bogus wrote:
Thanks a million, Ron!!!!!!

It does feel surreal to see ones name in print like that...

And yes, I did quit my day job; more on that later.

bogus wrote:
I don't need a new title... Grand Galatic Imperial Poobah is all I need.

bogus wrote:
Erin,

You are one smart kid... er, young lady.

Pretty much all of us have been members of Corvetteforum.com at one point or another. I was on there for nearly 7 years and 40k posts... 30k technical and useful... the other 10k over in off topic.

The point being, they would rather control their content and their members, versus having the right answer. So they banned me for protesting their policies.

I don't need a new title... Grand Galatic Imperial Poobah is all I need.

Thanks!!!

bogus wrote:
I haven't met your Dad in person... but I have always suspected he is best the man covering your back in that dark alley, versus the opposite. That absolute confidence in knowing he won't go anywhere before taking care of the hostile.

The problem with CF was that they were bought out by a corporate entity. That meant their owner and admin left, and the men he had running the show already, were now poised to do the same thing without any guidance. They lost their check and balance.

I was one of four that was banned that day - CentralCoaster and JeffVette two of the others; at the same time, a 4th was banned, but he has moved on to building vintage hot rods.

The bottom line? They were more concerned with us complaining than with the content we were generating. If I complained at a rate of 10 messages per 100, that is a lot. But to them, the 3 or 4 challenges to their authority was more than they could tolerate.

So they banned us and absolutely gutted the C4 Tech area of its brain trust.

zoe6 wrote:

Good for us bad for them. I see a lot of people lose their way and then focus. Lot of egos get in the way of good sound practice and judgement. I would think that if people with credability complained then there must be validity to the stated problem. So the bottom line is they never learned to listen!
Thanks for the comment about dad! Erin

anesthes wrote:
Quote:

zoe6 wrote:

Good for us bad for them. I see a lot of people lose their way and then focus. Lot of egos get in the way of good sound practice and judgement. I would think that if people with credability complained then there must be validity to the stated problem. So the bottom line is they never learned to listen!
Thanks for the comment about dad! Erin

It's a business. IB owns lots of sites. People get pissed off when things change. Fact is, the business model works. IB stock has gone up consistently the past 18 months.

When IB took over both sites, thirden.org and corvetteforum.com, both lost a few tech guys. But both also lots a bulk of the idiots, some of which worshipped and followed the good tech guys. They still have some strong tech folks like LD85, PeteK whom also moderates thirdgen.org, mseven, and tequilaboy.

I don't remember why Andy got banned. I know CC got banned frankly because he was baiting them. The mocking IB avatar was the 'last straw' if I recall.

You also can't piss off the owner. I don't agree with 99.9% of what Andy says tech wise, but if I spent all day calling him out what type of warm welcome should I expect on here?


-- Joe

bogus wrote:
Joe -

Business IS business... but IB handled the take over of CF much like the Nazi take over of Czechslovakia... with brutal efficency.

They were enforcing the rules of CF with authority and no compassion anymore. It lost its fun.

I can dig back into emails, but the bottom line is that they drove good ppl away in an attempt to create their own insular little world.

It was interesting... some weeks back, my name came up in regards to an article I sent into CE... Several ppl were like, "where did he go" and some answered with vague references to this place. Some of the CF members are so myopic, they would rather I come back than they risk visiting here.

I loved the fact ppl missed me, but gee...

Also, the business model for IB is interesting. It's what makes sites like this worth owning and how we get to set our ad rates.

1. Ppl post.
2. Ppl reply.
3. This happens a LOT.
4. Over 10+ years, you get lots of hits and lots of posts.
5. Everytime someone does a search (yahoo or google), your site is always on the first page.
6. Short of epic disaster, that legacy is always there.

This is how IB leverages the sites they own. They paid real good money to get that legacy. They then came in and cleared out the key ppl who created that legacy. I think that is what pisses me off the most. They wanted the legacy, but didn't give a damn about the ppl who created it.

anesthes wrote:
Quote:

zoe6 wrote:

Good for us bad for them. I see a lot of people lose their way and then focus. Lot of egos get in the way of good sound practice and judgement. I would think that if people with credability complained then there must be validity to the stated problem. So the bottom line is they never learned to listen!
Thanks for the comment about dad! Erin

It's a business. IB owns lots of sites. People get pissed off when things change. Fact is, the business model works. IB stock has gone up consistently the past 18 months.

When IB took over both sites, thirden.org and corvetteforum.com, both lost a few tech guys. But both also lots a bulk of the idiots, some of which worshipped and followed the good tech guys. They still have some strong tech folks like LD85, PeteK whom also moderates thirdgen.org, mseven, and tequilaboy.

I don't remember why Andy got banned. I know CC got banned frankly because he was baiting them. The mocking IB avatar was the 'last straw' if I recall.

You also can't piss off the owner. I don't agree with 99.9% of what Andy says tech wise, but if I spent all day calling him out what type of warm welcome should I expect on here?


-- Joe

zoe6 wrote:


So.. Joe I'm confussed.. you don't agree with 99.9% of what Andy says tech wise. I have gotten 100% good advise tech wise.

bogus wrote:
I am not arguing when I ask this question: Are my posts so wrong that you disagree with them that much? Are you that contrary as to wish them to be that wrong? Or was your statement a typo?

I read it and had an issue, but assumed you meant "I don't disagree..."

To be honest, if my tech was that wrong, I don't think I would be running this site...

anesthes wrote:
Quote:

zoe6 wrote:


So.. Joe I'm confussed.. you don't agree with 99.9% of what Andy says tech wise. I have gotten 100% good advise tech wise.

I have no personal problems with him. Nor do I have any intentions or arguing with him.

I have a hard time giving someone tech advice when I really want to say "why the f*** are you spending money on stupid shit like that".. Perhaps the problem is I'm a drag racer.


-- Joe

anesthes wrote:
Quote:

bogus wrote:
I am not arguing when I ask this question: Are my posts so wrong that you disagree with them that much? Are you that contrary as to wish them to be that wrong? Or was your statement a typo?

I read it and had an issue, but assumed you meant "I don't disagree..."

To be honest, if my tech was that wrong, I don't think I would be running this site...

Not "wrong" per say, I just tend to notice I don't agree with your way of thinking. Sometimes you are wrong too. Like when you insisted the TPI cars were bank-to-bank injector firing and I told you they were batch.

Plus you feel the LT1/LT4 is a good engine. I think it was chevy's mid 90s mistake that was pulled from market just after a few years. Does that make you 'wrong' ? No not at all. I just don't agree with you on that.

Maybe 99.9% is not the right number, but I'm 100% convinced that my idea of a built car is not the same as your idea.


-- Joe

bogus wrote:

There is a fine line between "wrong" and "disagree".

bogus wrote:

From a street perspective, yes, the LT1 is a fine engine. From a drag (or even road race) perspective, not so fine.

The performance options are not there for it. But the engine has shown to be durable and reliable, on the street, for lots of miles. More so in many cases than the L98.

bogus wrote:

However, the L98 does have the advantage of being a conventional smallblock. Hense, performance parts are plentiful.

I think the biggest problem is perspective. I am not a drag racer. Period. End of discussion. I do appreciate the hobby, it just isn't me. And as a drag car, the Corvette in general, leaves a lot to be desired. IRS just doesn't cut it for drag racing, and using a car like the Vette or Viper as a drag racer seems like the waste of a damned good chassis... it's like using a 72 Chevelle as an autocrosser, there are better tools for the task at hand.

bogus wrote:

My perspective is simple: A street car that has more guts than stock, but not so much that it loses its drivability. Is there a practical purpose to that 650hp street car? For the most part, I figure that 500hp is a good max point for the C4, perhaps more for the C5 or C6, but not at the expense of drivability (Z06 and ZR1 prove my point). I have driven tempermental performance cars... it really becomes exhausting, and detracts from the goal - a nice drive.

bogus wrote:

Oh, isn't batch and bank-to-bank the same thing? I think we were arguing that all 8 went at once versus 4 at a time. They are all batch until sequential showed up.

bogus wrote:

Perhaps this will clarify my place... and if nothing else we can agree to disagree.