Community Forums

ottffss · 03-15-2012, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eplex-dealer

...
but I admit I am only seeing it from 1 side.

This thread has been frighteningly stunning. The overt and unilateral application of blanket rules where the only results were 1) the masking of critical information voluntarily offered by a uniquely knowledgeable source and 2) making it so painful for that voluntary disclosure of information that the source would have EVERY RIGHT TO NOT EVEN PARTICIPATE. The real question is, in this particular instance, how many other potential volunteers of critical and unique information have been scared off or not willing to contend with the difficulty to contribute because of this unilateral rule application?

And no, eplex-dealer is NOT seeing it from one aide, I would assert it is clearly the Irv2 administrators who are.

This particular case is of an OEM type vendor we retail consumers really can not buy from nor can we retail consumer even dictate to the upstream RV manufacturers to even use this dealer's product. HOWEVER, this product is the life blood of some RVs and has had a tumultuous recent history. So tumultuous some manufacturers are no longer offering it - a huge re-engineering cost decision for those RV manufacturers.

YET, we owners with this product are (that is "were" until eplex-dealer came on line) left wondering just how significant a problem we owners of this system are facing given this system controls the bulk of our rigs and it's future was very cloudy. Some members of this forum are basing significant rig replacement decisions based on knowledge (or the former lack there of) about this product.

I am only suggesting that unilateral rule application in some situations has been a roadblock to the very mission of this forum "Supporting thoughtful exchange of knowledge, values and experience among RV enthusiasts." And let's be clear, this situation has NOTHING to do with spam in any way.

I want to personally apologize to eplex-delaer for him feeling the need to defend his actions and then having to take the time to play what has evolved into a counter productive effort by Irv2 administrators that hampered the dissemination of knowledge to members of this forum about the details of a product he sells but we can not directly buy.

I want to further thank eplex-dealer for his critical, unique, and insightful insights into this product.

Furthermore, I challenge Irv2 administrators to take steps that actually support the stated mission of Irv2, to ask questions when in doubt, and continue to evolve, understand and deliver those things that can and will make Irv2 even more useful to RV enthusiasts.

UFO Pilot · 03-15-2012, 01:17 PM

Don't like the rules? Start your own forum and run it any way you want. Just my opinion, you are entitled to a different one.

FlyingDiver · 03-15-2012, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UFO Pilot

Don't like the rules? Start your own forum and run it any way you want. Just my opinion, you are entitled to a different one.

So taking your ball and going home is better than trying to improve the game we've got now? I don't think so. Rules evolve. I just think the current ones need a little tweaking.

joe

TheTourVan · 03-15-2012, 01:34 PM

If everybody felt the rules needed to be tweaked, it might be different, however quite a few like the forum the way it is. "Tweaking" them to better serve commercial entities is something that might benefit some and might also keep others away that don't want to be fed pitches (and yes it will happen) or not feel they can state their opinion because the company is their to dispute it (yes this happens too).

Ramblin · 03-15-2012, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UFO Pilot

Don't like the rules? Start your own forum and run it any way you want. Just my opinion, you are entitled to a different one.

You are right to express your opinion, and I will defend to the death your right to express it, and your right to hear me tell you how wrong you are.

Thomas Jefferson (I think) said '...dissent is the highest form of patriotism'. Meaning, if you are a member of an orginization (forum, in this case) that is engaged in something you find practically or morally or operationally wrong, it is your patriotic duty to point it out. It is the catalyst for growth and evolution.

I point out problems I see here because I love our little corner of the net and I want to see it continue to grow and to get better. If my complaints again fall on deaf ears, so be it. I have done my duty, and I reserve all 'Itoldyaso' rights for future reference.

Ramblin · 03-15-2012, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheTourVan

If everybody felt the rules needed to be tweaked, it might be different

This forum is not a democracy. It is a benevolent dictatorship. We are priviledged to be allowed to participate at the pleasure and discretion of the forum owners. We don't get to vote on rule changes. All we can do is make noise about them till we are banned, censored, ignored, or they see the light and agree.

ottffss · 03-15-2012, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheTourVan

..."Tweaking" them to better serve commercial entities...

Hmm - clearly a failure to communicate. The suggestion to "tweak" is 1) to better serve the members of this forum, and 2) to better support the stated mission of Irv2. It has NOTHING to do with furthering any commercial interest.

BTW - I emphatically support the commercial controlled nature of Irv2. I also emphatically support the stated mission. When the two collide I get emphatically concerned - as should everyone. This collision is the point of this thread.

It is helpful to understand the background, nature, and intent of this thread.

FlyingDiver · 03-15-2012, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheTourVan

If everybody felt the rules needed to be tweaked, it might be different, however quite a few like the forum the way it is. "Tweaking" them to better serve commercial entities is something that might benefit some and might also keep others away that don't want to be fed pitches (and yes it will happen) or not feel they can state their opinion because the company is their to dispute it (yes this happens too).

Is that "quite a few" a majority or a minority? If not for threads like this, how would anyone know how the members of the community feel about these rules?

And, as pointed out already, your understanding of the tweaks needed is completely wrong.

joe

TheTourVan · 03-15-2012, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlyingDiver

Is that "quite a few" a majority or a minority? If not for threads like this, how would anyone know how the members of the community feel about these rules?

And, as pointed out already, your understanding of the tweaks needed is completely wrong.

joe

No they are NOT completely wrong. You feel they are completely wrong and have made that very clear. Allowing what you are stating does in fact do exactly what I said.

I understand that you invented forums, but you have no idea who I am. Maybe I own one of the largest forums on the internet that doesnt have to do with this industry? Maybe I am just a fan? Maybe I am a commercial entity myself?

The truth is, it costs money (and lots of it) to own a successful forum. Software costs money, hosting costs money and as growth happens, outgrowing your host happens quite quickly. Everybody can always "do it better".

However the flip side of that, is some like it very much that this is for the most part consumer only. They dont have to walk on eggshells when talking about products. There is always a "know it all" that wants to have his cake and eat it too on every forum I have ever been a part of.

The people behind this site started it with some values and some rules. Some of us here find them quite satisfactory. The irony here is based on those opposing it.

FlyingDiver · 03-15-2012, 02:26 PM

You do realize that the current owner of this site is not the founder? And that the founder (who sold it to SK) is a vendor here? And that some of the biggest "know it all"s on the forum are non-commercial members who complain to the admins about commercial postings whenever someone who actually knows the material contradicts them?

What username did you previously use on IRV2? Or are you telling me you learned all this in the month or so you've been a member and the grand total of 53 posts to date? Really?

joe

**JohnRR** · 03-15-2012, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramblin

I beg of you, please tell me I'm wrong.

Sorry but my remark was not directed at you nor anyone else's replies but simply directed at that one point in time there were discussions about too many commercial posts now the pendulum seems to be going the other way.

I'm also sorry I feel I can not engage in this or many other threads as I do not wish to contribute my personal opinions or views and have them perceived to be those of "an administrator" or of iRV2 in general.

TheTourVan · 03-15-2012, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlyingDiver

You do realize that the current owner of this site is not the founder? And that the founder (who sold it to SK) is a vendor here? And that some of the biggest "know it all"s on the forum are non-commercial members who complain to the admins about commercial postings whenever someone who actually knows the material contradicts them?

What username did you previously use on IRV2? Or are you telling me you learned all this in the month or so you've been a member and the grand total of 53 posts to date? Really?

joe

As I said, you have no idea who I am. I have never been a member here, but I do own forums. In fact I own the largest forum in the world in a particular niche.

Your condescending posts are ridiculous (but par for the course) and I am not going to bother with it anymore. You can continue to be the "I have to have the last say guy" and continue to talk down to people all you want. I wont be a part of it.

RustyJC · 03-15-2012, 02:53 PM

FlyingDiver · 03-15-2012, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnRR

I'm also sorry I feel I can not engage in this or many other threads as I do not wish to contribute my personal opinions or views and have them perceived to be those of "an administrator" or of iRV2 in general.

That's kinda sad. Is there some rule about this, or are you just afraid it would be misinterpreted? On forums where I was the owner or moderator, I would just include a statement in the posting when I was expressing a personal opinion rather than official position. Seemed to work out.

joe