quoting this for jnky since his posts are being moderated and thus buried pages back

 

Todays word of the day is messay... use it in a complete sentence

 

I am posting this because this member's comments have to be approved...and by the time they do, they are burried...I feel he has a right to be heard, in a timely fashion. I am not going to say that I agree or disagree with his comments, only that the comments have a right to be heard.

 

Mark,

You've been reading the dialogue now. What's your opinion so far given what's been said?

About Vendors: I think the review section for vendors is a move in the right direction. Personally, I've used it to post and look. However, my question to you is; When a potential vendor comes to NAM are there certain "criteria " professionally they must pass before being allowed to join or does one just paying the monthly amount make them worthy of being a vendor?

At what point do you as owner of the site make the decision to drop a vendor outside of non payment?

I ask because some of the issues being thrown out there globally pertain to vendors either on service, products or both. We've talked about mods policing the members, but who polices the vendors?

Paul

 

^ Good post

 

This begs the question, who would eat their hands in the first place?

 

would they be finger lickin good like the Colonel says?




**crickets chirping**

 

And there, in a single post, after years of an untouchable combination of wit, intelligence and mechanical accumen, my NAM idol falls from grace.




Me, I was going to rob him while his hands were up.

 

What is wrong here on NAM is that it has become rather messay.

 

A+ for effort

 

Perhaps I should have written it overly long and elaborate with minimal point.




Seriously though. Perhaps we could all learn some restraint from our friends on the other side of the pond when it comes to contributing to forum discussions.

 

Bamatt's messay made me mess my pants

 

NAM needs a thread dedicated to free food/beer

 

Can we get back on topic please.

 

sorry just trying not to take life(or the internet for that matter) too seriously

 

Sorry for the delay in posting...I had to get some sleep last night and I woke up to hundreds of posts to read through before determining which to address first.

There are thousand issues that have been brought up in this thread and among the moderation team because of me opening my mouth asking for input on what the problems with the site are and how we can deal with them. I want everyone one to know that I really appreciate your input. As pointed as the criticism can be I've already seen some things I want to change, improve, develop further, etc. In my mind this, while sometimes painful, has REALLY been constructive. That said there are lots of follow on conversations and discussions to be had.

To address your questions below:

To date the criteria has been that the vendor must have products/services that are MINI-related. Since most of the vendors on the site are small, new companies, etc. there is little background information that we can gather. We've certainly turned away vendors that don't have MINI-related products or aren't related to the "MINI-related" lifestyle (I actually hate that term) in some way but if they have MINI-related products/services and they want to join they can.

I've had long conversations with several members on this specific topic. My position to date is that NAM was never intended to provide a Consumer Report type of function. My interest has always been about geared toward building a community of people using different types of technology. With that in mind my feeling has been that the site will be used to expose vendors, through member posts, that are problem vendors. Once other members see those doubt will be cast on the vendor and if they don't try to solve the problems people will stop buying from them, and they will go away on their own. I like to think of this as Darwin's view of business. Either they step up to meet the challenge that the consumers are placing on them or they don't and they wither away into obscurity.

This, though, is a double-edged sword. There have been efforts on the site to discredit vendors through a barrage of posts...either from a unhappy customer to a potential competitor. All designed to make the vendor look bad...whether they may really deserve it or not. This is social engineering and in order to see it you have to look at the posting style of the person over time to see it. My feeling is that everyone is entitled to their rant about a vendor not treating them right (especially if they have taken the time to work out the issue with the vendor and gotten no where)....posting like that anytime the vendor's name is mentioned over the course of many months or years is something different.

I, and Sam Carr (vendor liaison), police the vendors on what they are doing on the site. We've proposed a set of vendor guidelines that they operate by on the site and, while not placed into effect, the guidelines has started some discussion around if there are cases when vendors should call each other out relative to their products/services/claims.

All the above said, what I think is being implied, is what does NAM do about vendors that don't really serve the customers outside of NAM? Are their products defective, did they deliver poor customer service, etc. We don't police what members say/do offsite so how could we effectively police vendors offsite? Again, we would have to launch some form of Consumer Reports type of organization, certify vendor products and practices, and identify how they stack up. Those not meeting a certain level of standard wouldn't be allowed on the site. Even if was the ideal solution I don't have the resources available to launch, manage, and support something like this.

To date we only have the review system to support consumer feedback. It covers both products and vendors...if its not already in there you can add them yourself (I'll be posting some FAQs on how to do this though but clicking on Upload Products works just like the gallery does...your just adding a vendor rather than a product). In the past couple of weeks I've trying to give this more visibility as I think its a potentially great resource for members as well as providing feedback to the vendors...if people will contribute their reviews. Again, if people thinks something stinks they can make that opinion known in the review system. As I mentioned above, this is also a double-edged sword. Reviews are moderated so that we can watch for the social engineering effect. To date though I've not rejected or edited a review for its content (other than making sure that a link or a picture worked as was intended by the poster).

In closing I'll say this. I've specifically instructed Sam and the moderators, at different times, to stay out of member feedback about vendors. I know that we've had a few cases in the past where this wasn't the case. I have tried to insure that these stay in the past and don't reoccur. I think that vendors and other members have every right to hear what's not right with them, their products, or practices. Hopefully it will help them improve...if not, and they go away, the community has won anyway (Darwin was right).

If there is a way to accelerate the process I'm all ears.

Mark

 

Thanks for that Mark, I think that answers a lot of questions and concerns....but will also bring up more questions. That is what we need, a nice open discussion about these issues with your involvement. Again, thanks.

As far as accelerating the process, just do it ...pull off the bandaid, jump into the cold water, takes a minute to adjust, but eventually, it will be fine, hehe.

 

A lot of very good points here.

Actually, I only wish for two things:

A dedicated JCW Forum (I know, there he goes again, lol)

And loosen up on the reigns concerning adult oriented humor. I don't mean anything goes, or cursing. But in fact, the overwhelming majority of the folks on this site, are of at least driving age, and something more than PG13 would be appropriate. It's like living in Topeka. Las Vegas is a LOT more fun! Up to a certain point, let people BE people. That certain point must be established by Mark and the Mods, but I think the bar can be raised some.

 

The review system is by the same people who wrote the gallery software. With that in mind you click "Upload Product", select the proper category, and fill out the information requested (you do the same for a Vendor although the wording is off). I get a notification that a new review/product/etc. has been added, I give it a quick check to make sure that if any HTML-like stuff is in the post that its working (ie - including URLs, pictures, etc.) and it gets approved and is visible to all. Only when we see multiple reviews that appear to be a form of social engineering (ie - they are posting multiple negatives to drive down the ranking of the vendor or product) will look into the review content further. This type of review prevents an unfair bias from forming.

Regardless I need to update the FAQs we have for the review system since they are outdated based on the current version of software we are running.

Now to address your unbiased and independent question... My feeling is, and always been, that people are free to express their opinions on the site as long as they do it constructively (ie - cleanly, maturely, with the intent to improve a situation, etc. using the site guidelines for guidance.). If you post a review of your favorite vendor, M7, it will go in as long as you keep in clean and constructive.

What you and I have butted heads on in the past is your pattern of constantly harassing members of the site relative to them buying an R56, a product from M7, etc. My impression has been that you do it more for entertainment than the supposed purpose of "educating" the new user to the ills of world. Based on this approach it feels like social engineering...watching new owners of the R56 bite back at your negative comments about how "stupid" they were to buy this model, taking digs at everything M7 in an attempt to drive them from the market, is both entertainment and an opportunity to sway the public perceptions of other people, companies, etc.. In the end the "fun" you've had only alienates members from the site, the community as whole, and from the MINI. Perhaps that is your goal. If so, then we will continue to have issues in what you think should be allowed versus what I feel your intent is.

There has been a lot of requests for NAM to stop being big brother. I think that applies here as well...you aren't the big brother of fellow members, they can form their own opinions and their own purchase decisions. They vote with their wallets just like you do.

Regardless I have an olive branch for you to consider. How would you feel if you could post what you want (within the site posting guidelines) but we start emphasizing how people can make use of the Ignore feature so they don't have to see you if they get tired of you and your posts on whatever rant of the day might be? It would be their decision on whether they want to see what you (and other members) have to say.

If your game for this I'm open to it as well. This would be something that we would encourage all the members to make use of for anything that they don't really like to hear, find offensive, etc. (all those gray areas that are hard to moderate). All I ask is that posting stay within the guidelines of the site (some of which may be changed, removed, updated) because of the feedback from this very thread.

Mark

 

all the rest of that post is helpful...but what it comes down to is this!!!!!! This should be the focus, let the old stuff go and be men and move on, start over!!!

We are working on change, lets work together as Mark suggests in the quoted comments!!!!!

 

This sounds like a great idea Mark. Now you're thinking . The world is a much better place when people are free to express their own opinion (No matter how harsh or un-PC it might be) instead of having someone stand over them telling them how to act.

A perfect example would be the "Racing" rule. Someone posting that they were involved in a spirited jaunt off a stoplight with another car up to 40-50 MPH is hardly racing, and there's absolutely no legal grounds for a lawsuit of any kind over it.

I could post that I raced a Ferrari up to 150 MPH on the freeway weaving all over, the letter of the law allows for no recourse. Unless an officer of the law witnessed the event, it doesn't matter what you post about (Just as a friend can't get arrested for not running to the police and telling them my story, the site that hosts said post is certainly safe from any potential legal recourse...).

I have a feeling the rule has more to do with maintaining order (keeping the members that drive at 35 in a 50 off their backs) than any potential legal recourse against the site. Other forums allow for this by creating a seperate section for this discussion (Where members can CHOOSE to stay out). For an example, visit http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum...play.php?f=124

Another possible option would be to implement a "Filter" system, to "Click" before showing large images (As they could potentially have R-Rated Content) and allow users to manage their own "Safe Lists" for members they trust, along with "Ban Lists" with members they don't trust (For example, allow different levels of viewing of selective members posts. If someone only wants to read what I have to say, and not any HTML Content I post (Pictures, links, etc) then they can).

Allowing users to maintain their own list of profanity to filter would also open up a lot of freedom on this site. Some of us don't care, some do. Many video games have a profanity filter that can be turned on and off (And edited), why not a forum.

 

Can you put the "add user to ignore list" on the little drop down box you get when you click on the user name? Then I'll be able to power ignore. I would get alot more use out of that rather than "add user to buddy list". I don't like having to go to their profile to do it.

 

On the iggy feature... I occasionally post on another board & if you have a person on ignore they completely disappear. It's like they never existed. You don't see that they posted in a thread. It's like if they make post # 22 your view will show post #21 followed by post #23. I wonder if the software you are running will do that. I mean I don't really have much of an iggy list here but for those that want to iggy someone I think it's better for them to poof & totally disappear than to constantly see their name in threads. Just curious

 

I forum I go to has made it so descrete that you don't even know it is there. Just a small break inbetween the post.

"Bamatt is on your ignor list. Click here to view the post anyway"

 

with vBulletin, the post is soft-deleted as viewed from the member, but visible if you want to see it. by using ignore, you have to make the choice to read it