I’ve already emailed them and asked that any post relating to these scams be instantly canned, and make sure the poster also becomes a cannee.
This site is supposed to be about helping someone with car problems, which are a pain in the neck even on a good day. It’s not supposed to be about separating someone from their cash.
If someone chooses to go on any one of a thousand scam sites and get bilked then so be it but the ball should not start rolling here.
If you break the posters on this forum into 2 groups ~ enquirers and responders i.e. you, the number of ‘hard core’ regular responders is very small, probably about 20. That number of emails shouldn’t swamp them and if there are enough requests, they’ll probably do it.
After all, the forum URI is ‘Car Talk - Public Action’. If the regular responders didn’t provide feedback, the forum wouldn’t work. Therefore there is no reason why the people who provide that feedback shouldn’t have some input as to how it works.
It can only improve the forum value.
Seems like you don’t attend the forum on a regular basis, otherwise you’d know, and no-one is making either insinuations or accusations. Read a few historical posts and you’ll get the idea. As for ‘objectivity’, I believe that nearly all of the responders on this forum strive to provide objective answers to enquiries for help. There is the occasional Troll, but they soon obviate themselves and go away once they’re ignored.
This is a pudding that doesn’t need over egging, but as an example a page advising how to pose a question.
Always provide Year, Make, Model, Engine & transmission type (i.e. Auto / Manual) and estimated mileage.
Don’t use all capitals, it gives us a headache - known as shouting in forum speak.
Provide as much information as possible, responders can only provide answers based on the information you give, the better the information - the better the answers you will get.
Try to provide feedback of the fix for your problem, it may come in useful for future posters. Saying thanks is gravy.
Other suggestions are listed above, an interference engine reference, Dino vs Synth oil discussion, maintenenace intervals among others. With an FAQ area the ‘nuggets’ from previous posts can be assembled into a single reference page, enquirers can then be referred to that page when they post - I’m not expecting posters to find the page themselves, though they should be able to. Those threads then become write once. read many times, the quality of that specific information can only improve since it is focal and objective.
Thereafter the question : “Should I be using synthetic oil in my 1998 Honda Accord V6 auto”
Can be answered : "This subject has already been covered in detail and can be references on "
Rational enough ?
Interesting response… But, you didn’t answer my question. What are you afraid of? What is so hard about answering this question: “I am curious… What threads have you enjoyed in the past? What is it that you do want to discuss?”
Nice, but you’re addressing a symptom not the problem and are simply rechurning the same discussion that occurs twice a week. If you search for ‘water’ or ‘hydrogen’ on this forum there are plenty of threads to expound your view.
This thread is related to whether or not the forum should continue to address those questions directly, not the question itself.
Perhaps they could make it part of the question filling out part of the thread title before they even make the post. Like little drop down menus for year, make, model, mileage, etc.
Here is one for the FAQ - if ever there is one:
http://biz.yahoo.com/brn/080502/25295.html?.v=1&.pf=family-home
Being a regular at this site is a lot like retail sales. You get someone every day that is unfamiliar with your product and needs education. Look at it as an opportunity to help someone out, not an imposition on your time. If you’ve had enough of the watr-for-gas discussions, just ignore them.
ok the last part could be left off.
Like this?
LOOKING FOR ANSWERS? YOU IDIOT!
Just because many of the responses do not match your particular beliefs (i.e., that you can run a car on water) does not necessarily make them irrational, insinuating, or accusatory. If responses contain factual errors, they can be corrected. If someone is insulting and nasty, or a space and time wasting looney, they can be criticized and even moderated out (everyone knows who I’m talking about, and it’s not you, sderekh). Granted, some responders need to be a little more civil, but when someone with an agenda keeps pushing an issue long after it’s died,…
What am I afraid of? Certainly not you. Heck, many years ago I was extended an invitation to join an outlaw motorcycle club (not really my cup of tea) so you’re not really contributing to my fear factor.
What threads have I enjoyed in the past? Just about every one of them I’ve read and that includes ones that I have not responded to. There are a large number of regular posters on this board and I fully enjoy reading their insight on automotive problems.
What is it that I want to discuss? Anything related to the repair of an internal combustion engine or whatever is attached to it; be it 2 wheels, 4 wheels, or winged.
What is it I do NOT want to see? Shills providing links to scam products which are designed solely to separate the naive and unsuspecting consumer from their dollars. At times posts appear where someone has very obviously been BSed or flat out robbed of their money on an auto repair and this honestly pxxxxx me off. (I’m a volatile guy).
I don’t like seeing anyone getting screwed out of their cash; no matter if it’s a fraudulent auto repair or one of about 8000 bogus gas saving gimmicks.
You’ve got a shill right now on another thread about yet another performance/gas saving scam; Pulstar spark plugs.
Are those answers clear enough?
My point was that it is possible to argue with someone without questioning their motives, intelligence or by being outright accusatory.
My point was that it is possible to argue with someone without questioning their motives, intelligence or by being outright accusatory.
and answering the same questions from the hip ad infinitum is preferable to a singular subject reference page ? Or should we just refer to previous threads on the same topic and copy / paste the previous dialogue each time that question arises ?
Perhaps auto manufacturers should omit the publication of owners handbooks and workshop manuals and simply have a help desk to answer owners questions using your concept ?
“If you’ve had enough of the watr-for-gas discussions, just ignore them.”
unfortunately it is the “average joe” who is trying to get some glimpse of their autos problems who is suffering from this drivel from these useless and redundantly redundant posts. i hesitate to even call them questions, since they are just sales pitches disguised as an innocent question.
Where did you get that from? All I’m suggesting is that we should have a little patience or to ignore the stuff that you know will irritate you.
Not at all, you are suggesting that the same subject questions should be individually answered each time and that the same problems (such as Make, model, year) should remain as problems.
My original suggestion was made to improve the quality and scalability of answers to enquirers. Personally I’m abivalent about an FAQ, I can just ignore the Hyrdogen, Vortex and Snake Oil posts. But then ultimately those posters won’t receive an informative response since with the exception of yourself, I’d guess that the majority of responders will tire of answering these questions.
Time for a FAQ page? Yes, in addition to some tweaks to the discussion board. A problem with the current search is you put in your problem, specific or not, and tons of related questions and answers come up. The answer could be there but who wants to search through all those posting to find it. So, its easier to just post a new discussion.
What about of just being able to post a question right off the bat why not make it mandatory to search, but revised, for an answer before being allowed to post a question. If an answer was not found one is asked to highlight ones car make, model, and year followed by categorizing the question and then type the question and submit. Categories predetermined and offered in a drop down menu. However, categories must be kept simple. Categories such as engine, noise & vibration, transmission, brakes, steering and handling, body and paint, heating and cooling, electrical, and other. With car make model and year along with categories a better search could also be had.
An automatic search feature exists at CarTalk’s previous site at www.wondir.com (yes, wondir…not, wonder). Sometime, the search response was pertinent, and sometime, not.
I agree with many of your points, but mainly I contend that this forum software has been left to languish. I was really very happy when they simply started letting us add replies inline with the page, rather than popping up a giant box on the screen. I thought they were going to keep developing and massaging the software so that it’d be more like standard forum software. As it stands, I don’t think that they even have the ability to make a topic “sticky” (maintain its spot at the top of the list of topics, regardless of replies), which is exactly where this proposed FAQ should go.
Car Talk forum lackeys: hath this forum any upgrades in its future?