apologise for knocking the moderators - we are very thick.
Sorry - edit to read "thick-skinned" []
The big problem we have is that there is a whole load of background info that it's awkward, to say the least, to comment on without seeming biased. There have been posts on here that have been brought to the attention of the Board members as they were beyond our ability to moderate, and it will probably happen again.
There are a lot of people who make a living out of the 944 and other Porsches. And some who would like to make a living out of them and think they can abuse the forum to gain business. The way I see it, if anyone feels that the moderators are being in any way unfair or biased then they should go immediately to the administrators who WILL either back us up or publicly over-rule us.
Again, if any of the moderators had a personal tie to a company then I guess it would come out fairly quickly. We are a small community, and I'm sure that there are many of you that would be happy to shoot me down in flames if I took a line that promoted one company over another. Again, bear in mind that there is a whole load of background information that, for one reason or another including legal, we can't make public.
I personally feel that the current level of intervention is about right. As an example, we have deleted posts from one member to his great annoyance, but have also today deleted a post criticising him because it was, although justified, not within the rules or spirit of this forum.
My biggest disappointment after a year as RS is the lack of feedback from the 1400-strong membership. This forum only works because it self-regulates, which means you guys telling us what you do and don't like! So, keep the feedback coming, and please don't feel you'll upset us. []
Sorry - edit to read "thick-skinned" [
]The big problem we have is that there is a whole load of background info that it's awkward, to say the least, to comment on without seeming biased. There have been posts on here that have been brought to the attention of the Board members as they were beyond our ability to moderate, and it will probably happen again.
There are a lot of people who make a living out of the 944 and other Porsches. And some who would like to make a living out of them and think they can abuse the forum to gain business. The way I see it, if anyone feels that the moderators are being in any way unfair or biased then they should go immediately to the administrators who WILL either back us up or publicly over-rule us.
Again, if any of the moderators had a personal tie to a company then I guess it would come out fairly quickly. We are a small community, and I'm sure that there are many of you that would be happy to shoot me down in flames if I took a line that promoted one company over another. Again, bear in mind that there is a whole load of background information that, for one reason or another including legal, we can't make public.
I personally feel that the current level of intervention is about right. As an example, we have deleted posts from one member to his great annoyance, but have also today deleted a post criticising him because it was, although justified, not within the rules or spirit of this forum.
My biggest disappointment after a year as RS is the lack of feedback from the 1400-strong membership. This forum only works because it self-regulates, which means you guys telling us what you do and don't like! So, keep the feedback coming, and please don't feel you'll upset us. [
]
924nutter
PCGB Member
Not that you get over there very often with your wide wheel-arches and Lanchester balance shafts, but did you know that I am a moderator on the 924 forum?[][] I am having a trundle down to Cornbury in the 924T on Sunday just to have a look at the old girl on display. I hope it's going to be more[8D] than[]
][] I am having a trundle down to Cornbury in the 924T on Sunday just to have a look at the old girl on display. I hope it's going to be more[8D] than[]
pauljmcnulty
Active member
Hi Riverside, sorry I can't use your name as your profile is blocked.
I'm not going to get into a slanging match on here with you over my right to my personal opinion, but I'm very happy to have a chat with you in person if you call me on 07971 832780 evenings and weekends.
The post was deleted because it was not in the spirit of the forum and contained swearing. That does not mean that the author was wrong in his sentiments. As I've said before there is a lot that can't be said on the forum, but that doesn't make it irrelevant or incorrect. For your information, it is not a case of opinion, but documentable fact.
Happy to discuss it in person,
Hilux
New member
I`m fascinated by this one, I see it rearing its head now and again. I dont know anything about it but someone sounds really pissed off......................[
][][]I also visit the Westfield site now and again as an old member. It is carefully but not overly moderated. There are the odd spat between people, normally a newbie kicks off without understanding its not a forum for p*ss taking. Whereas Blatchat is about to implode IMO because personalities are allowed to clash. The Westfield site sits happily alongside sponsors who freely quote and comment as requested but do not promote themselves in any other way and without intrusive (any) advertising except on a sponsors` page. They are sponsors as they are specialists and the club recommends them accordingly.
I have no issue whatsoever if a respected trader comes along and says "I can help with part no this or that or I know a supplier we use etc etc" It is exactly the same as a member referring others to that product or company with good service FFS [8|]
I`ve had work done by different people, 1) recently you are all aware, 2) a small independent last year and 3) a big well respected independent the year before.
I commented on all. Should I have done? If so, the PCGB should tell these companies that it sanctions comment and critique of them on its forums (shouldnt it) and is therefore open to litigation?
My point is that the forum restricts comment and help (albeit potentially of commercial benefit to companies) yet allow comment from members (admittedly it only happens now and again) as to who NOT to use for any number of reasons.
Strange....................
I think your stance is odd, Paul. The forum is for the members to use for non-commercial purposes primarily relating to a common interest in Porsche cars. It is absolutely not for people who make a business in the Porsche marketplace to solicit custom free of charge.
I don't know exactly where, but for sure somewhere in the Ts&Cs it will have a piece about PCGB not being responsible for the content posted and that views expressed are those of the individual etc., so I don't see how the Club is at risk by negative comment being posted. There is moderation and in this area it is about appropriateness of language used rather than the content itself. I don't see that PCGB has any responsibility to tell companies it will sanction discussion of their performance - if I pay someone to do something for me then I have absolute right to discuss and pass comments that truly reflect the experience with whomsoever I choose (unless there is a non-disclosure agreement in place) and there is nothing wrong with PCGB providing the medium for me to do that as it's my opinion and they make that clear.
Of course you can post about good experience, but that being the case someone with bad experience has equal right. Personally I take the good experience posts with a pinch of salt because lots of us can have work we don't understand and cannot see done and we really have no idea if it was actually done properly, or even done at all. Posts of bad experience I value more because (if substantiated) then they tell a story that is far more clear cut. I doubt most people would post on a forum as a first step - people make mistakes and the measure of the person/business is how they rectify the mistake. For me if something is done wrong and it is brought to the attention of the offending party on a one-to-one friendly basis and is then put right that is the end of it - in fact it becomes a story of good service. On the other hand when the offending party disputes or worse point blank refuses to honour commitments they have made then it is something for the forums as I think most of us would like to be forewarned and steer clear.
I disagree that a trader saying "I can help with this part" is the same as a member with no affiliation making a recommendation. That isn't to say it's absolutely wrong, but blowing one's own trumpet never has the impact of someone else blowing it for one. On here however there is no option to sponsor and a no advertising rule. Right or wrong we all agreed to it when we registered and it is patently unfair for one "specialist" (and I use the term in its loosest sense in the specific case we all know we're talking about) to repeatedly flout that to gaine competitive advantage over those who obey it.
I don't think there is anything strange about the way the forum operates. It's a resource ultimately paid for by the PCGB members that is open to non and ex members also (which I was vocal in arguing should be the case when there was a risk it may become members only). On that basis I am happy for all and every individual enthusiast to use the forum, but I personally object (and I am a member, irrespective of what it says under my name) to my subs being used to support a resource that is used as a free conduit for businesses to get to the heart of their target market. When you consider that the worst offended I know of is also alleged to have no specialist qualifications nor even depth of experience in the core work of the business and is using the forum to build credibility and reputation that should be earned through the quality of work done then I doubly object.
Lastly you're right, someone is very pissed off - more than one person in fact. In at least one of those cases it will all come out in the not too distant future and when it does I refer you all back to my stance on this going back many, many months.
Frankly I get pissed off too as I get labelled the bad sod for trying to warn other community members that all may not be as it seems with some specialists in the hope that they will take their business instead to one of a decent number of good suppliers. What I think is strange is that a significant minority of people don't want to hear the truth and would rather shoot me down than take advice, and would rather believe the repeated diatribe of a criticised supplier that usually completely fails to answer the tricky questions and who clearly has a lot of skin in the game over someone who ultimately has nothing to lose or gain beyond trying to help others make good decisions.
I don't know exactly where, but for sure somewhere in the Ts&Cs it will have a piece about PCGB not being responsible for the content posted and that views expressed are those of the individual etc., so I don't see how the Club is at risk by negative comment being posted. There is moderation and in this area it is about appropriateness of language used rather than the content itself. I don't see that PCGB has any responsibility to tell companies it will sanction discussion of their performance - if I pay someone to do something for me then I have absolute right to discuss and pass comments that truly reflect the experience with whomsoever I choose (unless there is a non-disclosure agreement in place) and there is nothing wrong with PCGB providing the medium for me to do that as it's my opinion and they make that clear.
Of course you can post about good experience, but that being the case someone with bad experience has equal right. Personally I take the good experience posts with a pinch of salt because lots of us can have work we don't understand and cannot see done and we really have no idea if it was actually done properly, or even done at all. Posts of bad experience I value more because (if substantiated) then they tell a story that is far more clear cut. I doubt most people would post on a forum as a first step - people make mistakes and the measure of the person/business is how they rectify the mistake. For me if something is done wrong and it is brought to the attention of the offending party on a one-to-one friendly basis and is then put right that is the end of it - in fact it becomes a story of good service. On the other hand when the offending party disputes or worse point blank refuses to honour commitments they have made then it is something for the forums as I think most of us would like to be forewarned and steer clear.
I disagree that a trader saying "I can help with this part" is the same as a member with no affiliation making a recommendation. That isn't to say it's absolutely wrong, but blowing one's own trumpet never has the impact of someone else blowing it for one. On here however there is no option to sponsor and a no advertising rule. Right or wrong we all agreed to it when we registered and it is patently unfair for one "specialist" (and I use the term in its loosest sense in the specific case we all know we're talking about) to repeatedly flout that to gaine competitive advantage over those who obey it.
I don't think there is anything strange about the way the forum operates. It's a resource ultimately paid for by the PCGB members that is open to non and ex members also (which I was vocal in arguing should be the case when there was a risk it may become members only). On that basis I am happy for all and every individual enthusiast to use the forum, but I personally object (and I am a member, irrespective of what it says under my name) to my subs being used to support a resource that is used as a free conduit for businesses to get to the heart of their target market. When you consider that the worst offended I know of is also alleged to have no specialist qualifications nor even depth of experience in the core work of the business and is using the forum to build credibility and reputation that should be earned through the quality of work done then I doubly object.
Lastly you're right, someone is very pissed off - more than one person in fact. In at least one of those cases it will all come out in the not too distant future and when it does I refer you all back to my stance on this going back many, many months.
Frankly I get pissed off too as I get labelled the bad sod for trying to warn other community members that all may not be as it seems with some specialists in the hope that they will take their business instead to one of a decent number of good suppliers. What I think is strange is that a significant minority of people don't want to hear the truth and would rather shoot me down than take advice, and would rather believe the repeated diatribe of a criticised supplier that usually completely fails to answer the tricky questions and who clearly has a lot of skin in the game over someone who ultimately has nothing to lose or gain beyond trying to help others make good decisions.
I've been following this thread with interest as I'm new to this forum, although not the club, having been a member for 17 years (also contrary to what it says below my name!).
Personally I like the fact I don't get bombarded by advertising whenever I visit the site. However I believe the saying, "rules are for the guidance of men and the abeyance of fools" is applicable here. I think there is room for a little leeway. A trader making an intelligent response to someone's question is advantageous IMO. If a trader takes advantage with repeated, blatant advertising then I think they should be spoken to publicly on the forum. This sort of behaviour from traders would prove counter-productive anyway. Annoying this forum is the last thing a sensible trader would do. I also have no problem with trader's websites being included in signatures, in fact as stated by someone above I think this is actually an advantage as it indicates the individual concerned has got an axe to grind.
Something else I would just like to say is that I find the removal of messages annoying; I guess occasionally this has to happen but it should be kept to an absolute minimum. I would prefer a good public reprimand and humiliation, it would also add a little spice and interest to the soap-opera, sorry I mean forum!!
Excellent forum though, very impressed so far.
Personally I like the fact I don't get bombarded by advertising whenever I visit the site. However I believe the saying, "rules are for the guidance of men and the abeyance of fools" is applicable here. I think there is room for a little leeway. A trader making an intelligent response to someone's question is advantageous IMO. If a trader takes advantage with repeated, blatant advertising then I think they should be spoken to publicly on the forum. This sort of behaviour from traders would prove counter-productive anyway. Annoying this forum is the last thing a sensible trader would do. I also have no problem with trader's websites being included in signatures, in fact as stated by someone above I think this is actually an advantage as it indicates the individual concerned has got an axe to grind.
Something else I would just like to say is that I find the removal of messages annoying; I guess occasionally this has to happen but it should be kept to an absolute minimum. I would prefer a good public reprimand and humiliation, it would also add a little spice and interest to the soap-opera, sorry I mean forum!!
Excellent forum though, very impressed so far.
The recent post that was removed wasn't done lightly. Paul and I discussed the matter at some length before acting.
The post was by a newer member to the forum. It is always regrettable to remove a newbie post as it doesn't encourage them to post further. In this case I am sure the member in question is big enough not to let this bother him.
We assume the removed post was with reference to another post much earlier in this thread; it was certainly directed at one member for his previous comments. Unfortunately, as the earlier posting wasn't "quoted" within the post, the sentiments expressed didn't seem to make sense relative to more recent postings and was therefor difficult to take in context.
I am pleased to say that there is very little moderation in this area of the forum. There are a number of "Traders" know to most of us and they are (on the whole) very courteous in their use of the forum. Their input is always well received and their experience valuable.
Paul McN' has been involved in encouraging such people to use the forum (because of their value to the membership) and has been equally instrumental in encouraging the Admin to allow the positing of references within the signature. This is a different forum to that of 12 months ago and, I think, much better for it.
The post was by a newer member to the forum. It is always regrettable to remove a newbie post as it doesn't encourage them to post further. In this case I am sure the member in question is big enough not to let this bother him.
We assume the removed post was with reference to another post much earlier in this thread; it was certainly directed at one member for his previous comments. Unfortunately, as the earlier posting wasn't "quoted" within the post, the sentiments expressed didn't seem to make sense relative to more recent postings and was therefor difficult to take in context.
I am pleased to say that there is very little moderation in this area of the forum. There are a number of "Traders" know to most of us and they are (on the whole) very courteous in their use of the forum. Their input is always well received and their experience valuable.
Paul McN' has been involved in encouraging such people to use the forum (because of their value to the membership) and has been equally instrumental in encouraging the Admin to allow the positing of references within the signature. This is a different forum to that of 12 months ago and, I think, much better for it.
Posts made and opinions expressed are those of the individual forum members
Use of the Forum is subject to the Terms and Conditions
