Closed Tuning Thread .....One comment by Byron
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,584
From: North Pole
Rep Power: 173
Originally Posted by Alex
People started calling a certain person a liar. That person got pissed (understandable) and admonished a lot that was said about he and his 996TT.
Chad's motivation and intent behind starting the thread were, I believe, for the good. Delete the thread? I don't know. Maybe moderate it a little better (this statement is not a personal attack) - at the risk of being faced with the accusations of censorship and possibly (god forbid) taking sides. Is it possible to have an open discussion about different tuning methods without it turning into a d!¢k-sucking/swinging event? Some who were attacked had on many occasions given and shown a lot of respect to 'other' tuners and their results. So why, I ask? Why? I would be embarrassed, if I were one of the tuners discussed, at some of the comments and attitudes of my customers who, like it or not, are representing my company and 'promoting' (used loosely) my product/s.
Lost a lot of respect for some participants in that thread.
Chad's motivation and intent behind starting the thread were, I believe, for the good. Delete the thread? I don't know. Maybe moderate it a little better (this statement is not a personal attack) - at the risk of being faced with the accusations of censorship and possibly (god forbid) taking sides. Is it possible to have an open discussion about different tuning methods without it turning into a d!¢k-sucking/swinging event? Some who were attacked had on many occasions given and shown a lot of respect to 'other' tuners and their results. So why, I ask? Why? I would be embarrassed, if I were one of the tuners discussed, at some of the comments and attitudes of my customers who, like it or not, are representing my company and 'promoting' (used loosely) my product/s.
Lost a lot of respect for some participants in that thread.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 567
From: Oceania
Rep Power: 64
Originally Posted by Byronmaui
Red 9 forget about my comment. I sped read your comment like an idiot. Can't even spell must be this centipede bite..lol
Aloha
Byron
Aloha
Byron
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,803
From: Missing in action
Rep Power: 214
Originally Posted by Red 9
By way of contrast- a thread of real garbage unlike any I have seen on 6Speed was RenntechV12 started on getting beaten. Absoloutely no fault of RTV12- he hardly posted-- but hijacked into trash talk territory by "visitors?"
Craig
Moderator
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 22,235
Rep Power: 1227
Originally Posted by Alex
People started calling a certain person a liar. That person got pissed (understandable) and admonished a lot that was said about he and his 996TT.
Chad's motivation and intent behind starting the thread were, I believe, for the good. Delete the thread? I don't know. Maybe moderate it a little better (this statement is not a personal attack) - at the risk of being faced with the accusations of censorship and possibly (god forbid) taking sides. Is it possible to have an open discussion about different tuning methods without it turning into a d!¢k-sucking/swinging event? Some who were attacked had on many occasions given and shown a lot of respect to 'other' tuners and their results. So why, I ask? Why? I would be embarrassed, if I were one of the tuners discussed, at some of the comments and attitudes of my customers who, like it or not, are representing my company and 'promoting' (used loosely) my product/s.
Lost a lot of respect for some participants in that thread.
Chad's motivation and intent behind starting the thread were, I believe, for the good. Delete the thread? I don't know. Maybe moderate it a little better (this statement is not a personal attack) - at the risk of being faced with the accusations of censorship and possibly (god forbid) taking sides. Is it possible to have an open discussion about different tuning methods without it turning into a d!¢k-sucking/swinging event? Some who were attacked had on many occasions given and shown a lot of respect to 'other' tuners and their results. So why, I ask? Why? I would be embarrassed, if I were one of the tuners discussed, at some of the comments and attitudes of my customers who, like it or not, are representing my company and 'promoting' (used loosely) my product/s.
Lost a lot of respect for some participants in that thread.
No problem here with constructive criticism. There was no way that thread could have been moderated in a good manner. The replies were being posted far faster than I could respond.
I knew it would be difficult when it started. I was hoping against the odds that others would realize what they had to do in order to start and keep the participation of the turner/engine builders. Instead, personal attacks convinced these people to stop or just stay clear. Frankly, I don't blame them.
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,584
From: North Pole
Rep Power: 173
Originally Posted by Craig
Agreed! Its ironic that the RTV12 thread, rife with invectives and childish antics unrelated to Porsches, was allowed to flourish without limitation, but this thread was shut down and removed in the blink of an eye. I did not read this thread, so I do not know the precise reasons for its removal, but I suspect personailities played a significant role.
Craig
Craig
I agree with CJV... it was going very fast... and I agree in closing the thread...
there was nothing useful at that point... just year long drama that didn't go away....
markski
there was nothing useful at that point... just year long drama that didn't go away....
markski
__________________
2001 996TT 3.6L and stock ECU
9.66 seconds @ 147.76 mph 1/4 mile click to view
160 mph @ 9.77 seconds in 1/4 mile click to view
50% OFF ON PORSCHE ECU TUNING BLACK FRIDAY SPECIAL
2001 996TT 3.6L and stock ECU
9.66 seconds @ 147.76 mph 1/4 mile click to view
160 mph @ 9.77 seconds in 1/4 mile click to view
50% OFF ON PORSCHE ECU TUNING BLACK FRIDAY SPECIAL
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 567
From: Oceania
Rep Power: 64
Originally Posted by cjv
Alex,
No problem here with constructive criticism. There was no way that thread could have been moderated in a good manner. The replies were being posted far faster than I could respond.
I knew it would be difficult when it started. I was hoping against the odds that others would realize what they had to do in order to start and keep the participation of the turner/engine builders. Instead, personal attacks convinced these people to stop or just stay clear. Frankly, I don't blame them.
No problem here with constructive criticism. There was no way that thread could have been moderated in a good manner. The replies were being posted far faster than I could respond.
I knew it would be difficult when it started. I was hoping against the odds that others would realize what they had to do in order to start and keep the participation of the turner/engine builders. Instead, personal attacks convinced these people to stop or just stay clear. Frankly, I don't blame them.
As observation-- not everyone is sitting on computer 24/7 so it will take time to contribute-- presumption is that the quality contributors are actually busy!Or maybe to smart!!
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,163
From: Earth
Rep Power: 91
There is no harm in letting tuners and customers speak openly, even all in one thread. It is an opportunity for the customers to make an informed decision, not only about the tuners' technical abilities but more importantly about their maturity (from a tech, personal and debating skills perspective) I think.
I regret that Todd K's post was deleted in the bunch as it held many true statements and facts that are often overlooked re. engine vs. chassis dyno and high vs. low boost tuning philosophy (if it is really one!). Too bad we did not get time to hear the other side's perspective, in a value added way.
I also wanted to comment on Stephen's IC efficiency test (I think it was the same thread).
I hope this picks up again in a good way with tuners not shying away from posting conflicting POV's, I am sure it will stay very civilized.
I regret that Todd K's post was deleted in the bunch as it held many true statements and facts that are often overlooked re. engine vs. chassis dyno and high vs. low boost tuning philosophy (if it is really one!). Too bad we did not get time to hear the other side's perspective, in a value added way.
I also wanted to comment on Stephen's IC efficiency test (I think it was the same thread).
I hope this picks up again in a good way with tuners not shying away from posting conflicting POV's, I am sure it will stay very civilized.
Moderator
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 22,235
Rep Power: 1227
Originally Posted by MARKSKI
I agree with CJV... it was going very fast... and I agree in closing the thread...
there was nothing useful at that point... just year long drama that didn't go away....
markski
there was nothing useful at that point... just year long drama that didn't go away....
markski
The two things I regret is losing Todd's fantistic reply and Porsche PhD starting to post and when I encourage him the rely was like no way you think I'm nuts. I knew the thread was a joke after that.
All I wanted was to learn why tuners in their opinion did certain things, instead it appears many were more interested in who knows what.
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,584
From: North Pole
Rep Power: 173
Originally Posted by Jean
There is no harm in letting tuners and customers speak openly, even all in one thread. It is an opportunity for the customers to make an informed decision, not only about the tuners' technical abilities but more importantly about their maturity (from a tech, personal and debating skills perspective) I think.
I regret that Todd K's post was deleted in the bunch as it held many true statements and facts that are often overlooked re. engine vs. chassis dyno and high vs. low boost tuning philosophy (if it is really one!). Too bad we did not get time to hear the other side's perspective, in a value added way.
I also wanted to comment on Stephen's IC efficiency test (I think it was the same thread).
I hope this picks up again in a good way with tuners not shying away from posting conflicting POV's, I am sure it will stay very civilized.
I regret that Todd K's post was deleted in the bunch as it held many true statements and facts that are often overlooked re. engine vs. chassis dyno and high vs. low boost tuning philosophy (if it is really one!). Too bad we did not get time to hear the other side's perspective, in a value added way.
I also wanted to comment on Stephen's IC efficiency test (I think it was the same thread).
I hope this picks up again in a good way with tuners not shying away from posting conflicting POV's, I am sure it will stay very civilized.