Biased Rules tainting Autopia

J

joburnet

New member
Please move this to the correct forum if needed. There used to be a forum about the website but it looks like it's been removed.



First of all let me state that I have gotten a great deal out of autopia and used things learned from this site to help me start my own detailing business. I have great respect for DavidB and other members of the forum and I think autopia.org is one of the best websites I have ever used. I also recommend autopia.org to many of my customers that have questions about detailing.



I was looking through the rules and found this:



"To offer added support to our Sponsors, we would ask that you refrain from overly recommending non-Sponsor businesses, products, or services that are in direct competition to our Sponsors in your thread replies. If you wish to offer another source to our Members, please use the PM option to give the information to a members in a private manner. "





This seems to go against the idea of autopia.org which is a forum for members to freely discuss the art of detailing. It seems to me that if I find a business that I like a lot then I should be able to recommend them to as many people on this forum as I would like. Not because I have an interest in the company, but because my recommendation is meant to help a fellow member out.



I have no problem with sponsors, and the way sponsoring is done seems to be done very well on this site except for the rule I quoted above. I have never seen that rule enforced but I really don't think it should be there as it unfairly biases the entire site toward the sponsors.



Please post your opinion on here and perhaps we will see a change.
 
Oh boy :rolleyes:



Please do keep in mind that this forum is run by a very generous man, who pays to bring this forum to you free of charge almost entirely out of pocket. That licenses him to makes any rule he sees fit.



Also, perhaps you overlooked the word overly in that passage:



To offer added support to our Sponsors, we would ask that you refrain from overly recommending non-Sponsor businesses, products, or services that are in direct competition to our Sponsors in your thread replies. If you wish to offer another source to our Members, please use the PM option to give the information to a members in a private manner. "





At least to me, that does not read that you cannot discuss other vendors/products/businesses who aren't sponsors. It is just that it is going to be very frowned upon if you get into a habit of plugging them often in your posts.



Is this 100% unbiased? Well, may be technically not, but few, if any, organized policies and regulations truly are if you analyze them enough.





Despite this policy, Autopia is still very open to discussion of the complete spectrum of products and vendors available to the detailing junkie. The policy has been posted for a long time without incident which apparently meant no one had a problem with it. I'm sorry, but I don't see the grounds for the complaint. :nixweiss: Unless, of course, there is someone with something to gain from the policy being revoked.
 
Bill D said:
Oh boy :rolleyes:



Please do keep in mind that this forum is run by a very generous man, who pays to bring this forum to you free of charge almost entirely out of pocket. That licenses him to makes any rule he sees fit.
Click to expand...



I agree that autopia is a great thing that I have benefited greatly from it as I said in my first post. My point is that the rule does slightly bias autopia and the whole point of autopia is for it to be unbiased.



I would also like to say that I have nothing to gain from this rule being changed except to make sure that autopia remains unbiased.
 
By all means, e-mail David B. If that policy is going to chance, it's going to be his decision. Once sponsorship takes place on any kind of forum, there's always the chance that it can't be 100% purely unbiased. Perhaps you can outline for him a game plan that will satisfy your requirements for being unbiased.



Heck, if a forum was completely sponsor free, that does not equate to being unbiased either. In that instance, the bias is going to take place through who frequents the site and what the site's owner allows being posted.



All I'm saying is its pretty tough to keep something honest-to-goodness, absolutely bias free no matter who sponsors and who participates. Despite all of that, Autopia continues to be a pretty good place for discussing a great variety of all topics relating to detailing.
 
This rule may exist but never enforced. IMHO DavidB is very good about allowing "ALL" products to be discussed in "HIS" forum.

Unlike many forums, posts that do not follow the company line (sponsor bias) are never deleted here at Autopia without explaination or for a good reason (Spam).



Freedom of speech, not spamming, definitely exist here at Autopia. :bow



Just my 5 year observation. Take it for what you feel it is worth. :usa
 
Bill D said:
Autopia continues to be a pretty good place for discussing a great variety of all topics relating to detailing.
Click to expand...
Its actually leaps and bounds ahead of most other detailing forums in operation today.....David and his quiver of moderators keep this place in pretty good check. Last time I had "strayed" I was politely informed of my errors, and I didnt feel attacked....

I too, hope Autopia keeps its current doors open for all to discuss matter and materials, openly and freely, without overly recommending items....Of course, thats in its members hands as well......

Ive said it before, "hats off to David" for bringing it all possible to over 25,000 members......
 
I emailed davidB with a link to this thread so hopefully he'll see it and think about it. I have no problem with sponsorship and as I said I think it's done well on this site.



I just don't like a rule that biases what members are allowed to say. I think that members should be allowed to freely recommend whomever they want as much as they want.
 
I don't remember seeing that rule before, any idea how long it has been in there? I don't remember it from last time there was a big fuss about the rules and David posted them up. In any event, I don't recall seeing anyone's posts being curtailed for promoting non-sponsor businesses. As Bill noted, bias can creep in in many ways, that being said, some detailing sites which are corporately sponsored or have a lot of sponsor activity can seem like mutual admiration societies.



IMO, the thing that might happen with sponsorship is a sort of polite self-editing, like if you went to a party, and the host had bad breath or his food choices were poor. Do you tell him? Or just pretend everything is ok so as not to insult the host? And if you tell him, can you do it without hurting his feelings so that he doesn't want to "sponsor" parties anymore, or doesn't invite you.



I think the community has been doing a pretty good job walking the line with this, and hope we can keep this the place where polite, civil discussion can occur, regardless of the (detailing) topic.
 
Well, I'm truly to sorry to hear that but at the same time people have to realize, there is not absolute freedom of speech on these discussion boards. They are private properly and we are guests.



Here on Autopia you are allowed to recommend whomever you wish. There is a limit to that and any forum administrator will clearly see the need for the limit. Nearly everyone here recognizes that and has no issue with it.



To be honest with you, at least in the world of detailing, I think you are going to be hard pressed to find otherwise on any other thoroughly moderated site. This is for the same reason.



Other than blatant spammers, I don't think we have ever reprimanded anyone here for overly recommending something. I think the vast majority of the community is in check with regards to this.



Why this is a concern to you is beyond me as is why so randomly out of the blue you decided to bring it up. :hmm
 
Bill D said:
Well, I'm truly to sorry to hear that but at the same time people have to realize, there is not absolute freedom of speech on these discussion boards. They are private properly and we are guests.



Here on Autopia you are allowed to recommend whomever you wish. There is a limit to that and any forum administrator will clearly see the need for the limit. Nearly everyone here recognizes that and has no issue with it.



To be honest with you, at least in the world of detailing, I think you are going to be hard pressed to find otherwise on any other thoroughly moderated site. This is for the same reason.



Other than blatant spammers, I don't think we have ever reprimanded anyone here for overly recommending something. I think the vast majority of the community is in check with regards to this.



Why this is a concern to you is beyond me as is why so randomly out of the blue you decided to bring it up. :hmm
Click to expand...





I do think that autopia is still the best and unbiased place to find detailing information on the web. I would also like to see it stay that way.



I think that david does what he thinks is best for the community while still trying to make a little money at it. I think this rule is simply unnecessary.



As for bringing it up out of the blue it is because this is the first time I have seen this rule.



I don't mean to be rude but I resent your comment insinuating that I have some alternative motive for bringing this up. I have been an active member of this forum for about two years now and I have never tried to do anything shady.
 
I simply commented about the oddity of it being addressed after having been part of the rules for quite a while now.



Well, maybe he'll side with you and remove it. When we worded the rules, we decided the passage was a necessary formality.



Everyone on the mod team is commited to make sure Autopia remains "unbiased". Just to note though, that does not mean being able( nor wanting) to control the preferences of the members.
 
I think that rule may have sprouted as a result of the Chemical Guys fiasco. IIRC, certain member(s) were known to be overly promoting them as a source of detailing supplies, and I can understand how that is 1) annoying and 2) unfair to the sponsors.



joburnet, I can understand where you are coming from, but as BillD pointed out, we don't pay for this forum, so it's all in DavidB's hands as to whether or not he wants to run it a certain way.
 
Joburnet....I think you are reading into this rule alittle too much IMO. I feel that it is set up to prevent the constant plugging of products by certain individuals or non-sponsors. I have never seen DavidB prevent the open discussion of detailing products. However, when certain products are plugged time and time again and it is apparent that the basis for the discussions are for material gain then they will be curtailed.



In my experience this forum is very open to discussions as compared to many other forums.
 
Pats300zx said:
Joburnet....I think you are reading into this rule alittle too much IMO. I feel that it is set up to prevent the constant plugging of products by certain individuals or non-sponsors. I have never seen DavidB prevent the open discussion of detailing products. However, when certain products are plugged time and time again and it is apparent that the basis for the discussions are for material gain then they will be curtailed.



In my experience this forum is very open to discussions as compared to many other forums.
Click to expand...





That has been my expirence as well so maybe I should just leave it alone. I do think it's a step in the wrong direction though.
 
David has been more than fair allowing members to discuss what they like on this forum. Don't forget it's his money, his time and his love of detailing that keeps this website up for our enjoyment and knowledge!



One thing I have noticed is that everyone is aware of the rules and the tone here is pretty civil, unlke other detailing boards that I have visited.
 
joburnet said:
That has been my expirence as well so maybe I should just leave it alone. I do think it's a step in the wrong direction though.
Click to expand...





Respectfully, I would advise that. This apparent "step in the wrong direction" has been nothing of the sort since it appeared in the rules and there really are no grounds for fearing that it will be.
 
My understanding of that rule is that you shouldn't push competing products on a sponsors forum only, which is not the same as not mentioning non-sponsored brands ever. (IE. Someone asking about Brand A in Brand A's forum, and then gettting a reply of "Try Brand B. It blows Brand A out of the water.") I don't see that it limits discussion of non-sponsored brands in general, just in the sponsored forums. (Which I think is only polite.) I hope this is clearer than it sounds. ;)
 
David has been generous to not apply this rule strictly. We collectively often say nice things about Jeff Werkstatt, PakShak, Zaino and other non-sponsors that many members like. So my view is that it is nothing to be concerned about.



I think the best policy is to talk about all good detailing products from a knowledge standpoint but support those sponsor's products you like so that the site retains some revenue from sponsors.
 
Bill D said:
I simply commented about the oddity of it being addressed after having been part of the rules for quite a while now.
Click to expand...





Out of curiosity only, how long has it been a part of the rules?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top