Peter Gariepy

Bickering and finger pointing...

Recommended Posts

Guys,this is just a car forum,lets talk about cars,too many fights in this forum,this is to bad,old ladies do this........not car guys!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Double M,

Frankly, it is an attack.

If managing this forum (including the Reatta forums) for 12 years (with a generally totally hands-off approach) doesn't earn the respect of the users of this forum nothing will. (FYI: i am a volunteer webmaster: i.e. I don't get paid.)

If my demands fall on deaf ears so be it. If my warnings are not heeded then those that get banned have no one to blame but themselves.

As an AACA member I encourage you to escalate your issues with how poor this forum is moderated and managed to the AACA Directors and AACA President. Find their contact info here: http://www.aaca.org/about/officers/default.aspx

Regards,

Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mogeonman,

"this is just a car forum,lets talk about cars"

Thats exactly what I am trying to do. There is way to much bickering and I'm trying to put a stop to it so we can get back to talking about cars! :)

Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a place for everything on the Internet. Could responses to Peter's initial statement be moved there ? I would not like to see anyone banned but this is coming close.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm trying to stay out of this and don't want to add to all the controversy. I will limit my comments to saying that the ice is much thicker in this thread than I thought it would be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't like the rules or how the board is handled I suggest you grab your hat and walk out, keep walking until that hat starts to float. There will be plenty left behind here to enjoy things as they are, with a little less noise to boot.

Your restraint Peter is admirable to say the least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ice is much thicker? Well, can't quite get my hands around that one.

This is a forum of car lovers, we can all agree to that.

The AACA is an entity, and that entity has certain legal obligations, this is not a free speech issue. To put it another way, you can make statements on this forum, but they can be deleted by a higher power.......for the sake of legality.

Thus, negative comments about vendors, on the AACA forum, can be construed as AACA negative comments, thus, we enter into the legal issues. Slander, libel, you sort out which is verbal and which is written.

Let's talk cars, I agree.

But don't, ever, start bashing someone who is moderating this forum, for the good of all.

It's like hitting a referee in an NFL game. You might feel good getting your feelings out with a good solid punch, but you're going to end up in the locker room....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ice is much thicker? Well, can't quite get my hands around that one....
Please re-read Peter's previous post to this thread, quoted below, and I think my comments will make more sense.
Double M,

My loyalties are to keeping this forum ALIVE! I refuse to see this forum overrun with bickering, finger-pointing and false accusations.

You are on thin ice. To accuse me of being a vendor or somehow bias to a vendor is WAY OUT OF LINE! I've run this forum FREE TO THE REATTA COMMUNITY FOR over 10 years! If you don't like how I run this forum then feel free to LEAVE!

Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, I get it, as my son (16) says, mea culpa, I didn't have comprehensive understanding.

As I've grown older (60 now and counting, not bragging, I just can't seem to do anything to stop it), I've grown less tolerant of people who walk on thin ice.

I just saw an engineer turn down a great job, because he wanted a few more thousand a year. Thin ice.

I recently saw a guy on the highway cut in front of a car, with inches to spare. Real thin ice.

So, I get it, as they say, and to his credit and patience, Peter has some thick ice under the guy making the comments.

Me, I'd have chopped a circle around him, and let him deal with the frigid dihydrogen monoxide, a few posts back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Geez, I don't check the forum for a few hours and look what happens. :eek:

Just as a point of clarification for those of you who are conspiratorially-minded: We are using the term "vendor" generically here as that is presently the issue at hand. There is no commercial or monetary relationship implied with these "vendors" and the AACA or the BCA.

You can (and should) use the vendor term interchangeably with individual as there is no difference as far as the rules regarding bad-mouthing. Stating " "John Doe" is a crook" is the same-same as "XYZ chrome plating is a crooked operation".

This isn't about protecting vendors, it's about protecting the AACA from lawsuits from those parties that are aggrieved by libelous statements made on the AACA's forum. Right or wrong, win or lose, defending the AACA from lawsuits costs significant money, not to mention what it would cost if there was a judgement levied.

So remember what your moms all told you: "If you don't have anything nice to say..."

Edited by Rawja (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A snide and unjustified attack on a respected moderator of this forum is of no little importance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK...while there is agreement/dis-agreent of what has been discussed on the subject, it is time to taker a breather and step back.

Let me remind many of a quote a renown philosopher (and convicted felon) from a past generation:

"Can we all (just) get along?"

--Rodney King

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not trying to drag this on, but I have a genuine question.

I don't understand how this forum or organization could be drug into a legal suit having anything to do by a deal between members. I'm a member of many many forums, and this is the only one that refuses to have a member/vendor feedback policy. Wouldn't a blanket statement when signing up, or in such related buy/sell forum, stating "AACA assumes no liability...etc" cover any mis-deeds?

A bad deal between two members is just that. A bad deal between two members. AACA didn't force anyone to buy or sell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am relatively new here but I would just like to see the sales pitches regulated to the sales side and keep the forum for discussion. not a cult of personality. Just my 2 cents worth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AACA is a much larger organization than most car clubs, with members in the 10's of thousands. And, there are many dollars attached to that large number of members, it caters to the collector, but it's a business too.

As such, it is subject to any sort of nuisance litigation.

A post on an AACA sanctioned forum, being negative, could easily be considered libel.

A company won't go against a small, minor, organization's forum, for negative comments, but if you figure the potential damage against an organization with the number of members of the AACA, the damages could be construed as major.

A vendor has an annual revenue of X dollars. A very negative comment is posted, and their revenue the next year is 1/2 of X dollars. They could sue, and, in today's wonderful litigious society, possibly win. But, win or lose, the organization has to foot the bill for lawyers and such.

Thus, as I stated earlier, the concept of free speech does NOT apply to a forum that is connected to an organization such as this......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would hope the AACA has a means of staying current on all the legal issues concerning such an organization.

The topic here seems to be Internet Defamation Law. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act clearly grants immunity from liability for defamation for websites like this forum that are considered distributors of information not publishers.

That being said, they still should not encourage or elicit comments or opinions from posters that might be defamatory, nor allow defamatory posts to remain on the site lest they might lose the protection that section of the act grants.

Thus the club has generated rules of conduct for the forums and appointed moderators to enforce them. They have the job of trying to balance the club from possibly being sued for defamation and still allow free exchange of opinions and information. Not an easy task at times, and they earn every penny they are paid :rolleyes:, and deserve our respect for their service. :)

I imagine when they review posts on the forum with an eye towards possibly subjecting the club to litigation, they know that there is very little chance of liability from posts where poster X calls poster Y a scallywag for a statement or opinion they have made. However, when a negative comment is made against a "vendor" the risk of litigation rises substantially since there are financial losses that come into play which are easily provable and more likely to be brought to the legal system for resolution involving the club in a lawsuit whether they have any liability or not.

So it is not out of protecting the "vendors" that they do things the way they do, but protecting the club. It just seems that it might be taken that way to an outsider. The real protection in a defamation lawsuit is if the stated allegations are true. Our moderators cannot know if an allegation is true or not. Even less so if the allegation is relayed second or third hand. Thus the best decision is to remove any allegation that could be deemed defamatory rather than let it stand on the forum. We can't expect them to investigate allegations and get in the middle of them to make any determinations as to their validity. Heck, the club would have to double their salaries or more! :eek:

Leave that to the publishers like Hemmings who are liable for defamation for what is printed in their publication, and who charge vendors for the use of that publication for advertising and can therefor afford to investigate and mediate allegations and disputes which the AACA cannot be expected to undertake as a club. Granted this gives the vendors the benefit of the doubt, but that's unfortunately the nature of the beast, and I don't see how it would be in the best interest of the club or this forum to do it otherwise.

May the gift of gratitude enter the hearts of all the forum members this holiday season and may we learn from this discussion to keep our posts civil as well as informational and appreciate the great benefit this forum brings to us and respect its limitations now that some of the reasons for their existence have been revealed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The topic here seems to be Internet Defamation Law. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act clearly grants immunity from liability for defamation for websites like this forum that are considered distributors of information not publishers. "

Bravo!

The AACA is not legally libel for negative posts. Period.

End of story.

You may now continue with your regularly scheduled programing...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"The topic here seems to be Internet Defamation Law. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act clearly grants immunity from liability for defamation for websites like this forum that are considered distributors of information not publishers. "

Bravo!

The AACA is not legally libel for negative posts. Period.

End of story.

You may now continue with your regularly scheduled programing...

BUT they still could get sued and have to pay for lawyers, court fees, etc. Even if they do win.

This is an automotive forum. It is not a complaint department. What good is it going to do to complain about it here? Is the Reatta club going to go hunt them down based on one person's story that may or my not be legit? Would the AACA do the same? I think not.

Again, this is an automotive forum. We talk CARS here. in the Buy/Sell section, vendors sell parts, buyers buy the parts. Nobody is forcing anyone to do anything.

If you have a problem with a vendor, take it up either with the vendor himself, or with Hemmings, eBay, Google, whatever. This IS NOT the place.

And remember, there are ALWAYS two sides to any story.

Summary: Stay on subject. Vendors can sell their stuff, buyers can buy their stuff and give recommendations about vendors. But this IS NOT the place for trash talk. First hand, second hand, thirteenth hand, whatever. If you've got a problem, take it somewhere else. It will do NO GOOD here.

My 2 cents.

Edited by NCReatta (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

McReatta - thanks and it is very well put. In line with my philosphy, I would certainly hope that no fraudulent allegations are even attempted to be put on any AACA Forum.

Peter G. has made it abundantly clear how these matters should be handled. One problem lies in the fact that there are an awful lot of Reatta owners, who have most valid complaints, are not aware of the existence of the AACA forums and thus turn to others to fight for their redress for certain fraudulent and illegal actions they have been subjected to.

In the future, they will be directed to Moderators and as I mentioned in an earlier post, one of the Moderators very successfully intervened recently, and one several years ago, when a party ultimately was directed to them and eventually justice was served.

I am sure that all participants in the many Forums are indeed greatful for the opportunities afforded by the AACA through your efforts and guidance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BUT they still could get sued and have to pay for lawyers, court fees, etc. Even if they do win.
I agree. I consider my website as a repository of information about the Buick Reatta and I do not consider myself a publisher. I have stated many times that I don't consider myself an expert on Reattas. The goal of my website is to make the information provided by this forum, and other sources, easy to find when it is needed. However, even considering what Mc_Reatta just pointed out about section 230, I can tell you that liability weighs heavily on my mind. There is not a day that goes by that I don't worry about liability issues involved with operating ReattaOwner.com. The old adage that "anyone can sue anyone for anything" is always in the back of my mind and is always considered in any decision I make concerning the website. Because of that very reason I am currently looking at every tutorial on my website to evaluate what liability risk it might pose and whether or not it should be removed from the website. I have already identified a few that might need to be removed but so far I haven't done so.

I have a small, rarely used, forum on ReattaOwner.com and regardless of what section 230 says I would not tolerate any remarks that might possibly defame a vendor or anyone else due to the possibility of a law suit.

I do favor some type of vendor rating system so buyers could rate a seller. When I brought that up on this forum it was rejected before I even had a chance to explain it properly. Now that Peter has stepped in and made his wishes known about this matter, I stand behind him as the final say on this forum and respect him for the hard work he has done. I think everyone else should do the same.

Edited by Ronnie (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"The topic here seems to be Internet Defamation Law. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act clearly grants immunity from liability for defamation for websites like this forum that are considered distributors of information not publishers. "

Bravo!

The AACA is not legally libel for negative posts. Period.

End of story.

You didn't understand a word of what Mc_Reatta said. I can tell you didn't because of your asinine response. First, the AACA is responsible for having to legally defend itself if someone sues them. Second, it is the AACA's wishes that this forum is used for social communication to promote the old car hobby. It has been stated time and time again that if you have a problem with a vendor, it needs to be handled through Private Messaging. And that, my friend, is PERIOD. End of story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.