 |
Re: What about the discussion board?
Author: Anonymous User
Date: 07-02-2010 - 23:46
OPRRMS Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> OK. If it had been me, I would've explained to him
> that this is an non-moderated, no subscription
> discussion board and that unless what someone
> posted was illegal or immoral (like, "I'm coming
> to your shortline and kill you"), I wasn't going
> to prevent the person from posting it.
That's essentially what I did.
> Then I would've thanked him for reading AP,
> told him I hoped he would continue to do so and
> that if he changed his mind about providing info
> about his railroad to please get in touch with me.
He was angry enough about what was said that he refused to help and ended the phone call.
> As to whether or not what's posted here affects
> your sales, I really can't speak to that, simply
> because I don't know. My recollection is that
> when you posted your Winterail letter, you stated
> that sales had fallen off the last couple of years
> and you suspected the reason was related to the
> economy.
I don't remember talking about the economy at all. I can't get enough folks to help with information. When railfans make it more difficult for me, it hurts that much more.
> I have no problem with any rules you write. I
> have a whole grip full of rules that I'm supposed
> to follow. Some make sense, some are clearly
> there for no reason other than to protect the
> company from liability ("We have a rule against
> it, the man did it anyway, so we're not
> resposible") or are just plain silly ("You're not
> allowed to walk with your hands in your pockets").
> But the timing of the new AP rules seems to
> indicate that they were written so as not to
> disparage Todd Clark or his web site.
I reached a point where I'd had enough. The subject of Mongo's posts had nothing to do with it. And the rules weren't written to protect anybody. When Mongo went off about TO, I received several phone calls and e-mails alerting me to the problem. I shouldn't have to put up with this.
> You didn't write rules when people started taking
> potshots at Drew Jacksich, and I'd argue that Drew's
> done a lot to bring people to this web site than Todd.
> How come Drew wasn't afforded the same
> consideration?
If you recall, Drew responded in kind or sometimes made the initial comment that created the heated discussions. Should I have instituted rules back then? Probably. But instead, I decided to give everyone another chance.
David
-------------------------------------------------------
> OK. If it had been me, I would've explained to him
> that this is an non-moderated, no subscription
> discussion board and that unless what someone
> posted was illegal or immoral (like, "I'm coming
> to your shortline and kill you"), I wasn't going
> to prevent the person from posting it.
That's essentially what I did.
> Then I would've thanked him for reading AP,
> told him I hoped he would continue to do so and
> that if he changed his mind about providing info
> about his railroad to please get in touch with me.
He was angry enough about what was said that he refused to help and ended the phone call.
> As to whether or not what's posted here affects
> your sales, I really can't speak to that, simply
> because I don't know. My recollection is that
> when you posted your Winterail letter, you stated
> that sales had fallen off the last couple of years
> and you suspected the reason was related to the
> economy.
I don't remember talking about the economy at all. I can't get enough folks to help with information. When railfans make it more difficult for me, it hurts that much more.
> I have no problem with any rules you write. I
> have a whole grip full of rules that I'm supposed
> to follow. Some make sense, some are clearly
> there for no reason other than to protect the
> company from liability ("We have a rule against
> it, the man did it anyway, so we're not
> resposible") or are just plain silly ("You're not
> allowed to walk with your hands in your pockets").
> But the timing of the new AP rules seems to
> indicate that they were written so as not to
> disparage Todd Clark or his web site.
I reached a point where I'd had enough. The subject of Mongo's posts had nothing to do with it. And the rules weren't written to protect anybody. When Mongo went off about TO, I received several phone calls and e-mails alerting me to the problem. I shouldn't have to put up with this.
> You didn't write rules when people started taking
> potshots at Drew Jacksich, and I'd argue that Drew's
> done a lot to bring people to this web site than Todd.
> How come Drew wasn't afforded the same
> consideration?
If you recall, Drew responded in kind or sometimes made the initial comment that created the heated discussions. Should I have instituted rules back then? Probably. But instead, I decided to give everyone another chance.
David
