I agree, I'm not taking sides and don't want to see anyone banned unless they threatened someone with violence (I don't condone it), I was just saying Jeff has been a straight shooter with me, I have never talked to the other party. I like to say things that people don't like to hear (not my fault, see my posts) but I have never attacked anyone on the board and never will. I appreciate all parties, I think competition and opinions keep the board square, it's the way it should always be.
You can read the email I sent Stef yesterday morning and haven't heard back. I thought it was nice and an open door. Only Stef's original post have been soft deleted for now, all the other posts deleted in this thread were his alias accounts posting links to his Fabspeed attack on other websites. It is obvious what Stef is doing and is still in full attack mode, if you didn't understand what we did at first at least you are starting to understand now with his follow up behavior. When he can stop acting like a twit and breaking half our rules and discus this in the right way, then the door is open. http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showpost.php?p=140930762&postcount=9
just do a search for "fabspeed stefvan taiwan" and you'll get lots of info. Nothing is secret in the internet anymore. He probably shouldn't have been going gungho here when it's a sponsor, especially at sponsor's thread..
as I've said from start he could have posted most or all of that in the right way in the right place and it would have been OK.
the funny thing is that other site allowing him to post is the same one that censored the critiques of the Formula Dynamics Drive-By-Wire systems as they are a sponsor there when we didn't moderate a single post or user because of it here. They aren't about doing what's right, first priority is just picking up our trash instead of making their own way.
I saw that, i just spent 30 min reading the threads he started over there about this. He is definitely in full attack mode, the way he words some things makes him sound like he works for capristo (in my opinion) but I have always thought he has some financial interest in the company.
So Rob, is Stef correct about the origin of the headers and are we being mislead by a sponsor? There is a time when following rules needs to take second place to exposing the truth. I assume you have tried to find the truth as I'm sure integrity is extremely important to you on this forum. If he is totally wrong then that is fine, he as what is coming to him by way of a ban, if not then he needs a medal and there needs to be more moderating of sponsors! Made in the US should mean what it says.
this is stark reminder that this "forum" is merely a business. lets hush him up before he exposes the truth as it relates to a sponsor, unless of course he too wants to become a sponsor, irrespective of how the truth may affect the forums users. I have no dog in this fight but it appears that a very good contributor to this forum has been banned in favor of a sponsor which appears, to me at least, to be tap dancing around the truth.
we're not at the point of making judgments for either party right now. Stef's account was put on hold until he contacted me back, he has refused to and instead has gone on the attack elsewhere. There was a way and place for his post and it wasn't how and where he did it. Others have continued his questioning here, which is perfectly fine how they have done it. So the discovery is still alive and well here. Fabspeed has responded, but hasn't been as active and facing this head on as I suggested. I can't help either party at this point like I tried, it is up to them now. As usually happens if we allow these discussions to continue in the right way we get to some conclusion or at least acceptance.
Rob is certainly not responsible for the accuracy of sponsor statements as he is not for the accuracy of member statements. What he is responsible for is maintaining a forum which attracts both members as well as sponsors as this is his primary business. The ban imposed ( I assume) on Stef was done to protect a sponsor from untested allegations. The fact that the sponsor has come out with a statement which at best is evasive and at worst proposes that the members of this forum are all naive does little for the sponsors credibility. Unfortunately when things like this happen there are no winners and the stigma will remain with all parties. Fchat moderator for being overbearing The sponsor for not dealing with the matter in an open manner The member for being a spy/provocateur/plant/capristo employee. Pity that Fabspeed did not seize the opportunity for some positive PR and instead have behaved like an ostrich. .........just saying. .
what is it that I dont understand? is F-chat not a business? Did stef not provide members here with technical insight, free of charge? one need not a mensa level IQ to make a logical assessment based on the info provided as to the origin of materials? do business owners not favor their vendors? please enlighten me mighty one so a moron like me can understand.
was started because I bought a 328 back in 2000 and there were no other forums and I have loved Ferrari since a kid. it was a hobby that is most efficiently run as a business. in the wrong way in the wrong place. forums wouldn't have advertisers if they didn't have a good community. we have 60 sponsors, don't need +/- 1. we do what is right for the community, everything I did in this case I have specifically outlined why it was done for the good of the community which includes Stef, Fabspeed, and other users. you didn't understand as your questions proved as I have answered them many times over the past few days. Stef could have posted most of that info in the right place and way without issue. Posts by Stef elsewhere prove that at this point he is just mad at Fabspeed and on full attack. He could have done that here, but not after he baited them and posted in a sponsor thread posted by Fabspeed. get his own thread for his own topic. first thing I would have done if Stef actually returned my email was to copy his removed post to a new thread minus any protected information (if there was any).
I don't understand why this isn't obvious. That's NOT why he was banned. He was banned because he hijacked a sponsor's thread with the intent of discrediting that paying sponsor. He just did it in the wrong place. Should have started his own thread. Why isn't that obvious?
Semantics. The sponsor may be paying for the space, that certainly does not entitle said sponsor to make allegations that may be baseless in part with absolute impunity. If someone tests the said sponsors allegations be it in a new post or as a response to sponsor's thread the intent is the same. I assume that stef wished to test the efficacy of certain statements made by the sponsor. What is the difference where he does it? Judging by the sponsors response he certainly did not need stef to discredit him as the sponsor did a magnificent job of doing it to himself. Talk about opening mouth to change feet. As I previously proposed when things of this nature occur there are no winners. Stef has moved on and the knowledge he has shared has moved with him. Fabspeed will find a reluctant and inquisitorial market ahead of them.
Because that's a silly rule (its a disservice to the community to have it in another thread and leave the original sponsor sales and marketing thread unblemished by the truth and thus misleading on its own). Or, perhaps its a good rule to keep competitors out of the sponsors threads (even then IMHO its only good for Rob and sponsers, not for the users). Remember the sponsor is using the thread to sell and market to us (!)...in that regard they open themselves to be called if they are BS'ing. And, to be clear, Stef is not a competitor, he is a member and was offering information to protect/educate other users. If not post that information there in the original sales/marketing thread, then where *better*? (not where do the "rules" say it should go, where *better*) While this is my view, to your point, and to be clear, Rob has clearly stated that (your reason) is exactly why he was banned and the post deleted (and I believe Rob).
This is like the Casey Anthony thread in Silver. The verdict was obvious to anyone with an open mind, but the Yeah Buts went on for fifteen pages.
