Morris Minor Owners Club

PS Is the link at the bottom of your posts and advertisement in contravention to the website rules icon_confused.gif

Define advertisement in this context? It's certainly not an advertisement for a commercial trader or establishment, and the link definately does not take you to the sales area. Yes, the site is, as the front page currently states, primarily to enable a free method to try and clear low value clutter, but when I get time there will be other content on there. So does linking to the front page constitute an ad, or linking to the ad pages, or linking to a blog (if created), or simply having the word flog in my sig?

While I can't help but feel the vague aroma of persecution from certain quarters because I have once again dared to pass my (worthless for I haven't provided a DNA sample) opinion on the running of things, I am more than happy to alter my sig if it is felt to be outside of the permitted conduct of this forum.

I don't have a problem with it. You are more than welcome to come and clear my garage of clutter any time you wish.

Pete

A little childish don't you think. I have no intention of persecuting anyone, all I am trying to do is protect this website and encourage its correct use by all Minor enthusiasts.

However as you say in your own website, where you are encouraging people to put your link in their signatures, "Please make sure that sigs linking to a sales page are acceptable under the terms and conditions of the forum before doing so, as this site does not intend to spam other forums! "

And the MMOC rules quite clearly state, " No advertising unless in For Sale / Wanted section "

I will not delete this link until I have received the views of the other moderators. However I would advise you that a similar link was recently removed by the poster himself on a voluntary basis.

Is the link at the bottom of your posts an advertisement

That sounds a very fair question to me, and was merely asking for some feedback. It wasn't an accusation and in no way shape or form is it persecution!
Just my 2ps worth - the link is to a site where people can buy or sell car parts. The site owner takes no money, so can't be classed as a trader... There is less reason to class this as advertising than say for example a link to ebay.
Having the link in a signature makes it appear all over the place out of context (not ideal) but judging each case on its merits I've no issue with it for the reasons stated above.

If (at some point in the future) the site becomes a money making scheme where the site owner takes a fee, then this becomes an advert to a traders site, but I doubt that's going to happen.

Judge wrote:A little childish don't you think. I have no intention of persecuting anyone, all I am trying to do is protect this website and encourage its correct use by all Minor enthusiasts.

Funny how last time there was a thread about the state of the board/ club and I posted a couple of small contributions to it, you picked up on those in a very self satisfying way, and again today of all the very emtoive comments about a forum issue it's my (supportive of the mods but faintly critical of the rules themselves) post you choose to pick up on to reignite the flames.

Maybe it is just coincidence, but certainly there were far more critical and even damning comments posted in that thread that you seem to have been happy to let pass by.

[edited out] by me - Packedup

Now, how about a simple clarification rather than peeing contest?

rayofleamington wrote:

Is the link at the bottom of your posts an advertisement

That sounds a very fair question to me, and was merely asking for some feedback. It wasn't an accusation and in no way shape or form is it persecution!

The part about my sig just seemd to come on the back of one of my posts being singled out from many in a rather heated thread - And that's happened in previous threads so it's hard to tell if it's a grudge or coincidence.

Just my 2ps worth - the link is to a site where people can buy or sell car parts. The site owner takes no money, so can't be classed as a trader... There is less reason to class this as advertising than say for example a link to ebay.
Having the link in a signature makes it appear all over the place out of context (not ideal) but judging each case on its merits I've no issue with it for the reasons stated above.

The site is all over the place and out of context at present!

If (at some point in the future) the site becomes a money making scheme where the site owner takes a fee, then this becomes an advert to a traders site, but I doubt that's going to happen.

Because it's so small time and badly designed? ;)

There's no intention to ever charge fees, and there's the intention to expand to a more general site along with the auctions, within bandwidth and space constraints.

I apologise for not being in the best of moods this afternoon, but really, all I'm asking is as someone has picked up on my sig (dfor whatever reason), is it a breach or not? You suggest not, someone suggests is. If it's close to being in breach as it is, but can be made to comply without losing too much immediate meaning, then suggestions as to how to do that are welcome.

You suggest not, someone suggests is. If it's close to being in breach

If you made money from charrging users of the other site, then it's a breach as then it's 'trader advertising'.
Advertising on it's own often gets allowed - I made a lot of 'adverts' for my trip to Africa when i was trying to get sponsorship money, and got no complaints. Equal but opposite an overseas trader came on and advertised his second hand parts business, and got moderated (and got stroppy about it too ).
I'll run this question round the moderators and give you some feedback.

In the mean time - happy moggying, and my hands say BRRRRRRRR it's cold in the garage again!

Packedup wrote:If it's close to being in breach as it is, but can be made to comply without losing too much immediate meaning, then suggestions as to how to do that are welcome.

Although you apparently feel that I have a grudge, this could not be further from the truth. I was simply stating the terms of the website.

However, again referring to the terms, they state, "No advertising unless in For Sale / Wanted section ".

As this is apparently not a commercial site, perhaps the other moderators would agree that it would be more appropriate there.

Out of curiosity does a name in a siggy have to be a link to a web site to be in breach? Or can you write what you like, for example the name of my magazine, Minor Monthly as long as nothing happens if you click it?

i see there are others that openly use there company title in there name which i think they use when people ask regarding parts ,this man has put a lot of effort in this .and im sure at some sort of cost personaly to him. it is there for all to use . i am a newish member and i enjoy the mmoc site . but what a load of nit pickers and wingers .cant do this cant do that .what happend to freedom of speach. get alife

I agree with Bill.

There was a very interesting report on radio 4 today (that's it now I condemned to be thought of as a fuddy duddy) about the changes to the radio 4 message boards. It centred on correspondents complaining about censorship. More than one person said they wanted to say what ever they wanted. The moderator from the BBC tried to explain that there was no value in negative and unpleasant threads and that a decision had been made to change the way they moderate!!
Incidentally the BBC T&Cs make ours look liberal. and run to 9 pages of A4

Thanks Roger. I have tried my hardest to explain the situation on so many occasions that I have lost count. Perhaps we should let those that are so set on having their say, have it, and see how long it is before this website is closed down for good. But then they would complain to the club about that!

Sorry, it's been a long day.

minor restorations@motor sport ltd . he gets away with it ok for some not for others .

RogerRust wrote:I agree with Bill.

There was a very interesting report on radio 4 today (that's it now I condemned to be thought of as a fuddy duddy)

Actually the odd time I listen to the radio it's either Radio 4 or BBC 7 online.

So far as I could tell when making my sig it was not against the rules here. I don't greatly appreciate the attitude with which the matter was raised, nor do I feel that calling someone childish for defending themselves was either called for or actually within the rules.

However, I set the poll to run for 24 hours to provide myself and anyone viewing the topic with a basic idea of general consensus. I am all too aware that democracy doesn't have much sway at times (and being a means of govenment decided by the lowest common denominator that's not always a bad thing), but still I hope the findings are useful or at least interesting, whichever way they go. I also created the thread as a means of raising this as a point to discuss. I don't want to point fingers at commercial traders who sometimes use this board as really I feel if anything they're a little too restricted, especially a notable one who I feel does a lot of good for the Minor community. But there is certainly an oddity that plain words in a sig seem to be acceptable and a link isn't.

I don't wish to post further on this as I feel I've said my piece and now it's in the lap of the gods. There's certainly been some intersting points raised all round and with luck this will set a precedent so the matter can be far more easily dealt with should it arise again.

One final side note - If I posted a topic with a basic ideology and the link to the site in the Sales area, would that be considered acceptable? Personally I felt that my sig was just this side of allowed and far less blatant and spammy than a full post about it - And before anyone says anything I'm doing my best to keep this topic about the nature of the sig, and not the site!

Tony22, for information we do 'not get away with it' it is a requirement of the T and C's that traders make it clear as to who/whom they are. We clearly act within these conditions and our company name does not act as a direct link.
Sorry to say ,but this constant arguing over the T and c's is making this forum an unpleasant place to visit. I have often been repromanded for some of my more contentious postings, but I realise that if this forum is to continue then the new rules need to be followed. I doubt if they will be changed for the minority who have problems with them. I fully understand the confusion and anger from some vocal quaters, but can we now get on, and get over it.

but this constant arguing over the T and c's is making this forum an unpleasant place to visit

Glad I'm not the only one who feels this way! It'd be rather nice to simply move on...

It seems from some of the comments I have received, that some of my responses to postings on this issue were thought to be negative. If you too feel this way then I offer my sincere appologies, and would welcome your feedback by PM. However I can assure you that it was not my intention to be negative in any way, on the contrary I was simply trying to get the messageboard back on a more positive track by trying to bring these arguments about the T's & C's to a close for the time being.

I would now ask that we give the new team a chance to address your concerns, and hopefully bring about a sensible and reasonable interpretation and implementation of a well founded set of messageboard rules that are acceptable to all.

Could I have a description of the ford based disc brake conversion from someone, I need to know to start with if the ford based ones are all the same where ever you buy them, whether 14'' and/or 13'' hubs come with the kit, and are they aluminuim. If the original hubs can be used, and are the components standard ford parts or pattern parts and do the holes in the uprights need opening out. Also is there a choice between ventilated discs and plain, and can they be interchanged. Move this post if you want.

rayofleamington wrote: There is less reason to class this as advertising than say for example a link to ebay.
Having the link in a signature makes it appear all over the place out of context (not ideal) but judging each case on its merits I've no issue with it for the reasons stated above.

I agree - for what that's worth.