Hobson's Choice

[bec5150]

If I were in the pocket of the 'pro-Ford contingent', I would have NO PROBLEM with editing or deleting posts, banning members, etc. BTW, who do you think suggested your name in the first place?

 

What you advocate meets the definition of censorship.

 

Now censorship is justified when it is the only practical means available to achieve a legitimate purpose, but what purpose would this censorship serve? What would be the purpose of deleting posts, warning and banning members here? Keeping things quiet? Sorry, that's not an end that justifies, IMO, the means that would be used. Moreover, it is not the only means available to bring about a more civil forum here.

Not quiet, just civil, organized, and halfway respectful. In other words, moderated.

 

And I, for the life of me, have no idea why my name was brought in or why you would suggest it.

[RichardJensen]

Not quiet, just civil, organized, and halfway respectful. In other words, moderated.

 

And I, for the life of me, have no idea why my name was brought in or why you would suggest it.

As I mentioned, the goal is self-moderation. Not a moderator that is PMing individuals, deleting posts and topics and banning members. In the absence of members being able to moderate their own conduct, the least intrusive alternative is suggested: a public list of members that misbehave, with no other sanction applied to their activity on the board.

 

You were brought into it because I respect your opinions regarding the industry as a whole, which suggest a certain level-headedness and clarity. I might be mistaken though, feel free to correct me if my assumptions are wrong.

Edited November 2, 2006 by RichardJensen

[bec5150]

As I mentioned, the goal is self-moderation. Not a moderator that is PMing individuals, deleting posts and topics and banning members. In the absence of members being able to moderate their own conduct, the least intrusive alternative is suggested: a public list of members that misbehave, with no other sanction applied to their activity on the board.

 

You were brought into it because I respect your opinions regarding the industry as a whole, which suggest a certain level-headedness and clarity. I might be mistaken though, feel free to correct me if my assumptions are wrong.

 

<sarcasm>

You are wrong. I am an anti Ford, pro Honda/Toyota lover who lives in "Little Japan" AKA Ohio and hates unions and Taurus's. I pee on any car with a blue oval.

 

At least that's what many on this board have said, none of which made YOUR list.

 

</sarcasm>

What my point is if you are going to make the decision to name names, name 'em all.

[RichardJensen]

What my point is if you are going to make the decision to name names, name 'em all.

That appears to be the way the votes are heading.

 

I love the story behind the phrase "Hobson's choice":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobsons_choice

 

Tomorrow the sticky which has offended so many will be taken down.

 

If/when a member violates the code of conduct that will be posted in its place, his/her name will be added to the list. After (of course) ignoring a warning.

[DCK]

RICHARD WHY CAN'T YOU SIMPLY ANSWER A QUESTION THAT HAS BEEN ASKED DOZENS OF TIMES BY MANY DIFFERENT PEOPLE, I WANT A CLEAR DIRECT ANSWER AND NOT SOME BS PORPAGANDA YOU SO VERY MUCH LOVE TO WRITE.

 

QUESTION IS:

 

YOU MADE YOUR LITTLE LIST AND GAVE YOUR REASONING AS TO WHY PEOPLE ARE ON IT.

 

WHEN ASKED: WHY ARE PEOPLE LIKE 630LAND AND TOYBOXRV ETC..... AREN'T ON IT........ WHO SO CONSTANTLY DO THE THINGS YOU GAVE FOR THE REASON OF YOUR LIST YOU SO NICELY SEEM TO IGNORE THE QUESTION EVERYTIME, WHY?

 

THE SIMPLE ANSWER IS CLEAR, AND THAT IS BECAUSE YOU'RE BIASED AND SIMPLY MADE A LIST CONSISTING OF PEOPLE WHO HOLD FORD ACCOUNTABLE AND ARE STRICT WITH THEM, NOT FOR THE REASONS YOU GAVE. YOU DID NOT LIST THE PEOPLE WHO USE PERSONAL INSULTS AND TROLL CONSTANTLY THAT ARE BLIND FORD FANBOYS AND BASH ANYONE WHO SAYS ANYTHING NEGATIVE ABOUT FORD AND POSITIVE ABOUT ANOTHER AUTO MANUFACTURER BECAUSE THEY FALL FOR YOUR PROPAGANDA. WHY THE BIASNESS, YOU SO EASILY SEEM TO IGNORE AND RUN FROM THE DOZENS OF POSTS BY MANY DIFFERENT FORUMERS CALLING YOU OUT ON THE SUBJECT.

 

ITS TIME FOR YOU TO COME OF YOU HIGH HORSE, COME DOWN THE LATTER AND FACE THE FACTS AND SIMPLY SAY:

 

"I RICHARD JENSEN AM BIASED AGAINST PEOPLE WHO ARE STRICT WITH FOR"

 

WHY DON'T YOU JUST SAY IT, DON'T HIDE FROM WHO YOU ARE, YOU CAN'T ADMIT WHY YOU TOOK YOUR ACTIONS AND EVERYTIME YOUR CALLED UPON TO DO SO YOU IGNORE IT AND IN RETURN PLAYED UP SO MANY PATHETIC ACTS TO SNEAK YOUR WAY OUT OF THE MESS YOU CREATED BY BEING SO BIAS.

 

IT IS ABOUT TIME YOU MAN UP OR TEAR DOWN YOUR LIST AND FEEL THE NEED TO CREATE ONE DO SO WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND BIASNESS WHICH OBVIOUSLY WOULD NEVER HAPPEN.

 

NOW LET'S BE REAL YOUR EITHER GOING TO IGNORE MY ABOVE POST OR SIMPLY SAY "I CAN DO WHAT I WISH AND DON'T HAVE TO EXPLAIN" WHICH IS TRUE, BUT IT WOULD GO TO SHOW WHAT KIND OF BIASED PERSON YOU ARE WHO CAN'T MAN UP AND ADMIT WHO YOU ARE.......................

Edited November 2, 2006 by DCK

[ZanatWork]

Yeah, the fastest way to have an UNBACKABLE debate is to tell someone else what they think...you do know that, right?

[RichardJensen]

Yeah, the fastest way to have an UNBACKABLE debate is to tell someone else what they think...you do know that, right?

It would probably be best to ignore DCK's post..............

[kyle]

RICHARD WHY CAN'T YOU SIMPLY ANSWER A QUESTION THAT HAS BEEN ASKED DOZENS OF TIMES BY MANY DIFFERENT PEOPLE, I WANT A CLEAR DIRECT ANSWER AND NOT SOME BS PORPAGANDA YOU SO VERY MUCH LOVE TO WRITE.

 

QUESTION IS:

 

YOU MADE YOUR LITTLE LIST AND GAVE YOUR REASONING AS TO WHY PEOPLE ARE ON IT.

 

WHEN ASKED: WHY ARE PEOPLE LIKE 630LAND AND TOYBOXRV ETC..... AREN'T ON IT........ WHO SO CONSTANTLY DO THE THINGS YOU GAVE FOR THE REASON OF YOUR LIST YOU SO NICELY SEEM TO IGNORE THE QUESTION EVERYTIME, WHY?

 

THE SIMPLE ANSWER IS CLEAR, AND THAT IS BECAUSE YOU'RE BIASED AND SIMPLY MADE A LIST CONSISTING OF PEOPLE WHO HOLD FORD ACCOUNTABLE AND ARE STRICT WITH THEM, NOT FOR THE REASONS YOU GAVE. YOU DID NOT LIST THE PEOPLE WHO USE PERSONAL INSULTS AND TROLL CONSTANTLY THAT ARE BLIND FORD FANBOYS AND BASH ANYONE WHO SAYS ANYTHING NEGATIVE ABOUT FORD AND POSITIVE ABOUT ANOTHER AUTO MANUFACTURER BECAUSE THEY FALL FOR YOUR PROPAGANDA. WHY THE BIASNESS, YOU SO EASILY SEEM TO IGNORE AND RUN FROM THE DOZENS OF POSTS BY MANY DIFFERENT FORUMERS CALLING YOU OUT ON THE SUBJECT.

 

ITS TIME FOR YOU TO COME OF YOU HIGH HORSE, COME DOWN THE LATTER AND FACE THE FACTS AND SIMPLY SAY:

 

"I RICHARD JENSEN AM BIASED AGAINST PEOPLE WHO ARE STRICT WITH FOR"

 

WHY DON'T YOU JUST SAY IT, DON'T HIDE FROM WHO YOU ARE, YOU CAN'T ADMIT WHY YOU TOOK YOUR ACTIONS AND EVERYTIME YOUR CALLED UPON TO DO SO YOU IGNORE IT AND IN RETURN PLAYED UP SO MANY PATHETIC ACTS TO SNEAK YOUR WAY OUT OF THE MESS YOU CREATED BY BEING SO BIAS.

 

IT IS ABOUT TIME YOU MAN UP OR TEAR DOWN YOUR LIST AND FEEL THE NEED TO CREATE ONE DO SO WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND BIASNESS WHICH OBVIOUSLY WOULD NEVER HAPPEN.

 

NOW LET'S BE REAL YOUR EITHER GOING TO IGNORE MY ABOVE POST OR SIMPLY SAY "I CAN DO WHAT I WISH AND DON'T HAVE TO EXPLAIN" WHICH IS TRUE, BUT IT WOULD GO TO SHOW WHAT KIND OF BIASED PERSON YOU ARE WHO CAN'T MAN UP AND ADMIT WHO YOU ARE.......................

 

 

heh how about the ford econoline sales!!!

[Roadrunner]

I vote against allowing bec150 as a moderator if he will censor posts or penalize people for funny verbiage.

 

See other post with a poll; I think "Fuck!" is leading.

[NLPRacing]

I vote against allowing bec150 as a moderator if he will censor posts or penalize people for funny verbiage.

 

See other post with a poll; I think "Fuck!" is leading.

 

I second that

 

And actually, "George W Bush" is leading by one vote.

[bec5150]

I just think there's a more mature, clean, adult way to run this fuckin show.

 

<grin>

[Bluecon]

Quote RJ

 

"DCK: A recent member who is not uniformly negative, but who advances arguments without the benefit of external references. If you do not accept his opinions at face value, you will be insulted by him.

 

Bluecon: Bluecon blames Bill Ford, Jr. for everything, and he thinks that Chrysler is either better run, or 'better able to weather the storm', depending on the day it is.

 

Footballfan: It's very simple. Footballfan hates Mark Fields.

 

Sixcav: Sixcav likes to stir the pot. That's all you need to know about him. That and he doesn't believe in paragraphs. If you like to read the comments of someone interested only in bringing matters to a froth, by all means, read his posts.

 

pcsario: Best summed up by this: "everything in Europe is better". You don't need to read any of his posts, if you can memorize that four word mantra. It is the key to all of them.

 

taxman100: Does not approve of Ford hiring or benefits policies, and will find a way to bend most topics to this subject. He's a fan of the panthers, but has at least enough clarity to recognize that Toyota builds a good car.

 

g48150: An expert who worked for a tank factory that employed 1000 people, and who made a rough introduction to and exit from Ford Motor. He has most of the answers to Ford's current problems, and they revolve around building only tiny cars and big trucks."

 

What I don't get is what most of those people did to arrive on this list. Now myself and Sixcav I can understand. Ford fans get angry when I am right all the time.

 

The rest mostly just state their points with no profanity or anything like that. Taxman 100? Very polished and articulate. His only sin being he likes the Panthers and has criticized Ford.

 

The only thing these people have in common is they have disagreed with RJ and criticized Ford.

Will that be the criteria for recieving the terrible humiliation of an electronic public flogging?

Are Ford cheerleaders exempt from this punishment?

[RichardJensen]

the terrible humiliation of an electronic public flogging?

Fortunately, I never signed the Geneva Conventions.....

 

[kyle]

Fortunately, I never signed the Geneva Conventions.....

 

 

 

Nor did George Bush...but that is for another board:)

[Mark B. Morrow]

Quote RJ

 

"DCK: A recent member who is not uniformly negative, but who advances arguments without the benefit of external references. If you do not accept his opinions at face value, you will be insulted by him.

 

Bluecon: Bluecon blames Bill Ford, Jr. for everything, and he thinks that Chrysler is either better run, or 'better able to weather the storm', depending on the day it is.

 

Sixcav: Sixcav likes to stir the pot. That's all you need to know about him. That and he doesn't believe in paragraphs. If you like to read the comments of someone interested only in bringing matters to a froth, by all means, read his posts.

 

 

What I don't get is what most of those people did to arrive on this list. Now myself and Sixcav I can understand. Ford fans get angry when I am right all the time.

 

The problem is that you are not "right all the time".

 

When other list members call you on stating opinion as fact or failing to back up your argumnets you get testy.

 

Everyone on the list should lighten up! The free exchange of ideas is what makes this site and the USA great. We don't have to agree with eachother or even like the opinions expressed.

 

Things did get a bit out of hand during the months we experimented with the "Non-automoitve topic" posts. I didn't agree with some of the opinions expressed but I didn't take personal offense. I ahd some great give and take with Hemisbc, Niteflight and others and I even learned some things from some people I don't agree with politically.

 

Unfortunately, the experiment broke down when some made everything a personal attack of their adversary's intellectual abilities, mental stability or sexual interests. The posts became boring snipping back and forth with very little cogent thought. Kind of like the old Monty Python skit where the guy pays for an argument and just gets insults in response to his attempts to argue a point.

 

Now the forum has returned to the subject of cars by and large and Ford in particular. So here is a thought, I don't believe that any of us is Always Right. One of the hazzards of e-mail/instant messaging as communication is the ability to hit send before really thinking about what is written. Let's try to take eachother and the posts a little less seriously.

 

If some think Ford can't do anything right and its all over but the burial, some of us disagree. If you make statements as fact and you are challenged to present support for your position, don't retaliate by accusing others of stupidity for asking you to provide proof.

 

As far as I am aware, no one who posts here is actually running Ford (Bill? Alan? you out there?). Our opinions are in the end just opinions.

Edited November 2, 2006 by Mark B. Morrow

[ZanatWork]

What I don't get is what most of those people did to arrive on this list. Now myself and Sixcav I can understand. Ford fans get angry when I am right all the time.

 

 

I'm trying to remember any time that happened without much success. I have seen you try to spin your points into the direction of "correct", but I can't recall any real success.

[Bluecon]

The problem is that you are not "right all the time".

 

When other list members call you on stating opinion as fact or failing to back up your argumnets you get testy.

 

Give me an example and I will explain.

 

True.

Only right 98.6% of the time.

That is just an estimate. I tried to lowball it.

 

 

 

 

I'm trying to remember any time that happened without much success. I have seen you try to spin your points into the direction of "correct", but I can't recall any real success.

OK. here we go.

 

Predicted the failure of the 500.

Predicted the Fusion would not be a great seller.

Told you to buy Ford stock just before it went up.

Said Chrysler was in better shape then Ford and the 3rd quarter numbers would prove it.

Predicted a 6 billion loss for Ford in the 3rd quarter.

Predicted Ford was heading for its' current situation.

 

Lots more but I am tired of this.

[Edstock]

Actually, maybe things should be left as they are.

 

BON just wouldn't be the same without the vituperative brain-farts. Makes you appreciate lucid perspicacity when it is posted.

 

If the restive were absent, then we would lose all those eager contestants for

 

[pcsario]

The only thing these people have in common is they have disagreed with RJ and criticized Ford.

Will that be the criteria for recieving the terrible humiliation of an electronic public flogging?

Are Ford cheerleaders exempt from this punishment?

 

Kinda funny, isn't it?

[Bluecon]

When other list members call you on stating opinion as fact or failing to back up your argumnets you get testy.

 

Give me an example and I will explain.

When you going to back up you're argument? Are you getting testy?

[RichardJensen]

When you going to back up you're argument? Are you getting testy?

"Ford pays a royalty to Toyota on every Escape"

[Roadrunner]

Actually, wouldn't it be every Escape with hybrid technology?

[Guest Sixcav]

What the do you muther have to be so god upset about! You buncha whinny and further more you make me wanna . lol

 

Crap, bec got to my post before it even posted. lol

 

Didn't someone post the link proving that both Ford and Toyota got their hybrid tech from the same private company? I'm sure I saw that around here somewhere.

 

I personally still firmly believe that if everyone here met face to face, toss in some grilled steaks, cold bear and the company of some fine young ladies that everything would be alright. Well unless Lemon showed up, that would be bad, but otherwise we'd be alright. So when you're posting here, just pretend you smell the soothing aroma of grilled T-Bone and perfume. lol

[bec5150]

What the do you muther have to be so god upset about! You buncha whinny and further more you make me wanna . lol

 

Crap, bec got to my post before it even posted. lol

 

Didn't someone post the link proving that both Ford and Toyota got their hybrid tech from the same private company? I'm sure I saw that around here somewhere.

 

I personally still firmly believe that if everyone here met face to face, toss in some grilled steaks, cold bear and the company of some fine young ladies that everything would be alright. Well unless Lemon showed up, that would be bad, but otherwise we'd be alright. So when you're posting here, just pretend you smell the soothing aroma of grilled T-Bone and perfume. lol

I got news for ya, Six. I'm a miltary guy like you (8 years Desert Storm and Shield) and love to tilt a few back. But my guess is that the main culprits on this board are either too young to drink, or too scared to say the sh*t they say on this board face to face.

[Guest Sixcav]

I got news for ya, Six. I'm a miltary guy like you (8 years Desert Storm and Shield) and love to tilt a few back. But my guess is that the main culprits on this board are either too young to drink, or too scared to say the sh*t they say on this board face to face.

 

Probably right Bec. By the way, First Team! baby. lol Enlisted or Commissioned?