Off-Topic Chat (#3)

[Bender1]

http://golfmk6.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1017596&postcount=101

this violates the second line of your quote.

Announcement threads for new products are permitted - one in the forum to which they belong (i.e. wheels, engine, etc.). If you feel a post violates a rule please use the reporting mechanism.

 

[KurtP1]

If that is the reason he was banned, why hasn't SPM been banned for announcing their new IC in a thread, GIAC banned for announcing testing of their new turbo kit in a thread, Unitronic testing a stage 2+ thread, etc? They all cross posted their stuff in other forums too.

Plenty of moderators were in that thread for pages when it was numbers and data being posted. The ban didnt happen until Arin called out a mod for affiliation to a competitor and borderline stirring up the trouble in the first place.

No, I think you banned him because someone got embarrassed you wanted to smack down APR a little.

 

[danielj1]

Yes, teaser threads are fine. Once they have links to buy the are no longer allowed in technical forums.

 

[Dybz]

Announcement threads for new products are permitted - one in the forum to which they below (i.e. wheels, engine, etc.). If you feel a post violates a rule please use the reporting mechanism.

not really trying to point fingers, but saying you should be consistent. that post i linked talks about a discount for an item discussed in the thread's OP. from the outside looks of it arin got banned for a post about a discount for an item his OP was discussing. new product vs old i guess is only difference, but that's a fine line to ban someone over.

 

[Dybz]

Yes, teaser threads are fine. Once they have links to buy the are no longer allowed in technical forums.

and posting a link to SPM's facebook page from where they advertise items for sale isn't? i don't know... just saying it's a very fine line you guys have drawn.

 

[danielj1]

and posting a link to SPM's facebook page from where they advertise items for sale isn't? i don't know... just saying it's a very fine line you guys have drawn.

Yes, paying vendors can have links to their sites in their signatures.

As I said earlier, Arin was temp banned for spamming the sale threads across multiple technical forums instead of the vendor sale forum.

This has nothing to do with any other vendor or products. Lastly, we (I) do not give any ban lightly. Members often receive multiple reminders/warnings in such cases.

 

[Bender1]

Plenty of moderators were in that thread for pages when it was numbers and data being posted. The ban didnt happen until Arin called out a mod for affiliation to a competitor and borderline stirring up the trouble in the first place.

Please see the cleaned up version and you will see this is factually incorrect.

 

[Dybz]

Yes, paying vendors can have links to their sites in their signatures.

As I said earlier, Arin was temp banned for spamming the sale threads across multiple technical forums instead of the vendor sale forum.

This has nothing to do with any other vendor or products. Lastly, we (I) do not give any ban lightly. Members often receive multiple reminders/warnings in such cases.

i don't doubt the highlighted part, nor have I ever said that it has anything to do with other vendors. the link provided by rebecca is not in her signature, it simply says to watch that site for future developments and it just happens to be a page where they provide advertisement and links to buy their products.

i'm not saying arin didn't deserve the ban, nor am i trying to argue to get him unbanned. i'm trying to better understand the word of the rule. my interpretation of how it is written would have rebecca also being reprimanded for providing links that have nothing to do with technical aspects of the originally discussed product, but are leaning more towards having to do with sales and advertisement.

 

[KurtP1]

you'll have to point me in the right direction to see that. I answered one of the moderators questions on page 2 or 3 before it got locked and banned pages later after the spacebook post.

 

[A_Bowers]

If that is the reason he was banned, why hasn't SPM been banned for announcing their new IC in a thread, GIAC banned for announcing testing of their new turbo kit in a thread, Unitronic testing a stage 2+ thread, etc? They all cross posted their stuff in other forums too.

Plenty of moderators were in that thread for pages when it was numbers and data being posted. The ban didnt happen until Arin called out a mod for affiliation to a competitor and borderline stirring up the trouble in the first place.

No, I think you banned him because someone got embarrassed you wanted to smack down APR a little.

I see your edit and submit this. What was posted that was considered "Stirring up trouble"

I simply stated that the V1 unit from SPM is no longer in production.

And I confirmed that it was a chinese core.


After that Im not really sure why things went the way they did after i posted that.

 

[Bender1]

you'll have to point me in the right direction to see that. I answered one of the moderators questions on page 2 or 3 before it got locked and banned pages later after the spacebook post.

You answered my question on page 7 - FB post was on 4 and is still there

 

[mustache rash]

Originally Posted by KurtP
The ban didnt happen until Arin called out a mod for affiliation to a competitor and borderline stirring up the trouble in the first place.

No, I think you banned him because someone got embarrassed you wanted to smack down APR a little.

That's how I interpreted it :iono:

 

[danielj1]

It was pointed out to me that SPM had updated 2 of their teaser threads with links to buy and I have since moved them to the vendor area. We try to catch such updates but some get past us. I'll try to better catch updated OPs of teaser threads.

Anytime you all see things we miss or you feel are unfair, please report the post.

 

[Skipdr]

On an unrelated note, my cookies are finished!

 

[Bender1]

No bread?