Quote:
Originally Posted by svxistentialist
I would also like to record my thanks to Trevor for acknowledging the problem with the thread and apologising.
However I would have to differ strongly on your contention Trevor in your first paragraph. Your statement "When dubious inflexible advice, leads members towards possible unnecessary expense and hardship, the situation becomes intolerable." is contentious and unsustainable.
This is an amateur forum and any and all advice that is volunteered in response to member's problems has to be accepted by the members on that basis. There is no warranty here that any information will be accurate, and that applies whether the person volunteering the information has a Doctorate in Engineering, or is just some ordinary SVX owner responding because he or she dealt with the same problem.
Without deconstructing everything you have said, two points in the sentence above stick out as contentious;
1) "Leads members towards possible unnecessary expense and hardship"
Members need to make their own minds up on what advice is correct and trustworthy before they commit to expense or difficult strip-downs.
I am on this Network for many years and I have yet to see a post from a member coming back and saying "You sons of !$%& es cost me a lot of expense because you gave me wrong advice!"
And
2) "The situation becomes intolerable"
Intolerable is a very strong word.
This network is set up with the stated aim of helping members keep their cars in good condition. Amateur help and advice is given in good faith, for members to accept or reject as they see fit. Intolerance has no place in such a social network. Our stated goal is to work with one another for the common good, not be intolerant of perceived inaccuracies.
Having said that, in the case of both you and Harvey, there have been some heated statements from both of you in past threads. I am going to go back in the records and delete posts that break posting rules, from whichever source. With the disputed material cleaned up perhaps you two guys could get on a little better and just get back to helping our members? That would be a good start. Thanks.
Joe
|
Joe,
I have not mentioned Harvey’s name. You have fitted his cap which rather confirms your thoughts. I have put forward sincere reasons why members are disadvantaged, when presented with incorrect information which is officially reinforced.
Amongst many irrelevant words, you have stated :- “I am going to go back in the records and delete posts that break posting rules, from whichever source.” i.e. you will personally overrule previous valid judgement and pre-empt the law.
Censoring past records, including a thread containing a post of approval by the founder of this network is a bold threat. Your sole purpose can only be towards protecting Harvey from the need to correct gross errors and apologise for slanderous statements.
The threat to destroy evidence is frankly dishonest. The results of your meddling will be observed with keen interest. Make sure your blue pencil is sharp.
Trevor.