Posting on the forums in a Vendors point of veiw.

[Bill Kondolay]

Powerwagon,



In case there is any doubt about how i feel about what you did, let me just clarify. It was an act of censorship. What it left me wondering is what are the moderators involved qualifications to determine whether or not the question was answered. How many years have you guys been building transmissions , how many have you personally built for these cummins to give you the level of understanding that is required to decipher that jargon.



Asking me to not comment on transmission threads until a judgement is made is a farce.



One other question comes to mind, why are the rules as they apply to me being enforced differently based on moderators personal interpretation.



An example that comes to mind, involves the same company you are trying to protect from me. How it is that when they put up a thread marketing their product no action was taken. It went on for days, even though the inaccuracies were many and the marketing was blatent, they were not censored or the thread removed. I did not whine or complain eventhough i was surprised how this was allowed to happen.



So again i must wonder, why is it that the same rules dont appear to all of us equally.



Censorship is a dangerous game.



I know personally of the information that sledpuller alluded to, problem is we cant post it , beacause the guy that does will be banned. Are we now to take the road where we cannot in our respected fields challenge or share information we know is harmfull or incorrect?



Last night I read and re-read my post , there was no reason it should have been censored in the first place.

 

[Mark_Kendrick]

I personally enjoy watching you guys duke it out and call each others bluff.



I'd like to be able to read it for my self. If someone lies calling them a liar is not slander and is okay in my book. The perpetrator often gets bent out of shape, but oh well. Next time think before you speak. Spades are spades.



I've learned a lot from talking reading and asking vendors questions. The TDR should rethink the existence and the application of some of the posting rules.



I don't own an auto truck but have learned a lot about what should be done to an auto to make it survive from Bill. I have a clutch from Peter being installed as we 'speak'. Their reputations speak for themselves.



Perhaps there should be a vendor forum where they can duke it out a little more freely along with all of us lowly consumers I find it as entertaining as it is informative.





Thanks,

The Other Mark

 

[Jetpilot]

New Jersey, eh? Wonder who that could be? Guys take note of what is being said here.....



Doug

 

[Bob Wagner]

after reading Bill's post

That was a bonehead move by removing it



Reread the post and view it as a Member not a Moderator and you may see the point.



shame shame shame

 

[redneckdr]

vendor's forum

HEEEEEYYYY... ... ... ... ..... I LIKE!!! how about it admin? let 'em have a vendor's forum. then let any who enter be prepared to defend him(her)self. as long as no dangerous stuff got started, let 'em duke it out. those of us who venture in to read won't be offended by what is said. i agree!!! A SPADE IS A SPADE!!

 

[Don M]

Just signing up for e-mails on this thread.



Don~

 

[Mark_Kendrick]

Nice to see you're back Don.

 

[KatDiesel]

Originally posted by Don M

Just signing up for e-mails on this thread.

You don't have to post to sign up. When your reading a thread look at the bottom of the posts and you'll see three links. The one on the far right says "Recieve Updates to this thread". Click it and you are subscribed to the thread. To unsubcribe goto User CP and find it and hit the "Unsubscribe" button.

 

[Don M]

Originally posted by Mark_Kendrick

Nice to see you're back Don.

Hey Mark,



Yeah, I had an unexpected vacation from the TDR for a few days Im reformed now and fit to return.



I still read some posts and Steve took care of me on the PM troubles I had at first. The new me will be somewhat kinder and gentler to others here on the board.



An Amsoil guy thats glad to see me back must be a stand up guy



Don~

 

[Fred Swanson]

PowerWagon, how is a moderator going to know if a statement is truth or a lie, when it's between 2 vendors?

That sounds like it's up to the Moderators to determine if a post is truly factual. You'd have to interpret the information and that could be dangerous, if the Moderator wasn't 100% sure.



I don't feel anyone on the TDR would want that. As a Moderator, I'd be very cautious to censor, especially if the statement was not clearly false.



The end result could be liable. If the TDR is truly a business, you could say it(TDR) has some liability from its(TDR) actions. That's a very sticky position to be in.



Just my observation.

 

[Steve St.Laurent]

Bill, if you want to call it censorship that is fine, call it whatever you want - I would call it enforcing the guidelines. The answer to what qualifications the moderators have to determine whether or not a question was answered is totally irrelevant. The decision to remove your post was not based on technical information in any way shape or form. The moderators can not be experts on products like the vendors are, therefore we do not make decisions based on the technical validity of a post. We simply look at it and determine whether it falls within the guidelines or not. Here is what you posted in that thread that precipitated the removal of it:

The simple fact remains they dont want to answer the question about apply pressure and release pressure. Since we are talking about oem stuff its not top secret. I can come up with 3 reasons as to why they dont want you to know.



1) They didnt do the test

2) They dont know how to do the test

3) There is something in that information they dont want you to know about.

That is in direct violation of this guideline:

5. Vendor Participation: Vendor input and commentary is welcomed in our Discussion Forums, however, direct solicitation is not. Vendors have proven to provide insightful conversation and commentary. Demonstrate professionalism in all post to the TDR Discussion Forums. The following will be strictly enforced:



5. 1. The TDR Discussion Forums are not an appropriate forum for emotionally charged discussion between manufacturers, distributors, dealers, shops and/or users. These forums are intended to be technical resources for members interested in learning more about the proper care and maintenance of their trucks. All Vendors will refrain from making direct, emotionally charged, posts to and/or about competitors. All Vendor posts must be civil and technically oriented. If Vendors wish to compare products with competitors, use generic references (i. e. “oiled element air filter” as opposed to Amsoil, AFE and K&N).

Asking you not to comment on transmission threads until a judgement was made most definately was not a farce. Robert and Robin were out of town on vacation and were not available to put their input in on the subject and since they are the owners of this website and you are an advertiser I felt it was important to get their input on what actions should be taken.



The reason that the rules are sometimes enforced differently by the moderators is because we are human. There are many posts that push the edges of the guidelines and when they are right on the edge one moderator may see it as slightly over, another may see it as slightly under - we do our best. Also, sometimes posts are simply missed. There is no way that we can read every single post put on the site every day - some will slip through the cracks. You mention the marketing of products on the site and why a certain thread was not shut down. If you read the guidelines you will see that they say "No direct solicitation pricing discussions are allowed on the TDR Discussion Forums. The discussion of prices is best left off-line in a private e-mail to those with interest as noted in the appropriate area of the Classified Advertisements. Why? Because many people who visit our Website do not want to pay to read solicitations and sales pitches in our technical Discussion Forums. " The thread you mention did not mention prices in any way and THAT is the reason it wasn't shut down. I'm sure that I could dig back through prior posts and find where you've posted about new products and wasn't shut down.



It's unforetunate that you missed Peter's point on this post completely. I called Peter on the phone yesterday to verify what he meant by it. What he was trying to point out is that there is nothing wrong with competition. A person's good name and reputation speaks for itself and there is no need for anger nor questioning another vendors integrity.



I have received many comments that users want vendors to participate in the forums as much as possible. Users have much more free reign on the site as to what they can say and do because they do not have a vested interest in the outcome. Vendors on the other hand have a market that they either want to capture or want to retain - therefore vendors are more restricted in what they can say and do on the site. I have received zero complaints from vendors that they no longer post because they were censored too much (other than you now), I have however received many emails from vendors (including trusted vendors with the users) that they don't post any longer because of the bashing they've received from other vendors and some users. Several of those vendors have emailed me to say that they are watching how well these new guidelines work and how they are enforced to see if they are going to participate in the forums again. Should we cater to your wishes and allow you free reign while other vendors are chased off? Or should we try to create a balance where technical discussion is possible but bashing is not. We all benefit from having as much vendor participation as possible on the site - the best way to foster that in our opinion is to enforce the guidelines strictly.



The vendor guidelines state "All Vendor posts must be civil and technically oriented. " You made 6 posts on that ATS thread that were sticking to the technical aspects and there was no problem with any of those. We encourage the technical discussion of products. Where you crossed the line was when you moved from the technical discussion and questioned their knowledge and integrity.



BTW, I find it interesting that you replied on a thread today where a user was knocking a vendor that you work with closely for not divulging information that they consider proprietary. On that thread you defend the vendor in question for not answering his questions and state "I dont blame them for wondering what you are up to. Maybe try putting yourself in their shoes and see if their attitude makes more sense. " Sound familiar?



We have discussed in the past about creating a vendor free for all forum. However, given the input we've received from many vendors we feel that the current guidelines and structure is the best way to foster as much vendor involvement as possible.



-Steve St. Laurent

Lead Moderator

 

[JHansen]

In looking at said quote I thought Bill was actually quite civil. Not knowing Bill personally, I guess I can't say that with 100% certainty..... but if it was me posting instead of him and I wanted to be uncivil I would have chosen a lot different phrasing then that . Plain and to the point-pretty much what Bill gives you all the time. I don't have an automatic-to be honest I don't ever plan to have one unless I win the lottery and decide to build a street rat ... . ! Stick suits me better. But he's given out more info on here to help guys out of binds-even with competitor's stuff-than anyone else I've seen. That marks him in my book as a stand-up guy... . I can understand that right about this point in time he feels like he's got one arm tied behind his back... ...



BTW somebody PM me with the magic explanation to this east-coast thing that I'm reading about but not even faintly grasping !



Jason

 

[Power Wagon]

Originally posted by Fred Swanson

PowerWagon, how is a moderator going to know if a statement is truth or a lie, when it's between 2 vendors?

That sounds like it's up to the Moderators to determine if a post is truly factual. You'd have to interpret the information and that could be dangerous, if the Moderator wasn't 100% sure.



I don't feel anyone on the TDR would want that. As a Moderator, I'd be very cautious to censor, especially if the statement was not clearly false.



The end result could be liable. If the TDR is truly a business, you could say it(TDR) has some liability from its(TDR) actions. That's a very sticky position to be in.



Just my observation.

Fred, you are dead on the money. I am not wise enough or knowledgeable enough to make technical judgements about the merits of the vendor's arguments. Our guidelines clearly state that it is not the merits of the case, but the focus of the post that we're going to use to decide if things are acceptable or not.



In my history here at TDR, there have been some very long and very deeply delving topics, involving a number of issues, one in particular was Ted Janetty VS Joe Donnelly about turbos and again later about exhaust sizes. In each case, they disagreed vehemently about the technical aspects of each other's position, but never personally affronted the other repeatedly because of thier disagreements. Obviously, the truth was somewhere in that mix, but it was not up to us as moderators to determine what it was and 'settle' it.



There is no difference in the transmission issue. I cannot assume one side to be wrong and the other right, and allow one person to claim the other side is deliberately misleading or otherwise harming consumers. That is and has been my only issue... and it applies to transmissions, oil, filters, clutches, and any number of other controversial topics.



I have repeatedly stated this before, but you put it in far better term than I came up with, and I thank you for your help...



Mark

 

[boatpuller]

Censorship?

It sure seems like it,

I hope I can make my point, as I see it.

When 2 vendors start into a technical discussion which the thread we are refering to was it has to be a 2 way street, it is not a discussion if only one sides point of view is made, in a discussion both sides need to be willing to discuss, I thought Bill Kondolay remained very calm and did not attack them, he was only making a point that they would not answer the question.



To Quote Powerwagon "Fred, you are dead on the money. I am not wise enough or knowledgeable enough to make technical judgements about the merits of the vendor's arguements"



than why not let the vendors make their arguements, I do not feel that Bill was breaking the rules by tring to get them to answer the question, if there was fourth reason that they did not want to answer the question then they should let us know why the don't want to answer it.



I have always learned something from a thread that Bill was involved in, I am here to learn what I can, I think that the other guys are the ones who have a problem because they won't answer simple technical questions, I know there is no way to force them to answer but I think that Bill is being singled out

because they start or enter into a discussion and then when it's not going the way they like they say something like- we will post on this at another time, why not answer the question.



Sorry to be so long winded and still don't feel like I've made my point very well, I do believe that we are seeing a kinder gentler Bill than was maybe seen in some of his first posts and I can understand from his posts that he is very much trying to follow the guidelines where maybe he didn't when he first started posting.

My$. 02 seemed more like my $2000000

Caleb

 

[boatpuller]

Reread the post where the trouble started, on page 3 C Cannon stated

"I am glad to see everyone understands the concept and workings of the Triple-Lok converter. The only other question I see here about our converter is the rattling problem that Ford has with their converter and HOW the clutches are centered... ... "



That was after Bill asked his question and therefore it looks to me like he is ignoring Bills question, like I said if Bill says somthing he agrees with no problem but if Bill starts to question the technical merits the man is afraid to answer.



also wanted to state that I have no ties with any of the people involved in this thread other than being a member of the TDR



Caleb

 

[Bob Wagner]

auto transmission technicans

If there is any other technican out there with a higher IQ than Bill Kondolay when it comes to the Dodge transmissions, I for one would like to meet that person.



Bill K know's his stuff and it shows.



Bill asked a question, so wheres the answer?

 

[azgearpro]

I cant believe Bill got hammered for that post, I guess they had there reasons, but I will state that I think ATS was using posts for advertisements. Again that is just my opinion:--)

 

[Thomas]

I'm still having trouble with this part—All Vendors will refrain from making direct, emotionally charged, posts to and/or about competitors. All Vendor posts must be civil and technically oriented—what exactly is an "emotionally charged" post, and where is the line dividing "civil" from anything else? These certainly sound like subjective calls to me.

 

[GLASMITHS]

East Coast Crap

Jason:



It's where you do not offend anyone, for any reason; no matter that the sucker might be lying or whatever. It is the same process that got us to 9/11. Don't you offend any body Geeesssh



Bill was correct. ATS engaged in the discussion and then they clamed up. Wouldn't it have been proper to just say, uh, uh we will not disclose that information, blah, blah. But to say nothing, implies ignorance or stealth, or what ever.

 

[Cummins Corvette]

GOOD STUFF!!!!!!!!!!!! I agree completely with everything said so far! Oo. Oo.



Edit- Uhhhhh- guess I should have read the last couple of pages too. I agree with every thing on the first page! I can see both sides, the moderators saw that as an attack from Bill on ATS. Then again, what does Bill have to say to get them to answer his question?