Policy question for Ron....

Hi Ron, quick question for you regarding forum policy with regard to commercial vendors using the forum for the promotion of their products or services. To be specific, are there limits upon posting content or presence/utilization of the forum for commercial purposes by vendors associated with GT40 replicas? I see a lot of this passes for just collegial chatter but the underlying motivation is often sales/marketing.

In contrast, I've always been impressed by guys like Roy Sayles (US CAV dealer) who is conspicuously quiet on the forum so as not to be interpreted as using the forum for his own commercial purposes.

Just curious. Thanks in advance.

Cliff,

I think that Ron answered this already. While I can't answer for Ron, I can say that in the past, about the only thing that was kind of forbidden was for one vendor to start bashing another. Then the question came up "what if there is something dangerous?" In that case, we all collectively decided that if anyone was aware of a condition/situation where anyone else's life or limb was put in jeopardy, they were basically obligated to at least raise the question of a possibility of danger. This is kind of a grey area for a vendor to call on another vendor, but if he does, he'd better have some pretty compelling, documented proof.

That said, to my knowledge, no vendor has been kicked off the forum. One or two have decided to stop posting, but that was thier decision. (I was abscent there for a while, so I may have missed something during my hiatus.) Additionally, I can count the number or members who have been booted on one hand, and I can tell you that they were given a lot of latitude before that happened.

Beyond this, since it is a free forum, I guess each vendor must decide for him or her self how they will interact with the GT40 enthusiast community. It is sort of like a supply and demand thing effecting prices: if one chooses an approach that is irritating to the community, one's business will suffer; if one chooses an approach that is so low keyed as to be overlooked by the community, one's business will suffer. As in all things, a balance is what is needful, IMHO of course.

Hi Cliff,

there is no hard and fast rule such as "if you post more than one time per day in support of your products you are kicked out" or anything like that (besides the spammers that get deleted on sight). The forum has, and will continue to be, fairly open. Some manufacturers are active and support their products on the site frequently and the side effect will be that they will be exposed more. Some representatives, for example Roy, don't post much at all on the forum and certainly by no means would tax anyone for advertising. While there is no hard and fast rule, that isn't to say I wouldn't kick one off for excessive posting with regard to their product. I suppose I'd say "I haven't seen excessive abuse yet, but I'll know it when I see it". If you feel someone is breaking the unwritten rule by all means let me know.

Certainly I've seen some supporting manufacturers and agents posting on threads making folks aware of their cars. They are certainly advertising. I've also seen some manufacturers that have useful information on a variety of topics that they post on. There are folks can use that information but along with it will come the exposure their company will receive via the avatar, web link, and signature. That isn't necessarily a bad thing in my opinion, as long as it isn't excessive.

One thing you must bear in mind is that the forum would not be here if not for the manufacturers and advertising. Costs drove us to start accepting banner ads because user support was not enough to keep the forum afloat (it was up until a couple years ago). We definitely still need user support for sure, it covers approximately half the costs (I need to check that for 2006), but the advertisers are covering the other half. I'd like to say I manage the forum because I enjoy doing it, and that is 100% true. But if were to cost me say $7,800 a year to do it, on top of my time, I'd have to say I wouldn't do it - I simply don't have the free time to donate, which works out to about 25 to 40 mins a day, on average, dealing with forum issues etc.

All in all I think having manufacturers on the site is a good thing. Sure, there can be negative implications of it - manufacturers arguing, infighting, XYZ vs. ASD, and all of that, but it is rare to have a chance to talk directly with the folks that built or designed your coffee maker, much less your toy that you're hot shoeing around the track at a buck fifty. We're all different though and folks have different thresholds for "advertising" so remember to use the User Reputation System to affect people you feel are excessively posting or incorrectly posting or as a last resort the "Ignore User" feature (click their name, -> View Public Profile, then click "Add XYZ to your Ignore List"). Please feel free to discuss the issue here (I think I'll move the topic to the Forum Suggestion forum though) and I'll certainly help if we have a problem I've missed.


Thanks,
Ron

PS-Lynn, I just saw your post - you made it while I was pasting mine in - and it is 100% right on target, thanks.

Hi Gents,

Thank you, it's clear - makes total sense and I understand the underlying logic. I ask for the benefit of myself, the fellow members here and the various commercial entities who utilize the forum both in a formal commercial sense (as a sponsor, for example) and in a non-formal manner (soft marketing/sales via casual conversation).

Policy issues are tough because they are interpreted differently by those with a vested interest in the health of the organization. The reputation system is one of the reasons I joined. It promotes positive interaction and provides quiet incentive for functioning within the scope of reason. Let's see how it works over the course of time. If a vendor or forum participant is being inappropriate and operating outside of the framework of policy or reason, the private message system may provide the opportunity to channel dialog into a less volatile environment.

I have a rule in my own company rule where I won't let employees discuss policy or critical decisions over email or the internet. It's much easier to discuss policy and convey a collegial nature when setting down over a cup of coffee. Maybe we can do that someday if there is a GT40s.com convention.

Steve