Banned from Bedford!!!!!!
08 December 2003, 10:35 AM
#363
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: MY99UK-MY02STi-MY99Type R-MY06 T20-MY11 340R-MY05 TYPE25
Posts: 11,468
Received 22 Likes
on
19 Posts
This is my second and last post on this Topic 
I posted this in The SIDC Forum and thought it apropriate to a copy of my reply on Scoobynet. This is how I saw that days events
This was an SIDC event open to all, I was there and yes the was an issue over noise. It may not been handled brilliantly on the day by Bedford Marshalls but was certainly not handled any better afterwards on aPublic forum. JP joined in the debate, he was attack personally, defamed possibly by some people who wern't even there or SIDC members.
JP reacted by Toally banning ALL SIDC members from Bedford.
Now I am an SIDC member, I was there and feel really aggreived that I was banned for other peoples comments.
(This bit was explained to me by a Marshall who drove my car in the later driveby noise test)
Everyone had a static noise test done at the stated db limit prior to entry onto track.
During the first runs of the trackday complaints were recieved from a village about noise. We were asked by Marshals not to drive too close together as this might be triggering the meters
There are on track meters run by bedford and one outside track run by the Council. If the Council meters had not been tripped, Palmersport could have told the residents and Councilor to take a hike, but they were, so he to be proactive or be Prosecuted.
The tracktime was stopped, Jonathan Palmer who was watching his son's School Rugby match, had leave it and fly up to Bedford to speak to residents and Councilor. Apparently instead of just closing up shop and sending evryone home, which he did with the Bikers. JP sorted a compromise with them and left to finnish watch his son's game. The Mashalls were to get everyone to do a on circiut driveby noise reading and the sources of the high noise would be excluded.
Approx 7 cars failed the driveby test done by Bedford Marshalls, but the stated db limit was lowered during this test, which I didn't find out till much later after the event.
One section of track was closed, nearest the Complaining village/Council meters. The remaining cars then continued their tracktime.
I was not in anyway party to any discussions or arguments with JP's Marshall's. I was either on the Track, resting and checking car or having it noise tested by Marshall's
This is how I saw and heard the days events. Which to be honest seem to me a good compromise to all of us being sent home. I would have been also gutted if I'd been excluded. I spent on track insurance, night in hotel meals and beer(loads), a 400mile round trip. I do know a few who were excluded and some of the ones 'Banned' and really feel for them.
Things in life often go wrong, and thing did that day. But surely it is how things are handled and rectified after the event which makes the difference.
IMHO,AFAIRC,IIRC
Tony
Ps
If I sold you a £50 car radio on SIDC forum and when you recieved it it didn't work. You rang me up and complained it was faulty, I would drive 150miles to try a fix it and I would try my hardest to resolve the matter even if I had to buy one from Halfords to replace it. My reputation is worth more to me than £50.
Yet if you didn't ring me, you then posted on a Public forum that I was a robbing, cheating, con man, couldn't drive to save my life and a spotty geek. You would be now a proud owner of a non working radio and see you in court. You also wouldn't be invited to my house either.
I posted this in The SIDC Forum and thought it apropriate to a copy of my reply on Scoobynet. This is how I saw that days eventsThis was an SIDC event open to all, I was there and yes the was an issue over noise. It may not been handled brilliantly on the day by Bedford Marshalls but was certainly not handled any better afterwards on aPublic forum. JP joined in the debate, he was attack personally, defamed possibly by some people who wern't even there or SIDC members.
JP reacted by Toally banning ALL SIDC members from Bedford.
Now I am an SIDC member, I was there and feel really aggreived that I was banned for other peoples comments.
(This bit was explained to me by a Marshall who drove my car in the later driveby noise test)
Everyone had a static noise test done at the stated db limit prior to entry onto track.
During the first runs of the trackday complaints were recieved from a village about noise. We were asked by Marshals not to drive too close together as this might be triggering the meters
There are on track meters run by bedford and one outside track run by the Council. If the Council meters had not been tripped, Palmersport could have told the residents and Councilor to take a hike, but they were, so he to be proactive or be Prosecuted.
The tracktime was stopped, Jonathan Palmer who was watching his son's School Rugby match, had leave it and fly up to Bedford to speak to residents and Councilor. Apparently instead of just closing up shop and sending evryone home, which he did with the Bikers. JP sorted a compromise with them and left to finnish watch his son's game. The Mashalls were to get everyone to do a on circiut driveby noise reading and the sources of the high noise would be excluded.
Approx 7 cars failed the driveby test done by Bedford Marshalls, but the stated db limit was lowered during this test, which I didn't find out till much later after the event.
One section of track was closed, nearest the Complaining village/Council meters. The remaining cars then continued their tracktime.
I was not in anyway party to any discussions or arguments with JP's Marshall's. I was either on the Track, resting and checking car or having it noise tested by Marshall's
This is how I saw and heard the days events. Which to be honest seem to me a good compromise to all of us being sent home. I would have been also gutted if I'd been excluded. I spent on track insurance, night in hotel meals and beer(loads), a 400mile round trip. I do know a few who were excluded and some of the ones 'Banned' and really feel for them.
Things in life often go wrong, and thing did that day. But surely it is how things are handled and rectified after the event which makes the difference.
IMHO,AFAIRC,IIRC
Tony
Ps
If I sold you a £50 car radio on SIDC forum and when you recieved it it didn't work. You rang me up and complained it was faulty, I would drive 150miles to try a fix it and I would try my hardest to resolve the matter even if I had to buy one from Halfords to replace it. My reputation is worth more to me than £50.
Yet if you didn't ring me, you then posted on a Public forum that I was a robbing, cheating, con man, couldn't drive to save my life and a spotty geek. You would be now a proud owner of a non working radio and see you in court. You also wouldn't be invited to my house either.
08 December 2003, 10:51 AM
#365
Tony, we are not discussing the events of the day in this thread, it is more about how over a year after the event 28 people have now been banned from Bedford, for some not very good reasons it seams.
But as you seem to want to discuss the day again, let me remind you of what you said after the event and after all the main discusions had occured where all the facts were out in the open, as you seem to have forgotten again.
You wrote that after i sent my letter to CCC magazine, as can be seen in this thread http://www.scoobynet.co.uk/bbs/threa...=178498&Page=1
But as you seem to want to discuss the day again, let me remind you of what you said after the event and after all the main discusions had occured where all the facts were out in the open, as you seem to have forgotten again.
John,
I can now see why you Totally dis-agreed with my post. Sorry I just went with the flow and had no idea they changed Test specs.
I do just try to ignore things, stay mellow or I'll get infuriated and bite big time
Tony
Living in a world of his own
I can now see why you Totally dis-agreed with my post. Sorry I just went with the flow and had no idea they changed Test specs.
I do just try to ignore things, stay mellow or I'll get infuriated and bite big time
Tony
Living in a world of his own
08 December 2003, 11:16 AM
#367
Scooby Newbie
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tony,
yet again you add mud to the waters, as you have done throughout this saga.
In your "PS" you attempt to explain what has been done to death already, but you missed a crucial bit that renders your whole analogy meaningless.
In between the selling of a product that failed to meet the original terms and conditions that the original purchase had been contracted at(after the noise limit reduction), and the being flamed on a BBS, you totally missed the bit where the vendor or his representatives refused to listen to queries/complaints on the day and, in fact, made statements about (in several cases) regular purchasers being cheats, liars etc. Is it any surprise that feelings rapidly got out of hand afterwards?
This is not about whether Dr Palmer can ban anyone he wants or not, he can.
It is also not about whether it's better for SIDC to look after the majority than the minority; that is the duty of the committee members, whatever their personal feelings about this may be.
This IMHO is about an unfortunate situation that was exacerbated by at best a lack of customer care. I am one of the banned and I have no intention of going cap in hand to any organisation that treated me, in my opinion, so shoddily, despite my efforts to comply with the revised limits by driving 40 miles offsite to change my backbox from a quiet and previously acceptable Scoobysport one to a standard one to help them achieve their revised aims.
All the other points have been covered eloquently and ineloquently elsewhere, but I would refer you to Diesel's post. There is nothing to add.
John Higgins (can't post as Fat Boy from here...)
[Edited by **GOD** - 12/8/2003 11:18:47 AM]
yet again you add mud to the waters, as you have done throughout this saga.
In your "PS" you attempt to explain what has been done to death already, but you missed a crucial bit that renders your whole analogy meaningless.
In between the selling of a product that failed to meet the original terms and conditions that the original purchase had been contracted at(after the noise limit reduction), and the being flamed on a BBS, you totally missed the bit where the vendor or his representatives refused to listen to queries/complaints on the day and, in fact, made statements about (in several cases) regular purchasers being cheats, liars etc. Is it any surprise that feelings rapidly got out of hand afterwards?
This is not about whether Dr Palmer can ban anyone he wants or not, he can.
It is also not about whether it's better for SIDC to look after the majority than the minority; that is the duty of the committee members, whatever their personal feelings about this may be.
This IMHO is about an unfortunate situation that was exacerbated by at best a lack of customer care. I am one of the banned and I have no intention of going cap in hand to any organisation that treated me, in my opinion, so shoddily, despite my efforts to comply with the revised limits by driving 40 miles offsite to change my backbox from a quiet and previously acceptable Scoobysport one to a standard one to help them achieve their revised aims.
All the other points have been covered eloquently and ineloquently elsewhere, but I would refer you to Diesel's post. There is nothing to add.
John Higgins (can't post as Fat Boy from here...)
[Edited by **GOD** - 12/8/2003 11:18:47 AM]
08 December 2003, 11:58 AM
#369
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 4,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow, what a great thread.
I've finally read all 20 pages and I still don't understand how you can ban someone based on a user name. Fine, if its obvious but how can they identify the people behind the user name?
This principle applies to all posts on this forum.
I thought that it was only the moderators/webmaster who could link user names to real names/addresses etc and then only with good reason?
Therefore has someone provided the real names or has PS really banded people based on user names.
Sorry if this has been answered but I didn't see it anywhere and thought it worth clarifying.
I've finally read all 20 pages and I still don't understand how you can ban someone based on a user name. Fine, if its obvious but how can they identify the people behind the user name?
This principle applies to all posts on this forum.
I thought that it was only the moderators/webmaster who could link user names to real names/addresses etc and then only with good reason?
Therefore has someone provided the real names or has PS really banded people based on user names.
Sorry if this has been answered but I didn't see it anywhere and thought it worth clarifying.
08 December 2003, 12:12 PM
#370
Scooby Newbie
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It has apparently been based on User names taken from here by Dr Palmer's staff and supplied to SIDC as a list of people not welcome to his site.
My normal user id - Fat Boy - has one of my email addresses on there, which is easy to identify me from, and to cross reference me to, no doubt, my car registration and home address that I supplied when I signed on at Bedford. Actually, not sure about the reg plate, but my address was certainly given.
So, if someone didn't use their real name as their user id and excluded their email address and/or any identifying details in their profile then they could, in theory, sneak back into Bedford, if they wanted to.
Me? No thanks.
JH
My normal user id - Fat Boy - has one of my email addresses on there, which is easy to identify me from, and to cross reference me to, no doubt, my car registration and home address that I supplied when I signed on at Bedford. Actually, not sure about the reg plate, but my address was certainly given.
So, if someone didn't use their real name as their user id and excluded their email address and/or any identifying details in their profile then they could, in theory, sneak back into Bedford, if they wanted to.
Me? No thanks.
JH
08 December 2003, 12:18 PM
#371
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 1999
Posts: 742
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow, I was going to book a day there for my father but after hearing that the owner can decribe his customers as cvnts I think I will look elsewhere. That is not exceptable in my book. Its good to be know these things, I love the internet. It helps you make more informed decisions.
08 December 2003, 12:20 PM
#372
Mr Leigh
You cannot use this thread to make an informed decision, as everything in it is opinion only.
All. This is the cornerstone principle of the ability of this thread to continue.
All the best
Simon
You cannot use this thread to make an informed decision, as everything in it is opinion only.
All. This is the cornerstone principle of the ability of this thread to continue.
All the best
Simon
08 December 2003, 12:54 PM
#373
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I find coments like
Mr Leighs
Really offensive and coupled with the fact that I doubt JP would have used that phrase think it should be edited
There are 2 sides to this thread and most people are presenting thier views in a proper and articulate manner.
WHY SPOIL IT
but after hearing that the owner can decribe his customers as cvnts
Really offensive and coupled with the fact that I doubt JP would have used that phrase think it should be edited
There are 2 sides to this thread and most people are presenting thier views in a proper and articulate manner.
WHY SPOIL IT
08 December 2003, 12:54 PM
#374
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: £1.785m reasons not to be here :)
Posts: 6,095
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With respect, Simon, Mr Leigh can choose to base his decision on anything he wants 
Just, apparently, as Mr Palmer has applied his banning criteria.
D
Just, apparently, as Mr Palmer has applied his banning criteria.
D
08 December 2003, 01:29 PM
#376
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Assuming he did say it, couldn't it be explained as a heat-of-the-moment comment, aimed at people he viewed as trying to circumvent his noise restrictions, which theoretically could have landed him in big trouble with the Council?
I'm sure Mr Palmer doesn't have a problem per se with Scoobs, it's just that it was Scoobs caught up at the wrong place at the wrong time. I reckon *any* group of owners would have tried to do whatever they could to get under the noise limit, rather than being sent home.
At the end of the day, it was a piece of mis-management of the highest order. Mr Palmer was possibly naive to expect drivers who had turned up in good faith to just say "Oh that's ok then" when the noise limit was reduced due to the fog. The fact that it all took a turn for the worse on Scoobynet is very unfortunate, but i don't think Mr Palmer should view Subaru drivers in any worse light than any other group - anyone would have done the same, surely? Hopefully he'll realise this and lift the bans - keeping them in place proves nothing apart from the fact he doesn't understand human nature, in my opinion.
I'm sure Mr Palmer doesn't have a problem per se with Scoobs, it's just that it was Scoobs caught up at the wrong place at the wrong time. I reckon *any* group of owners would have tried to do whatever they could to get under the noise limit, rather than being sent home.
At the end of the day, it was a piece of mis-management of the highest order. Mr Palmer was possibly naive to expect drivers who had turned up in good faith to just say "Oh that's ok then" when the noise limit was reduced due to the fog. The fact that it all took a turn for the worse on Scoobynet is very unfortunate, but i don't think Mr Palmer should view Subaru drivers in any worse light than any other group - anyone would have done the same, surely? Hopefully he'll realise this and lift the bans - keeping them in place proves nothing apart from the fact he doesn't understand human nature, in my opinion.
08 December 2003, 01:56 PM
#380
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: a land full of corsets
Posts: 9,755
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tel, I was there on the day and the chances of my scoob ( ) failing the noise test were between slim and none, as it was standard in the exhaust department. I thought "no big deal" in a sort of I'm alright Jack sort of way. It was only afterwards that I found out about how much of a difference that 2dB makes that I wasn't so happy, mainly for the others. I hold my hand up and say I did insult Dr Palmer, I called him patronising in response to his replies to the others who had posted on here.
My main gripe was that I'd paid £175 for a trackday that was sold to me as being from 0930-1630, only to find I only got out on track proper at approx 1215 with the day being called to a halt at about 1545.
Other than the comment above, I didn't insult him. I may have thought things, but I didn't post them as it's not really my style.
) failing the noise test were between slim and none, as it was standard in the exhaust department. I thought "no big deal" in a sort of I'm alright Jack sort of way. It was only afterwards that I found out about how much of a difference that 2dB makes that I wasn't so happy, mainly for the others. I hold my hand up and say I did insult Dr Palmer, I called him patronising in response to his replies to the others who had posted on here.My main gripe was that I'd paid £175 for a trackday that was sold to me as being from 0930-1630, only to find I only got out on track proper at approx 1215 with the day being called to a halt at about 1545.
Other than the comment above, I didn't insult him. I may have thought things, but I didn't post them as it's not really my style.
08 December 2003, 01:59 PM
#381
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2,031
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd find it hard to believe that JP would use such terms about his paying customers & not specifically aimed at JP but succesful business people would be used to dealing in crisis management:
* they would not publicly use such words (OK Gerard Ratner did...)
* they understand that they make money from their paying customers
* they have a duty to uphold that the customers are safe & enjoy their time
* they have a duty to ensure rules & regulations are followed & if bent can of course add new rules
Plus a lot more.........
* they would not publicly use such words (OK Gerard Ratner did...)
* they understand that they make money from their paying customers
* they have a duty to uphold that the customers are safe & enjoy their time
* they have a duty to ensure rules & regulations are followed & if bent can of course add new rules
Plus a lot more.........
08 December 2003, 02:01 PM
#382
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,675
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Assuming he did say it, couldn't it be explained as a heat-of-the-moment comment
08 December 2003, 02:52 PM
#383
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
True, Craig, the only difference being the latter are in black and white, for all to see.
Let's hope Mr Palmer comes to his senses and relents; i think the positive publicity he'd gain from doing so would far outweigh whatever "advantage" he thinks he's gaining from sticking to the bad decision he's made.
Let's hope Mr Palmer comes to his senses and relents; i think the positive publicity he'd gain from doing so would far outweigh whatever "advantage" he thinks he's gaining from sticking to the bad decision he's made.
08 December 2003, 03:00 PM
#384
Let's hope Mr Palmer comes to his senses and relents; i think the positive publicity he'd gain from doing so would far outweigh whatever "advantage" he thinks he's gaining from sticking to the bad decision he's made.
Lot's of people read scoobynet who don't even post or register and no doubt there are links to this thread from other bbs's from users that have spotted it Paul
08 December 2003, 04:57 PM
#385
BANNED
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In my own little world
Posts: 9,644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It also sounds like JP has been let down by some of his "Staff"???
I,m sure all will end well. maybe some "off air" communication between certain parties could start to resolve things.Doesnt matter what happened...the current situation isnt good for him or track day users. Both sides have to meet at some point.
[Edited by Luke - 12/8/2003 4:58:52 PM]
I,m sure all will end well. maybe some "off air" communication between certain parties could start to resolve things.Doesnt matter what happened...the current situation isnt good for him or track day users. Both sides have to meet at some point.
[Edited by Luke - 12/8/2003 4:58:52 PM]
08 December 2003, 05:14 PM
#386
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Some country and western
Posts: 13,488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There once was a group called the Bedford 28
Some said to Palmer "your skills as a driver I don't rate"
They were not welcomed back
While they continued to attack
although some have sent an email but still wait
Some said to Palmer "your skills as a driver I don't rate"
They were not welcomed back
While they continued to attack
although some have sent an email but still wait
08 December 2003, 05:20 PM
#387
Scooby Regular
Not sure that you need to give up the day job after that ....
Interesting thread that has now been done to death....I await with interest any feedback from Palmersport on specific individual cases.....Interesting as the person who started the thread which got the Bedford 28 banned I'm not included in that number. Ho Hum
Interesting thread that has now been done to death....I await with interest any feedback from Palmersport on specific individual cases.....Interesting as the person who started the thread which got the Bedford 28 banned I'm not included in that number. Ho Hum
08 December 2003, 06:19 PM
#388
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 1,002
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well this was interesting
From listenign to all this it seems that Mr Palmer has been a naughty naughty boy.
He wants to be careful none of the people who were wrongfully banned take legal action for defamation of character (hey I know I cannot spell ).
Also sounds like Scoobynet encourages freedom of speech as long as you say what they want you to.
How they can ban people on a forum ID is beyond me and do not see it possible.
I have just been laughing the whole way through, an utter sham.
From listenign to all this it seems that Mr Palmer has been a naughty naughty boy.
He wants to be careful none of the people who were wrongfully banned take legal action for defamation of character (hey I know I cannot spell
). Also sounds like Scoobynet encourages freedom of speech as long as you say what they want you to.
How they can ban people on a forum ID is beyond me and do not see it possible.
I have just been laughing the whole way through, an utter sham.
08 December 2003, 06:29 PM
#389
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 3,491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also sounds like Scoobynet encourages freedom of speech as long as you say what they want you to.
I think I'm known to be very critical towards Simon (we once were close friends), but in this case you are doing him an injustice IMHO.
I do not agree with his style of posting (and if you read page 17 carefully he clearly states that he's not always happy with what he thinks he *has* to write as owner of this BBS), but let's in the name of fairness... erm... be fair.
This thread is not locked, some posts have been removed, sure, but all in all people had the freedom to tell (on both sides) what they thought of this situation.
I personally think Simon (and no, we still won't be friends again
) went out of his way to keep this thread open & running.And some very good posts have been made.
Fair's fair.
It's hard to not let personal preferences/relations etc. rule your posts, but in this case we can objectively conclude that this thread is still open, and given the "fear" for legal action (justified or not, don't think we need to have that discussion here), that is a good thing IMHO again.
To put it more consicely: this thread has stayed open and is at this hour still open.
Theo
08 December 2003, 06:43 PM
#390
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having spent some time re-reading this thread,its clear that the Webmaster is spending quite a lot of time keeping this thread open,its clearly being uber-moderated and whatever the motives are for doing so,I would agree with Theo that he deserves respect for that.
Quite frankly,I don't care for JP,PS or his track,as Docjock has said,some bans are mutually agreeable.
The arbitrary bans based on bbs user names and imposed by some employee or other from PS are laughable,i only wish my user name was Nigel Mansell so I could write a letter to him in that name.
I am disappointed the SIDC did not say a simple no to this request,but equally I understand their desire to keep the track on their calender due to its suitability for beginners.A tough call for sure,but one i think they got wrong because their members were treated unfairly,and that should have been resected.I believe this decision was made at an AGM,but perhaps some consultation was required from members to have gained a wider view.Just a pov they may like to consider for the future.
AFAIAC PS have treated their customers with contempt,and the best way to deal with that is with your wallets,take them elsewhere.
Quite frankly,I don't care for JP,PS or his track,as Docjock has said,some bans are mutually agreeable.
The arbitrary bans based on bbs user names and imposed by some employee or other from PS are laughable,i only wish my user name was Nigel Mansell so I could write a letter to him in that name.
I am disappointed the SIDC did not say a simple no to this request,but equally I understand their desire to keep the track on their calender due to its suitability for beginners.A tough call for sure,but one i think they got wrong because their members were treated unfairly,and that should have been resected.I believe this decision was made at an AGM,but perhaps some consultation was required from members to have gained a wider view.Just a pov they may like to consider for the future.
AFAIAC PS have treated their customers with contempt,and the best way to deal with that is with your wallets,take them elsewhere.