locking threads / advertising etc
Discussion
i have nothing to do with anyone or anything in the cobra scene debate etc.
But it seems to me this is a forum for enthusiasts to argue debate agree disagree share information knowledge and banter.
I think the points raised against the python were legitimate. I also feel that like many people on here i get slightly annoyed when manufacturers (not just RVD) effectively use this place to post topics along the lines of 'look at us we have built this aren't we great' (effectively free advertising) but then get annoyed when constructive crtiscism comes there way, branding it 'personal attack or hate campaign ' because they don't have the technical knowledge or intelectucal ability to hold a constructive arguement , so effectively all they are looking for by making there post is for us all to bow down and worship?
As far as i'm aware this has dragged on for years, so why not just ban what is effectively self promotion on this web site and lets get back to sensible discussion on a fantastic hobby.
I may be wrong but i feel i'm not the only person on here of this opinion?
edited to say, if this post is felt to be any kind of attack or misapproiate or speaking out of turn then this is not the place i thought it was and i will leave.
>>> Edited by jamesg20 on Tuesday 21st December 12:23
But it seems to me this is a forum for enthusiasts to argue debate agree disagree share information knowledge and banter.
I think the points raised against the python were legitimate. I also feel that like many people on here i get slightly annoyed when manufacturers (not just RVD) effectively use this place to post topics along the lines of 'look at us we have built this aren't we great' (effectively free advertising) but then get annoyed when constructive crtiscism comes there way, branding it 'personal attack or hate campaign ' because they don't have the technical knowledge or intelectucal ability to hold a constructive arguement , so effectively all they are looking for by making there post is for us all to bow down and worship?
As far as i'm aware this has dragged on for years, so why not just ban what is effectively self promotion on this web site and lets get back to sensible discussion on a fantastic hobby.
I may be wrong but i feel i'm not the only person on here of this opinion?
edited to say, if this post is felt to be any kind of attack or misapproiate or speaking out of turn then this is not the place i thought it was and i will leave.
>>> Edited by jamesg20 on Tuesday 21st December 12:23
ive read the post but i think my point although related is slightly different in that ....
in fact this is taking up too much time of my life. i really can't be bothered pointing out who/what the problem is for those who cant see it.
Met some good friends on here but i've had enough
bye.
in fact this is taking up too much time of my life. i really can't be bothered pointing out who/what the problem is for those who cant see it.
Met some good friends on here but i've had enough
bye.
Jamesg20
I totally agree with your point, I'm not interested in fighting matches between interested parties..........
I believe that a few should take a step back, and use this forum for what it really is meant to be: sharing INFORMATION and EXPERIENCES!!!!!! of any type, technical and non, fun or sad, but this is a forum for everyone.
We just need to remind ourselves, and have the good sense to use it wisely and respect the opinion of others, without getting offensive.
So Jamesg20 stay in the forum, the more we are the better it is for the diversity of ideas and opinions, even if a few won't like them, but that is always going to be the case...........and that is life isn't it..!
Italo
I totally agree with your point, I'm not interested in fighting matches between interested parties..........
I believe that a few should take a step back, and use this forum for what it really is meant to be: sharing INFORMATION and EXPERIENCES!!!!!! of any type, technical and non, fun or sad, but this is a forum for everyone.
We just need to remind ourselves, and have the good sense to use it wisely and respect the opinion of others, without getting offensive.
So Jamesg20 stay in the forum, the more we are the better it is for the diversity of ideas and opinions, even if a few won't like them, but that is always going to be the case...........and that is life isn't it..!
Italo
James
I agree with some of what you have said, but there is definately a place on here for manufacturers.
I believe it is a good way of said manufacturers communicating with the people that are buying their products.
It enables then to help if a customer has a question about their build etc.
It also means that they can address issues that are raised.
And why not allow them to use a public forum to show off what they are selling.
I agree with some of what you have said, but there is definately a place on here for manufacturers.
I believe it is a good way of said manufacturers communicating with the people that are buying their products.
It enables then to help if a customer has a question about their build etc.
It also means that they can address issues that are raised.
And why not allow them to use a public forum to show off what they are selling.
I'm pi55ed because I take a personal kicking and can't reply. (But I do understand where Ted is coming from) All because someone thinks that I'm part of some conspiracy, of which I am NOT.
And just for good measure they try to give Dax a kicking just because it's their cars that i build most of.
BTW most of their theories on the Dax were way off the mark. If someone wants me to answer that post on page 9 then paste it up and answer as much as I can.
>> Edited by Dave Brookes on Tuesday 21st December 19:22
And just for good measure they try to give Dax a kicking just because it's their cars that i build most of.
BTW most of their theories on the Dax were way off the mark. If someone wants me to answer that post on page 9 then paste it up and answer as much as I can.
>> Edited by Dave Brookes on Tuesday 21st December 19:22
Just for the record, the first postings about the Python on this forum were not posted by RVD as a means of advertisement. In fact they weren't posted by RVD at all.
They were posted by Den Tanner as part of his feud with Peter Filby, during which he criticised various aspects of the Pyhton's engineering and the abilities of its designer Vince Wright.
Having met Vince and been impressed by his Nemesis I thought it only fair that he have the chance to put his side of things and so told him about this forum.
Unfortunately the affair rapidly degenerated from a reasoned debate about kit car engineering into a nasty public slanging match, hence Ted eventually putting a lock on that thread.
With the 'Python saga' having featured so prominently here during its development it was maybe only logical that RVD should announce its completion here for the benefit of those PHers who had expressed an interest in the car.
It's just a pity that thread too degenerated into a bit of a slanging match as Purple AK has raised a valid safety concern, and though I don't think it's the problem he does I'm sure we both (along with others) would like to see the issue proven one way or the other.
Dave Brookes' suggestion of an independent test by STATUS would probably be the most universally acceptable way of doing this, and if RVD decide to take this route then it would only be logical for the results to be posted here.
Just so long as everyone sticks to facts and reasoned debate and lays off the name calling. Or Ted will get very annoyed.
They were posted by Den Tanner as part of his feud with Peter Filby, during which he criticised various aspects of the Pyhton's engineering and the abilities of its designer Vince Wright.
Having met Vince and been impressed by his Nemesis I thought it only fair that he have the chance to put his side of things and so told him about this forum.
Unfortunately the affair rapidly degenerated from a reasoned debate about kit car engineering into a nasty public slanging match, hence Ted eventually putting a lock on that thread.
With the 'Python saga' having featured so prominently here during its development it was maybe only logical that RVD should announce its completion here for the benefit of those PHers who had expressed an interest in the car.
It's just a pity that thread too degenerated into a bit of a slanging match as Purple AK has raised a valid safety concern, and though I don't think it's the problem he does I'm sure we both (along with others) would like to see the issue proven one way or the other.
Dave Brookes' suggestion of an independent test by STATUS would probably be the most universally acceptable way of doing this, and if RVD decide to take this route then it would only be logical for the results to be posted here.
Just so long as everyone sticks to facts and reasoned debate and lays off the name calling. Or Ted will get very annoyed.
grahambell said:
They were posted by Den Tanner as part of his feud with Peter Filby, during which he criticised various aspects of the Python's engineering and the abilities of its designer Vince Wright.
Just so long as everyone sticks to facts and reasoned debate and lays off the name calling. Or Ted will get very annoyed.
In fairness to Den, one of his main gripes was about Peter Filby advertising in Which Kit? that the Python was "better handling" nearly TWO years before the prototype hit the road...the words "advertising integrity" spring to mind.........
I have no axe to grind, and have gone on record as wishing Vince every success with his car, I have met him and Floyd a couple of times, and had no problems at all, and Graham's suggestion to submit the Python suspension to STATUS inspection should satisfy all parties and put any potential purchasers mind at rest........
It would be a great pity if yet another thread got locked, so let's try to keep to the FACTS and keep personal feelings out of the discussion.....
Just for the Record. I have no involvement in the "conspiracy", nor any wish to be involved. My views were/and still are, based on MY observations, and opinions. I hope for Vince's sake I am wrong, But I don't think so. (Thats just my opinion.) I could add a lot more that I have learnt since my first post on the ball joint issue, but frankly I don't want to get involved.
grahambell said:
They were posted by Den Tanner as part of his feud with Peter Filby, during which he criticised various aspects of the Pyhton's engineering and the abilities of its designer Vince Wright.
Wacky Racer said:
In fairness to Den, one of his main gripes was about Peter Filby advertising in Which Kit? that the Python was "better handling" nearly TWO years before the prototype hit the road...the words "advertising integrity" spring to mind.........
Ok, if anyone new to this forum doesn't know the history, please let them seek it out using the forum's search engine, rather than drag it all up again.
grahambell said:
Just so long as everyone sticks to facts and reasoned debate and lays off the name calling. Or Ted will get very annoyed.
And so will I!
As a customer of RVD I followed that post with interest (I have a nemesis on order)...... it should also be noted that without Dave and AK's inputs I would have been none the wiser to the potential issue in the first place (as was the case a yr ago).
There is a lot of bitterness and back door politics that we all know about and when issues arrise that other less independant people have raised previously it is easy (and not entirely unreasonable) to link the sources together rather than just call it coincidence.
I've also been on the sharp end of certain people who I asked to back up what they were calling facts here, only to be labeled all sorts of things along with having my integrity questioned and even had stuff made up about me too.
So I also feel that the questioning of integrity on that thread was unreasonable.
This is a forum for sharing ideas concerns etc... and those in the industry should recognise this and not flame people but should remain professional.
However right or wrong I feel RVD have done all they can reasonably to prove their concept, certainly enough to satisfy me. It's clear there will not be agreement, but I don't think many kit cars would exist if they had to prove every aspect of their car at a large independant body, it would be financially impossible.
However IMO in issues like this and following the kind of testing done by RVD the manufacturer should put an unlimited warranty on that item, to show their confidence in the design.
Not withstanding this I should point out my car does not use this suspension package and that whilst I AM a HNC qualified engineer it is in Civil engineering and over 10yrs ago so doesn't help me one bit in understanding the issue technically.
There is a lot of bitterness and back door politics that we all know about and when issues arrise that other less independant people have raised previously it is easy (and not entirely unreasonable) to link the sources together rather than just call it coincidence.
I've also been on the sharp end of certain people who I asked to back up what they were calling facts here, only to be labeled all sorts of things along with having my integrity questioned and even had stuff made up about me too.
So I also feel that the questioning of integrity on that thread was unreasonable.
This is a forum for sharing ideas concerns etc... and those in the industry should recognise this and not flame people but should remain professional.
However right or wrong I feel RVD have done all they can reasonably to prove their concept, certainly enough to satisfy me. It's clear there will not be agreement, but I don't think many kit cars would exist if they had to prove every aspect of their car at a large independant body, it would be financially impossible.
However IMO in issues like this and following the kind of testing done by RVD the manufacturer should put an unlimited warranty on that item, to show their confidence in the design.
Not withstanding this I should point out my car does not use this suspension package and that whilst I AM a HNC qualified engineer it is in Civil engineering and over 10yrs ago so doesn't help me one bit in understanding the issue technically.
Gassing Station | Kit Cars | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff