News

Where did Dave Rocks go?

Discussion in '348/355' started by PaulK, May 6, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. PaulK

    PaulK F1 Rookie
    Silver Subscribed

    Apr 24, 2004
    3,475
    Michigan
    Full Name:
    Paul
    In the interest of being constructive, is there a list of rules for sponsors or guidelines that sponsors must adhere to that I can review?
     
  2. ShineKen

    ShineKen F1 Rookie
    Rossa Subscribed

    Aug 3, 2007
    3,319
    Southern California
    Full Name:
    Ken
    https://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/help/terms

    If these are the rules, it seems to be "general" rules. Doesn't seem to be a set of rules specifically for sponsors.

    Either way. I would've accepted Rob's suggestion of posting over a period of time. It is a fair suggestion.
     
  3. PaulK

    PaulK F1 Rookie
    Silver Subscribed

    Apr 24, 2004
    3,475
    Michigan
    Full Name:
    Paul
    I reviewed those, I don't see anything specific in there that pertains to the subject of the dispute with Dave Rocks. Is there another location?
     
  4. ShineKen

    ShineKen F1 Rookie
    Rossa Subscribed

    Aug 3, 2007
    3,319
    Southern California
    Full Name:
    Ken
    So Dave discusses rules and whether or not he broke them. Gets banned for refusing to accept he broke them. Contacts a higher authority to re-discuss the matter and still doesn't see eye-to-eye. Writes a bunch of letters to bunch of people ... about what I am not sure of. And then gets SUPER Banned.

    I can understand this sequence of events and it is probably best both parties part ways at this stage.
     
    Booker likes this.
  5. rob lay

    rob lay Administrator
    Staff Member Admin Owner Miami 2018

    Dec 1, 2000
    48,833
    Southlake, TX
    Full Name:
    Rob Lay
    almost.

    we don't publish sponsor rules to users. I give guidance to sponsors when they start, there is a sponsors forum, and if we feel a sponsor is getting out of the guidelines we have a nice conversation. This is exactly what happened with Dave. Posting 7 threads at the same time was outside our guidelines, a moderator soft deleted the ones over, and then we had a nice conversation trying to help Dave understand. He just couldn't understand, he gave example of other sponsors, but none of those examples were valid. Example sponsor he gave me only had 2 threads in 7-day period. That said we have moderated probably a dozen sponsors in the exact same way the last 6-months for activity that was getting too "spammy". This wasn't about Dave not knowing the guidelines, this wasn't about us banning him for breaking the guidelines, this was about Dave refusing to accept the guidelines.

    there is an entire thread about this in Owners forum where I respond to Dave, this was October 18th, 2017. What was Dave doing? He was complaining about a sponsor spamming. As just one example, I told him the guidelines THEN!

    So Dave knew the guidelines AND show me where another sponsor has done the same thing and not been moderated?

    #92

    Image Unavailable, Please Login
     
  6. AceMaster

    AceMaster Two Time F1 World Champ

    Feb 6, 2009
    29,143
    Calling a penalty
    Full Name:
    Mike
    His choice or yours?
     
  7. Korr

    Korr F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Dec 7, 2003
    14,111
    Full Name:
    NaHCO3
    Some threads need their own theme music.

     
    JLF and dm_n_stuff like this.
  8. ShineKen

    ShineKen F1 Rookie
    Rossa Subscribed

    Aug 3, 2007
    3,319
    Southern California
    Full Name:
    Ken
    “sponsors should only top 1-2 times a week OR 1-2 new threads a week in single forum”

    I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say I’m not sure how clear this sentence is.

    1. What does “top” mean here? Top threads, top bumps? If it means top out at 1-2 threads a week, not sure what comes after “or” is necessary.

    2. What does “single” imply here? Does it mean you can post 1-2 new threads a week in each forum? Or does it mean you can post 1-2 new threads a week a single forum at a time?

    If one is going off this alone, I can see how it is open to interpretation and needs more clarity. I’m sure what was actually meant was cleared up at some point in the discussion, but to say Dave clearly new the rules based off a discussion 2 years ago before he posted might be a bit unfair.
     
  9. rob lay

    rob lay Administrator
    Staff Member Admin Owner Miami 2018

    Dec 1, 2000
    48,833
    Southlake, TX
    Full Name:
    Rob Lay
    ha, good question and I don’t remember exactly. we did what we could and helped a bunch when Ricambi started selling SR.
     
    AceMaster likes this.
  10. rob lay

    rob lay Administrator
    Staff Member Admin Owner Miami 2018

    Dec 1, 2000
    48,833
    Southlake, TX
    Full Name:
    Rob Lay
    really? I mean, really?
     
  11. ShineKen

    ShineKen F1 Rookie
    Rossa Subscribed

    Aug 3, 2007
    3,319
    Southern California
    Full Name:
    Ken
    I might be trippin’ , but give someone else a shot to decipher what that sentence clearly means.
     
    steved033 likes this.
  12. m.stojanovic

    m.stojanovic Formula 3
    Silver Subscribed

    Dec 22, 2011
    1,509
    Malaysia - KL
    Full Name:
    Miroljub Stojanovic
    "1-2 new threads a week in single forum" clearly means 1-2 times in each forum (which may also be simultaneous), i.e. one can start new threads in a number of forums as long as it is not more than 1-2 times a week in each of them. Why is it "1-2 times"? Since this rule obviously allows 2 times, why not just state "2 times".
     
  13. taz355

    taz355 F1 Rookie
    Silver Subscribed Owner

    Feb 18, 2008
    4,956
    Indio Ca/ Alberta
    Full Name:
    Grant
    Booker no disrespect but my understanding is because of the rules not being clear Dave did not understand that spam posting in your own forum was allowed. Which other sp9nsers have done thus he did not realize this was nit allowed. Rob clearly pointed it out after Dave questioned it. This is my understanding
     
    rob lay likes this.
  14. Natkingcolebasket69

    BANNED

    I’ll be extremely curious to see how much money fchat brings to sponsors through sales? What % can it represent of it?
    Also since I’m not as well versed as some of most in this thread who actually runs fchat? I’d be curious to know what the company generates $ wise; of course I might never know...
    Let’s be real this all think is about money, forum ethics(on the mod side) & ego.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  15. johnk...

    johnk... F1 Veteran
    Silver Subscribed Owner

    Jun 11, 2004
    6,925
    I would disagree. It's pretty plain English. "1-2 new threads a week in single forum" means exactly what if says, 1 -2 threads per week is a single (ONE) forum. If it were to means EACH, it would say EACH.

    Break it down. It means; You may post what? 1-2 new threads. How often? Once per week. Where? In a single forum.

    sin·gle
    /ˈsiNGɡəl/
    adjective
    adjective: single
    1. 1.
      only one; not one of several.
      "a single red rose"
      synonyms: one, one only, sole, lone, solitary, isolated, by itself;
    God, I'm defending Rob. :), Sorry Dave. My background makes me too dam objective.
     
  16. johnk...

    johnk... F1 Veteran
    Silver Subscribed Owner

    Jun 11, 2004
    6,925
    Challenge likes this.
  17. m.stojanovic

    m.stojanovic Formula 3
    Silver Subscribed

    Dec 22, 2011
    1,509
    Malaysia - KL
    Full Name:
    Miroljub Stojanovic
    So, if we replace the "single" with one of its synonyms, it would read "1-2 new threads a week in one forum". This can certainly be interpreted to mean that there shouldn't be more than 2 post a week in one forum, i.e. in any one forum, which can then be taken to mean that you can post a maximum of 2 new threads per week per forum.

    If the intention was to also limit the posting (of max. 2 new posts) to one forum per week, than the rule should have been written as "the cumulative number of new posts in various forums should not exceed two in any one week" (assuming that if one posts only one new thread in one forum, one is allowed to post another new thread in another forum in the same week). Otherwise it should state "1-2 new threads a week and each time in only one forum".

    If it is not agreed that the meaning of the statement is as I see it, then I believe that it should, at least, be agreed that it is ambiguous. If it is ambiguous, then the "ruling" should be in my favour based on the well known legal principle that the ruling goes against the party which wrote the ambiguous "clause" (contra proferentem).
     
    ShineKen and steved033 like this.
  18. johnk...

    johnk... F1 Veteran
    Silver Subscribed Owner

    Jun 11, 2004
    6,925

    It depends on what the meaning of ONE is. (Now I'll probably get banned for a political comment.) :rolleyes: :)

    In stead of looking at what it says and trying to justify your interpretation, look at what it doesn't say. Chat is made up of many forums. It doesn't you can post in 2 forums. It doesn't say you can post in 3 forums. It doesn't say you can post in several forums. It say you can post in ONE forum. Anything else is a misinterpretation.

    Now I am really getting out of this discussion because it's just getting stupid.
     
  19. dm_n_stuff

    dm_n_stuff Global Moderator
    Global Moderator Owner Lifetime Rossa

    Dec 10, 2003
    33,336
    The Sunshine State
    Full Name:
    Dave
    Ok, I'm briefly returning

    I am also briefly returning.

    That was 21 weeks ago. At the time, if I recall correctly, I went in and deleted some of those posts as spam, advised Mike of his violation, and he told me it wouldn't happen again.

    So, given that as background, I took a look at the classifieds this morning for Mike's posts. He has six threads he bumped in the last 24 hours. I deleted one bump, but all of the others included new information about his listing, generally price reductions, which is within the rules.

    I also advised him NOT to bump ads without a meaningful piece of additional information. I'm sure he'll be ok with that, and not contact the CEO of the company to complain that he's being treated unfairly. :rolleyes:

    D
     
    285ferrari likes this.
  20. steved033

    steved033 Formula 3
    Silver Subscribed Owner

    Apr 12, 2017
    1,510
    Atlanta, GA
    Full Name:
    Steve D.
    This.

    sjd
     
  21. Ferrarium

    Ferrarium Formula Junior
    Silver Subscribed

    Jul 28, 2018
    811
    NJ
    Full Name:
    Eric
    Except if gets personal, which this sort of feels like. This does not seem is as simple as a rule violation issue.

    This whole thing feels rooted in an ambigous policy, that then got personal, on what side is anyone's guess probably both. Asses got chapped then maybe someone quit, maybe someone banned, maybe both. Both sides feel justified, so we have a stalemate. That's ABUNDANTLY clear reading this trainwreck.

    I suspect no argument for or against any side of this will make sense here. It's personal, not to me, the ourcome was personal. in that context this whole absurd thread becomes clear.

    Rules to quote barbossa "they are more of a guideline". That was stipated above somewhere in different terms but that s super clear its about the only thing that is clear ironically.

    So in the end it is what it is. All parties are satisfied as I suspect reading this whe trainwreck so moving on is perhaps the best course. The 2 partiea have after all. :shrug:

    But alas that won happen either will it. Ok back to finger pointing then.

    Dave was wrong. No Rob was wrong. No actually Dave was wrong but Rob want right either. no no no you miss the facts sir, Rob was wrong but Dave was not right, yes but Rob was more right because X, actually Dave was more right because X-Y, 2 wrongs don't make a right but 2 half rights may make a wrong if we debate long enough.

    That covers it. Move on lol.

    Sent from my LM-Q710(FGN) using FerrariChat.com mobile app
     
    ShineKen and AceMaster like this.
  22. steved033

    steved033 Formula 3
    Silver Subscribed Owner

    Apr 12, 2017
    1,510
    Atlanta, GA
    Full Name:
    Steve D.

    So there's really THREE sides to every story? His His and the truth?

    sjd
     
    curtisc63 likes this.
  23. rob lay

    rob lay Administrator
    Staff Member Admin Owner Miami 2018

    Dec 1, 2000
    48,833
    Southlake, TX
    Full Name:
    Rob Lay
    Dave already pointed out how it was moderated, also if we weren't doing anything with that Sponsor why is their moderator thread THIS long? ;) The difference is they accept guidance and are willing to follow the rules going forward. Dave showed no indication of accepting our guidelines or following our rules going forward, if any other sponsor or user does this they will end up with the same ban.

    Image Unavailable, Please Login
     
    285ferrari likes this.
  24. JLF

    JLF Formula Junior

    Sep 8, 2009
    759
    Dallas
    Full Name:
    JERRY
    This thread has finally devolved into this..........

    Image Unavailable, Please Login
     
    flat_plane_eddie and showme1946 like this.
  25. dm_n_stuff

    dm_n_stuff Global Moderator
    Global Moderator Owner Lifetime Rossa

    Dec 10, 2003
    33,336
    The Sunshine State
    Full Name:
    Dave
    Probably more like 100 in this case.

    There's Dave L's, Rob's, the CEO's, mine, the other moderators who got read in and the 90 guys posting in here. :D

    We're not going to end up with a consensus of opinion, just not gonna happen.

    As an additional note, and then I swear I'm finished with this thread and this topic, I am not pleased with how this turned out. It was never my intent to start a ball rolling that ended with Dave L. getting banned and FC losing a sponsor. Should or will it change how I moderate spam posts? Nope, Will this thread change how spammers behave? Nope. People are gonna do what they do.

    Maybe we should just let this thread run the weekend and then close it? Thoughts?

    D
     
    RossoC360 likes this.

Share This Page