New Rule here at Fchat. And it's simple and easy to follow.

Nickoli, that's a long plane ride to present that action......LOL!

As stated above, we'll comply with whatever laws govern the dirt we are standing/driving on.

Common sense and human dignity also continue to be in effect.......

 

I publicly apologize if I hurt your feelings in any way.

Regards,

Stew


p.s. "what is a gratuitous outburst" ?

 

I had one the other day, and am packing my life into boxes now............they are definately best avoided........

It's what can happen when your brain filter falls behind the words escaping your lips........I dunno the typing equivilant.....

 

It means YOU enjoyed it, but almost no one else in the room feels the same......

 

A gratuitous outburst is not an honest outburst...it is sort of like the difference between justifiable homicide (an honest outburst) and a first degree murder by slow acting poison...(mean spirited and gratuitous). If you have to think over your outburst in advance, it just aint real.

 

Think about it this way. Let's say, God Forbid, you loose it and plow into a group of Nuns and Lepers on their way to an outing at Disneyland would you rather or rather not have publicly posted video's/photo's boasting of your regularly exceeding the legal speed limits in cars that aren't as politically correct as they were before "The Den of Thieves" went to jail?

Put yourself in Rob's position. Against the sage advise of council should he enable/encourage his site to become a repository of aforesaid video's/photo's/boasts? If so why?

 

See ya'll later, I have to check the Spector Trial.........

 

I meant completely unwarranted anda mean low personal attack. But apology accepted.

 

This isn't about Rob... so let's not go there, please.

 

I had a gratuitous outburst this afternoon. Must have been that burrito I had for lunch. Nice apology Stew! If I ever want to pick an internet fight, you are off the list of potential targets.

BT

 

That was funny.

 

I would like to say that I am in full support of this policy. It is just simply good sense. It is also a good editorial policy - we do not want to get into a constant "I kicked a Viper last night on Woodward Avenue" type of circle-fest. I belonged to a ZR1 group that got into exactly that and pretty much self-destructed over it. Probably sniffing their own nitrous, so to speak.

BTW - I once heard the story of a rather foolish private pilot who got caught flying his plane through the St. Louis arch.

He made two very avoidable mistakes (other than the stupid act itself) - the first was that he was a copycat; there had been quite a rash of these stunts in the months before he tried it - so security was watching for low-flying planes at the time.

His second mistake was to have one of his chums stand by on the ground and film the event.

The plane got away, but the camaraman was spotted immediately. Our pilot (who was waving to the admiring crowd with a big smile on his face) had also neglected to tape over the N-number on his plane.
_________

Now, on a rather more serious note - would anyone like to comment on the Road & Track article in which a certain Ferrari Enzo owner self-confesses to making 215 mph on a public US highway "somewhere west of Laramie, Wyoming"?

Remember what happened to this car?

 

gra·tu·i·tous
–adjective
1. given, done, bestowed, or obtained without charge or payment; free; voluntary.
2. being without apparent reason, cause, or justification: a gratuitous insult.
3. Law. given without receiving any return value.
[Origin: 1650–60; < L gr&#257;tu&#299;tus free, freely given, spontaneous, deriv. of gr&#257;tus thankful, received with thanks (for formation cf. fortuitous); see -ous]


If you think about it first then it is planned. If it is planned and not spontaneous is it really an outburst ? Is it really gratutious ?

Maybe its just a free observation. Without charge. And without a tip of course

Regards,

Stew

 

Agreed.

Plus it gets pretty old to hear somebody talking about their escapades on the highways, only to have the safety patrol tell them they should keep it under the speed limit. It's like what comes first, the chicken or the egg?

 

Mexican for lunch and Italian for dinner? Feel sorry for Lisa tonight......

 

Stew, you are right. I must have just lost my head for a moment. Without apparent reason, cause, or justification.

_______

But I was serious in my previous post above in support of this policy. Strongly in support.

 

I don't condone this, but find it worthy of discussion
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I posted this back in Feb 2006 regarding the "Enzo Crash" Under the "New Rules" I count 8-10 illegal acts and probably 8-10 immoral acts (it's funny how illegal and immoral go hand-in-hand).

If this were posted now would I be banned?




I have to confess, I was the driver!

It all started about noon on Monday. I was having my typical lunch of Bloody Marys at the Rainbow on Sunset when Michael asked me if I wanted to go to a party in the Malibu Colony before returning to Santa Barbara. I thought it over while consuming 3 or 4 margaritas to wash down the “ludes” he keeps behind the bar. He promised me that there would be “crazy people, lots of sex, and a pretty Swede named Stefan.” I was curious.

When we arrived Paris Hilton and Tara Reid had just completed their “girl on girl” video only to discover that the batteries had died and some one needed to go to the store to purchase new ones. Wanting to impress them, I volunteered.

When I returned everybody was in the pool drinking margaritas and enjoying something called “Peruvian Marching Powder” My head started to spin.

The rest of the night was pretty much a blur with so many twists and turns that I truthfully cannot remember who did what to who.

Then Stefan arrived. We spent hours talking about the differences in prison systems in the USA and Sweden etc, etc.

It was late, or early (I can’t remember) but I needed to get home. Stefan offered to drive me but the 3 V’s (vodka, vicodene, and Viagra) I had just consumed gave me an odd sense of “driving super powers” and I took the keys. I was bound and determined to make it to Santa Barbara in 5 minutes (distance about 60 miles). As I crested a small hill going 350 MPH a coyote returning home from a late night raiding garbage cans darted across the road. Being the nature lover that I am, I swerved into the light pole.

As we came to a stop, we noticed some interesting things. 1) The car was cut in half. 2) The lipstick that I had been wearing was smeared all over the airbag in front of me. 3) The radio was still working!

I offered to stay and wait for the tow truck but Stefan said “do you want to end up back in jail!” and “run Dietrich, run!”

I just woke up about an hour ago and was amazed to read the news and see this thread. Well, now you guys know the true story!

Bob (Dietrich)
__________________
You fell victim to one of the classic blunders, the most famous of which is "Never get involved in a land war in Asia", but only slightly less well known is this: "Never go in against a Sicilian, when *death* is on the line.". Hahahahahah.

 

Bill,

I think you may be on to something. I had Italian for dinner last night.

Regards,

Stew

 

James,

If you lost your head without apparent reason, cause or justification. Do you realize what that means ?

Unless you just ate a large meal of spicey food, you may of had a gratuitous outburst !

Regards,

Stew

 

AND

I don't condone this but find it funny

[Eddie in the Redline stunt]
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I think I may in fact realize - but it is a terrible thing to lose ones mind. Or, not to have a mind.

SonomaRik - those Enzo wrecks are both similar, but not the one I had in mind...

 

Actually, I had pizza for lunch. So Italian for lunch, dinner, and dessert. Italians are known for their outbursts as well as the Mexicans, Thais, and Greeks.

BT

 

IF our Nation's 'Founding Fathers' had the kind of legal council that Rob has whispering in his ear right now, they would have 'advised against' rebelling against England, for it might upset the King and have the British Redcoats 'cross' with them....oh, dear! I guess things like Freedom and Liberty are just old words found in a dictionairy somewhere - we wouldn't want to 'upset the King'....

As stated earlier, the laws of 'Hearsay' evidence no longer apply? Or are the FChat Legal Team too lazy to do their homework on that? Maybe the admission of 'hearsay evidence' doesn't support their argument for a need of this new rule, so they ignore this fact. Seems to me, this 'Legal Advice' being touted to support this new rule is half-baked, at best. There exists no REAL precedent for this kind of action, as there is no legitimate threat on our doorstep. Cops have 'trolled' this board (and others like it) the day it went online - how many FChatters are now behind bars because of something they posted here? HOW MANY???? Just some fear of what 'might' happen sending people in a tizzy. Hey, guess what - Uncle Sam could arrest each and every one of us tomorrow - for anything they wanted to. They don't need to convict you BEFORE they charge you with a crime in this country. The threat of misguided Law Enforcement hangs over all of our heads every time we start our cars on the weekend. If that has you shaking with fear so badly, then sell your car, shut down FChat, and move to Iran. They love sheep like you there. No wonder there are so many Ferraris in the USA with LOW miles on them - many of you are too afraid to drive them.

 

I think we need to separate the facts from morality:

Facts:

The claim that posters are exposing themselves to prosecution is absurd. Pictures of speedometers and videos of apparent high-speed driving prove nothing. Most speedo pics don’t include the drivers face and many are in vague locations where the legal speed limit for that area could be disputed. Video’s the same. And even so, who’s to say the speedometer in the video or pic is accurate? I would love to hear of a case where someone actually was prosecuted for a traffic infraction due to their post. If such a case even existed, I would bet that person either a) didn’t have proper representation; or b) included way too much info so as to leave no doubt of such an infraction.

I am tired of hearing that some drivers are endangering the lives of others and are reckless, uncaring sociopaths. Someone give me an example of a Ferrari driver who killed an innocent bystander by reckless actions on the street. Let’s assume it has happened. The rate of such an accident would be far lower than rates of other types of accidents. The fact is driver’s at speed are paying attention and cause fewer accidents than daydreamers not paying attention. Conclusion: driving fast increases focus. Even the focus to take defensive action if they spot other drivers who aren’t paying attention.

This policy cannot be fairly enforced. How can the mods determine if a post was a U.S. incident or an autobon incident? Or any other locale for that matter? How can a mod determine when a taped incident occurred? Was it before the policy or after? Some posts are educational in nature. i.e., don’t do this. Here’s what can happen if you do this. How can a mod confirm that the reading on the speedometer is accurate? Etc. Where is the line drawn?

Morality:

IMHO, this smells like an effort to eliminate content that some find offensive. Some of us like to see our auto’s driven to their potential. It puts a smile on my face. For me and others like me, it is part of the Ferrari experience to see how others drive their cars. For those that drive their cars like grandma on the street and save it for the track, there is a Holier-than-thou attitude from some of you. I think you should not be so prejudiced against others in the community who do not share your views.

What’s next? No commentary about someone who isn’t practicing safe sex? Afterall, that person could kill their sex partner w/ a disease. Or what about postings alluding to substance abuse. How about infidelity? Where do you draw the line. All of these examples have legal ramifications. Are you going to tell me I can’t share my lifestyle w/ others on this site?

Yes, it’s Rob’s site. Yes he has the right to control the content. The 1st amendment means nothing here other than it lays the foundation for a way of life many of us are used to. It sets the stage for communication standards that we expect. This site is Rob’s domain but it is the people and the users of this site that make it a true community. To discriminate against certain content is to discriminate against a certain part of this community. I like this site and I would like to continue to use it to it’s full potential. I have never posted something which would now be banned. But I want the right to know that I can someday if I choose to.

I am not an attorney but I have a hard time believing that Rob and this site are at legal peril for the content you are banning. Others have made valid arguments about the content that shows up on other sites. I have made arguments challenging the ability to prove who is in a video and exactly how or if they were breaking the law. They tried to sue Ozzy Osbourne for his lyrics after a teenager killed himself. That suit got nowhere. If someone made a claim against this site due to what was posted on it, I have no doubt it would end the same way.