How do I sign up for a Pista blast on the Autobahn?

Brooks cared enough to make a video, so he cares.

And I banned him, not Paul.

It seemed to me that someone who is clearly operating a commercial business, on the internet, should know and understand the rules where they are trying to DO business. (Incidentally if he had contacted Rob first, he might have been offered a reciprocal deal that would have been to his advantage.)

Evidence that he DID understand the rules included his posting his own video and saying, "Look at this cool video I found," not, "Look at this cool video I MADE." On a prior thread

Was he here for the sterling conversation? Um, no. outside of his videos, 60-ish posts clearly indicates he didn't have a whole lot personally invested here. He says he was here 13 years, but his posting volume says, 'not really."

As to reaching out before his ban. If he had been an involved member of the community, I probably would have taken the time to ping him and tell him that I had deleted his posts and that he needed to knock it off. But he's not an involved member here, he's a touch and go guy, posting his videos and then, no doubt heading to another site to do the same.

And, one last point. Suppose you own a retail store. You've worked hard, built up a big following, and your store is always busy. Guy comes along and sets up a table right outside your store, doesn't ask first, just does it, selling stuff that folks who frequent your store would find interesting. You gonna let him stay there, even if he claims he didn't understand that it's a violation of the law, and not the decent thing to do? If he had come into your store first, asked if it was ok, would you let him sell his stuff? No?

How about if he asks if he can RENT the spot out front, pay you for access to your customers? Might change your mind, eh?

That's what this is about.

Oh, and if he'd posted one or two videos? I probably would have let him off with a warning. But it wasn't one or two.

I am all talked out on this one. I get that some of you think I was grossly unfair. I'd challenge you to consider that Brooks tried to take advantage of the site, got caught, and is now doing his best to act indignant, and I'm not buying it.

D

 

Where I do order?


Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Ridiculous examples...

If he had a competing ferrari car forum and kept linking it in this forum then you have a point.

FChat made out more than he did monetarily. Car forums rely on his type of content to keep things interesting and the discussion going. There is no content being created on car forums.

NO discussion on performance of cars in car forums can be intelligently discussed without seeing a journalist article, promotional video or videos being made by people who know what they are doing. No discussion can be had without this. As someone said... FChat should be paying people to create content so that it can be discussed here.... not the other way around.

On another note of why he thought that he was banned or more accurately why people reported him (it couldn't have been a paid sponsor because he isn't competing with any of them. They probably even enjoyed the video). It would be interesting to know who actually reported him and what their motivation was...

Anyways; Brooks has been putting out these videos for a long time that people seem to enjoy. People come from all over the States to race him. He's had just about every marque represented and he doesn't need to convince them to come to him but rather they want to go head to head with him.

Pista has been around since October 2018 and he lives in a hot bed exotic car area of South Florida. Not one person has been willing to go up against him in a Pista (not exactly sure why, because it performs real well). He had to go to Germany and get Robert to do it with him. As he stated in his video; people with ferrari cars who have gone up against him, asked him to not show the videos.

The above being a backdrop and then having two people report him for "commercial use" , kind of backed up his point(s).

 

There are similar rules in reddit for self promotion, and that's the largest forum in the world. Is this good/bad? I don't know - a much larger discussion then my brain has the capacity for at this moment.

Notice many of the challenges are repeated almost verbatim in the guidelines.

I think one report was from a person that had their content banned in the past as well. So equal treatment is a fair contention.

I keep suggesting that instead of escalation and making a mountain out of a molehill, why not have Brooks and Fchat hash it out? I've sent many polite emails to Brooks advising he contact Rob/Booker for a mutually beneficial agreement, and no - money does not have to be involved. Everybody wins.

 

In fairness, Brooks is brand agnostic. I can't say the same about some of his followers that are lead to believe this is some Ferrari-Fchat conspiracy in censorship.

 

So when we are talking about our cars, personal anecdotes, getting advice from one another whilst chatting. This isn't content and no discussion can be intelligently had without seeing an article or video? Well there you go. We've all been doing it wrong.

 

so you ban Brooks, then let some members trash him on the forums where he can't respond;

Pretty sure Shadowfax is posting against the rules with this comment: "Well they could have a pecker measuring contest over there but I'm wondering if there is a ruler small enough." www.ferrarichat.com/forum/posts/146728624/

then get upset when he uses his own channels to respond with his opinion? He posted up the numbers on what he made, and what Ferrarichat made on a post with his video. That should be enough to have the admins look at some policy changes with regards to videos being posted as the benefit is really on the forum side monetarily and it allows the community interact directly with the creator. if the admins don't see this, at least in Brooks case, then there should be some reasons to suspect bias.

 

I literally cannot understand the objectors here. The rules are clear, they are there not only to stop those who want to post commercial material without sponsorship but to protect those who have made legitimate sponsorship arrangements. If you except one, the others - your customers - have reason to say they are being poorly treated, So who should fchat be more loyal to, proper customers or a long standing member who has paid nothing and contributes little other than his own videos, run for a commercial purpose? Don’t get me wrong, I like his videos and he is without doubt a real car guy. Just do it properly.

Oh, and to say he only got a few views directly from the channel is surely misleading. Everyone knows, or at least everyone who knows YouTube knows, that a few visits turns into many. If you click on a view from the fchat site once, YouTube will then regularly propose his content through the app or the site. Those won’t be attributed to fchat. Then there are the shares etc. - and the length of this silly argument shows you that forum members here are rather passionate so may well share and continue to watch his videos (seems everyone knows him here and that’s a lot more than 250 people). This is all about growing your subscriber base and viewership. And it’s why he would bother to post here with so few direct views. Even if it were only ever a few views, this has gone on for a long time. Materiality is not relevant when this is so visible to other sponsors.

I’m not denigrating him, but just stop defending this. Those rules apply to all the site sponsors, fchat didn’t shoot him, they banned him for 30 days - I think someone literally said that was “disproportionate”?!! I mean, what? He breaks the sponsorship rules for over a decade and gets a 30 day ban, which we should consider disproportionate? I run a business, if I treated my real customers (proper legitimate sponsors in the case of fchat) like this I would expect only bad things. Why should this be defended? This whole argument is so facile.

 

the same could be said for ferrarichat, additional collateral views from those viewing his threads on here, as well as the search engine benefits, you can search for terms on google related to his races and they show up and link to ferrarichat. of course those are gone now that the admins deleted his posts, when you click on the link from google, it says the thread is deleted.... see screen shot...

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Wrong, I never used the word "all". Who gets a "instaban" or not is where common sense has to take over. You admit you believe he didn't know the rule and wasn't malicious. Your words. So IMO a common sense warning and removal of the posts was max needed result. Anything more to me was a power trip and short sighted/poor business. I haven't been the only person there to point that out.

 

Exactly.

 

For godssakes get real. There is zero to see least of all appreciate, although as a Lambo owner and Ferrari detractor your take is to be expected - so no surprises there.

Fikse has got himself so far off base it's a joke and even blind freddy can see that. His sole purpose of posting here is clearly all about self promotion - mainly of himself filming himself talking funnily enough - with virtually zero content other than that - poking sticks at Ferrari and the source providing him with the platform to do so in the process. I'm actually surprised he's managed to get away with it for so long with all the spam. As I said earlier, he finally got caught with his trousers well and truly down around his ankles and the best he could muster was further attacks and insults. What a joke. Should he be so lucky he only got 30 days.....he should be sending Fchat mods a case of the best scotch and wine each for the trouble....along with a letter of apology for all the BS.

 

Ahh here we go the mac brigade trying shut me down again......sigh....

I'd be saying exactly the same thing if he was here to answer for himself....even to his face.

His vids clearly had a dual purpose... I didn't come down in the last rain shower....and none were in the best interest of Ferrari or Ferrarichat regardless of the spin offs some of the detractors are trying to sell.. as some pathetic form of excuse. As I said; put it to bed and move on. No one's buying.

 

Reference is to folks who are not members here. (Oops, sorry, joke completely intended.)

Calling someone in the big old wide world out for being an underachiever, even in the genitalia department, is not against the rules.

D

 

you're the one with the attacks and insults, talking about measuring peckers, talking about Brooks trousers around his ankles; pretty sure he's married, you can still have a crush on him, but this probably isn't the right place for it... then you go on telling his supporters to go talk about mclarens elsewhere... you're more biased than anyone in this thread...

Brooks posted a video on his channel because the banned and silenced him here, pretty simple, doubt Ferrarchat saw that coming... they tried to do damage control on his video but the comments going the other way were overwhelming...

how is he poking at Ferrari? putting up a video of the Pista with data down the Autobahn while complimenting the car? Putting up Ferrari races?

and now that he's posted the real data, it looks like the forum loses more than he does and there should probably be a policy change to stop this from happening again...

 

really? this is in the terms:

1.1 No "Flaming": Please do not post any messages that harass, insult, belittle, threaten or flame another user.

 

Literally exactly what he did.

Selective moderation I guess. Whats ironic about all this is Brooks was banned and he actually creates traffic here. People like Shadowfax drive people away.

 

Please feel free to drive away in your mac. I promise I wont miss you. Whilst I own other brands than Ferrari, whilst posting on Ferrarichat I am a protagonist for the respective brand whereas certain others, like yourself - ex ferrari owners - choose to post here as antagonists. It gets a bit old. Just saying. Time to move on. Put it to bed.

 

None of that changes that you are breaking the rules. Note: I didn't point out your comment, someone else did. I didn't say you would drive me away, way thicker skin that that.

Also I am in process of trading the Mac.....If my Ferrari's hadn't been so unreliable id probably be trading for a Ferrari again.

 

I'm not breaking any rules. The truth is the truth. You on the other hand are saying everyone but yourself is thin skinned. Knowing what I know today, the main reason behind your not buying a ferrari is the only way out of what youre in is to trade it for another as no one else will give you anything for it. Bit like buying a jeep or a volvo. At one point you will need to face up and take your own medicine. No escaping that one bud.

 

It's almost like you played right into his hands... you've actually generated more views and PR for him.... why does it matter if the he posts the video or your members do? the end result is exactly the same... by banning him you're actually instigating his followers who are members here to post more of his videos here thereby make less work for him...

what do you do if a member here got a new exhaust system installed on his Ferrari, records the sound so others car hear it, puts the video on youtube and posts the link here... clearly that is good content, but as per the terms that is not allowed. even if there are no ads on the the video, the exhaust brand now gets free exposure without paying and youtube might make a few cents as well.... it's futile to police this...

 

Incorrect. You definitely broke the rules. But selective moderation is on your side. Another user illustrated this clearly but you are attacking me now like that is going to change the facts. Also I didn't say "everyone but me is thin skinned", I said I was not thin skinned. We are going to have to work on reading and comprehension for you I suppose.

You don't know anything abut my finances nor does any of that have anything to do with this thread and you are simply attempting to create drama. How can you presume to know what I can or can't do? Ferrari doesn't currently offer a car right now that I couldn't purchase in cash without trading or selling my Mac. I was just at a Ferrari dealer Saturday in fact.... never know I might get another Ferrari.

 

Guys - I respect all opinions. At the end of the day we are all passionate car bros. At this time all points have been made on both sides. There is clearly a divided camp and that is no surprise, which is good to air out and hear opposing opinions. What's done is done. We all need to get back to our regularly scheduled program. Let me end with something light-hearted. Heard a funny joke the other day. You know how to make a million dollars? Answer: Work a million hours. Get it - $1.00 an hour - lol. Def. made me laugh. Enjoy the weekend all.

 

I certainly have not trashed him in this thread, in anything, I've been a vocal cheerleader. Admittedly I wonder of the intellectual honesty of the rest of his posts considering these last two posts have been inaccurate.

I don't see an attack on a specific member, but an indictment of the Ferrari vs. Mac debate as being silly. Just my take.

Brooks' first contention is he got banned due to censorship, I see from your last sentence, you still subscribe to this? Shouldn't it be painfully self-evident what the validity of this claim is considering the existence and state of this thread?

The second contention was Fchat asked him for money. Again, I know of no discussion where money was involved.

That's 2 for 2 my friend.

 

Oh for sure, Rob and Booker have been quite pleased with the additional traffic. As I said earlier they find the whole thing funny.

My suggestion (sorry I'm sounding like a broken record) is if Brooks' wants to post, just send a couple emails to Rob/Booker and reach an agreement, and no - money doesn't have to be involved.