Jay Herbert
Enthusiast
Jay, I am sorry you just do not get it. And probably never will. It is one thing to ban an individual or company from advertising here (though your "rules" should be clear to all and applied equally without prejudice). It is another level to ban the person from posting on the web site. But it is over the line to prohibit others from typing the individual's or company's name.
Can you imagine a school that would disallow text books from stating the name of the bad guys? You do not have to imagine, you can go to places like North Korea if you want to experience that type of freedom of speach (or the USSR a few years back). I think this board should play by reasonable rules, applied equally, that are consistent with the societal norms. Your norm would be punishment to those who whisper his name, for fear that mere mention of the name will create new customers. Give the web populace a bit more credit.
We tried not blanking out the vendors name. Here is what happened: A group of people plugged the vendor like mad, the vendor registered under aliases and plugged himself like mad, and badmouth his competitors even though he was not to post at all (one time the vendor pretended to be John Thompson, the publisher of VIPER Magazine, that was funny). Then the poeple who had huge issues with the vendor got in battles with the vendor and those plugging him. It was the same over and over and over and over. The [*****] method is used by nearly all car forums. It eliminates nearly all the problems mentioned.
Remember, text books are reviewed by a school board before landing in schools, and most text books, by their nature try to mention "bad guys" and then tell why they were "bad" (based on the societal norms of the times). I doubt you will see the word ****** ever mentioned in a text book without mention of the genicide he tried to execute. Funny thing is there is a group of people out their trying to say the genicide never happened.... go figure, sound familiar to issues here?
When someone is plugging a supplier here that is highly problamatic, your expectation is that every time that happens, the person that has an issue responds with an equal negetive.... so there are ninety happy customers fighting with the ten unhappy customers all the time.... which is why the battles always occur. Just like they are in this thread. Right?
What is your proposed solution to the following situation: There is a vendor that regularly has customer issues.... orders of magnitude more customer issues than the other vendors (who do many more cars than this vendor). The Vendor owes club members legal judgements, the vendor owes suppliers legal judgements, situations the other vendors are not in.
Should a warning be posted about the vendor? Suggestions..... Really. I would love for a solution that eliminates the repeat of this issue. One that informs postential customers of very real issues with documented problimatic vendors, but eliminates the reruns like this thread.