[Edited by dingy - 12/5/2003 2:21:55 PM]

 

Luke,

JP did refund everyone that did not make the noise limit(s).

 

Pete

Sounds like some just had a bad day on both sides then..

 

Dingy

I have replied to most of your mails, explaining that I do not know why you are on the list. The list is Palmersport's creation and I have given you their email address so that you can ask them. I have not replied to all of your mails, but I am sure you did not expect me to reply to some of them.

You also asked me to call you and explain why you had been banned. I did ring you but you hung up on me. I will not be contacting you again.

 

I was going to say as Dingy's questions were followed by no question mark then they could well have been rhetorical Mr Webmaster.



Ho hum.........

 

Dingy, could also look at it as Pete sent you the mail out of courtesy so you didn't waste time trying to book a trackday you would not have been allowed to attend by the company that runs the trackday..ie Palmersports. Or is your arguement that if Pete hadn't tried to book a trackday for the club he represents none of this would have been dragged out into the open?
C

 

if your not happy and cant get a resolution thats acceptable, vote with your feet and get like minded individuals to do the same.
if enough people stop using Bedford then some-people™ might need to rethink matters, of course they may not, its a chance you take as a paying customer.

if the issues are deeper than that and you feel that resolution is not acceptable to both parties then seek professional advice from someone who may/may not be able to advise you of further courses of action.

Speculation and insult throwing can make you feel better at the time but can have consequences as yet unseen.

if there are enough people who feel that resolution has not been acceptable (say 28 ) then you might be able to negotiate a reduced rate for such a professional, if money has been paid then hasnt a contract been agreed and willingly entered into by both parties?
I am following with interest, and I have to admit that my future actions with regard track days may well be affected by the outcome, It may also transpire that I am not alone in the above thought.

 

My 2ps worth

After reading the bulk of this thread the bottom line is;

If you are one of the unlucky ones to have been banned rightly or wrongly JP has stated that he will listen to you and by the sounds of it would just like an apology (if nessecary). Sounds fair enough to me.

Now I'm not suggesting people go cap in hand groveling on your knees but as individuals you know if you flamed the guy badly on here then it's hardly a great surprise if you were banned.

Emotions were running high and it appears from the posts that there were plenty of justifiable gripes from both sides. However, if you continue to upset and insult JP why would he want you at his venue? Would you ivite anybody to your place if they insulted you?

Put youself in his shoes (we've all made mistakes and could have handled situations far better with a little bit of thought)if you had made a mistake and were slated Internationally and personally for it would you be happy? I think not.

Has anyone actually tried ringing the guy and explaining their individual situation or apolgising for being so rude but can you understand why I was so annoyed?

As for the people who don't want to go back stop complaining you've made your decision and aired your view.Move on.

If you want to go back make the call explain your situation. The worst thing that can happen is he says no. There's plenty of other venues to choose.

Either way onwards and upwards. Scoobynet certainly gives a fair shout for all it's members which is far more than can be said for a lot of organisations

 

Spot on Supercue

 

Dingy - surely there are some data protection issues here where under current legislation you have a right to request any information that an organisation may hold on you...be it e-mails, posts or what ever...........i think that they are breaking the law by refusing !

Could be a point worth raising........

 

Simon,

The bigger problem for Scoobynet is that people are being banned by third parties on the strength of opinions expressed here. Imagine if Shell were to ban scoobynetters from their forecourts who had expressed a negative sentiment about Optimax

TBH I am unlikely to ever go on a trackday in my unmodified car. But if people have to be cautious about what they write here then the quality of debate may be seriously compromised. That can only damage the community and usefulness of this place as a resource. Will anyone who wants to drive at Bedford ever say that they thought another track was better? or even that the toilets were better elsewhere, for fear of being banned? That diminishes the usefulness of Scoobynet.

I have learnt much useful information based on negative comments about dampers, battery charging issues, garages to avoid, relative merits of computer games etc. etc. This for me is the major benefit of belonging. It would be a shame if we did not see such lively debate in the future, because people were always having to look over their shoulder.

 

My case is being reviewed as we speak.

As is typical for a thread like this it has been blown out of propotion, It's actually not that big a deal.

I am angry as I was in supprt of JP - but I am confused why someone who said they wouldn't go back would get so upset by not being allowed back.

Dave

 

[Edited by dingy - 12/5/2003 2:16:08 PM]

 

Wonder how many who have been banned.have taken the time to phone JP and try to get things sorted. A bit of humble pie works both ways....

 

Speedking, JP registered on this site and a few people said insulting things to him directly. This could just as easily have happened down the pub or at the track or wherever, the outcome would be just the same. It's not a problem with Scoobynet.
Cman

 

Pete,

I'm sorry Pete, but given your position within the SIDC, and being involved in the negotiations, for you to be saying that you're surprised that some people are on the list NOW is, in my opinion letting down SIDC members.

I fully understand that you have to look after the "majority", over the minority, but this just looks like you've allowed some innocent people to be sacrificed, with no attempt to stick up for them.

IMO, the CLUB should be speaking to JP about those people that would appear to have been unfairly treated, since it was a SIDC event, and they weren't there as individuals.

I have my own opinions about how Dr.Palmer has dealt with the whole affair, but I wouldn't want my post deleted !!!

Mark.

 

Hear hear Mark.

 

Mark

My surprise is that I would not expect some people to be abusive and was therefore surprised that they would be on such a list.

The time I spend on SIDC work is unpaid. I have already spent 2 full days on it this week. I do not have the time or inclination to search through thousands of posts to see if Palmersport are right or wrong to exclude someone. As I said earlier, because my business involves dealing with Subaru owners, I have never had access to the SIDC membership list. I do not know which of the people on the list is an SIDC member and which is not. I do not even know the real names of many people on the list.

If the person concerned felt that they should not be excluded, I asked them to contact Palmersport. Several have. Many have not.

I really have had enough of this and if people feel I have let down SIDC members then I will resign right now.

 

It seems to me some people are only selectivly reading what they want to read from Mr Croney's and the webmaster's posts

Where does it say the sidc have banned you?

 

I presume you also support expelling members who brought the club into disrepute through their written insults towards JP and Palmersports Mark?
Agree that any club member wrongly accused of directly insulting/bad mouthing should be assisted in regaining access to the circuit...though already the mechanism has been put into place for them to appeal.
Rgds
Chuck

 

[Edited by dingy - 12/5/2003 2:19:09 PM]

 

Likewise. I'm still awaiting a response from Palmersport as I went through every post of the threads John listed and to my mind I was courteous and polite in my posts.

The fact that I have been banned is neither here nor there really, its the why that bugs me.

 

[Edited by dingy - 12/5/2003 2:16:28 PM]

 

FFS people. If you want this flippin thing sorted contact JP. All people who run the SIDC are unpaid for their servies which are given as they are enthusiasts for the club and the cars. This includes all the committee members. They dont HAVE to go to meet JP about the track day, and could as a few people have said just 'write off' Bedford.

If you WANT to go back to Bedford Circuit, email JP and sort it out with him. If you dont, drop it.

For the record:
I WASNT there
I DIDNT slag the circuit
I AM a SIDC member
I WILL go there in the future.

I personally think the SIDC is efficiently run and have no issues with anything they have currently done or currently doing. So congratulations to all those people doing a fantastic job for very little reward.

Jon Stokes
CustomScoobyIOM

*Edited due to cant spell :rolleyes;

[Edited by CustomScoobyIOM - 12/5/2003 2:47:13 PM]

 

Am I banned ?

I WAS there
I DID comment on this BBS
I am no longer a SIDC member
I want to be 1 of the Bedford 28

I'm just a wannabe

Guys we should all know by now that JP has his own views and opinions of what took place a year ago and no matter how F*cked up they are he will stick by them no matter what.

Lots of beers to the fist member of the Bedford 28 to get themselves into a track day at bedford and to have their photo taken driving round

 

Pete,

Firstly, you hold your position in SIDC through choice It comes with certain resposibilities, and a claim on your time. So please don't use the excuse of it being unpaid, when your time is called upon.

I would totally agree that two days of your time, is wasted, however, all you had to do was ask JP to qualify why the listed members were being banned BEFORE mailing anyone. He'd already done the work of ploughing through posts, and would no doubt been happy to provide all the answers.

Chuck,

Yes, if the behavour of club members warrants it, expel them.

Mark.

 

Pete,

I just wanted to say, that whilst my posts are addressed to you, my opinions are directed at the "SIDC committee" who were involved in the "negotiations".

As far as JP is concerned, what he considers are the problem people, are SIDC members, on a SIDC event, brought up during SIDC talking about holding more events.

I would have thought it was in the clubs interest to help clear this up.

Mark.

 

Surely the committee has acted in the interest of the club

It has managed to get the complete ban lifted and given "appeal" details to those that are banned.

I'm sure that those members who have done nothing wrong will be re instated by Bedford with no doubt an apolagy.

To keep flaming the sidc IMHO which ever way they turn appears harsh

just my 2 euro's


Ronan

 

Mark

I hold my position because as I make my living from Imprezas, I think its important to "put something back". It is a decision that I am questioning more and more frequently.

On this occasion, I decided that rather than spend hours (days?) trawling through posts, or asking JP to repeat an exercise that he had done 12 months ago, I would write to people and let them know the situation. In witing I would also let them know of an appeal process if they thought this situation was unreasonable.

Interestingly, the majority of the mails that I have had back have been along the lines of "I did give him a hard time so fair enough and no hard feelings". Of the ones that have not been like this, I have encouraged everyone to contact JP and appeal. I am sure that most, if not all, of these appeals will be succesful.

I am not sure why you would have a problem with any of this.

 

T5NYW you change your position as often as the wind changes direction, you seam to have forgotten again what happened that day and the way people were treated as a consequence.

Dave, fog or no fog, that doesn’t change the facts that the limits were changed on the day, this caused the whole day to become a shambles. People didn’t receive an apology for JP feeling he had to drop the limits; they received a dressing down for having noisy cars, despite these cars being prepared to the published noise limits. JP has yet to accept the problem was that he dropped the noise limits, not that cars were trying to cheat his noise meters. The post in the SIDC forum is also incredibly selective with the facts to reinforce the myth that the issue on the day was with the cars present and their specification.

I am sorry you feel people are being self-righteous chuck, by pointing out facts and questioning the fact they have just been banned for no fair reason. Maybe if you were “blacklisted” you may feel slightly differently? Maybe not, it’s a sad day when people accept unfair treatment as OK and are expected to just “drop it”. As you say, Bedford doesn’t need the SIDC, but the SIDC doesn’t need Bedford either. What people need is fair and honest treatment when things go wrong, Bedford have not apologised to their customers for wasting their time and money and instead went on the offensive to shift the blame for the fiasco onto their customers, this is unacceptable behaviour by any business.

Thanks for posting the email Craig. To quote it “we said that anyone who had made unjustifiably derogatory comments about the venue on the scoobynet web site after the previous event would not be welcome again” I have just re-read the original thread, I don’t see how people on that Blacklist fit into this description, myself included. “If you do not think you came in this category, I can certainly have the forum checked and see what you said” I am astonished he hasn’t double checked the reasons behind each and every one of the people being blacklisted personally, it is not a small thing for a business to ban members of public, if you are going to do this you should make sure you have a reason that is watertight.

With regards to the SIDC and its involvement in all this, in my opinion they should have returned that list asking for an explanation as to why each individual was named. That isn’t a big thing to do, the SIDC are there to represent its members, all of them. I think it was correct to inform people who were on the list, but to leave them on their own to fight their case is not what a club should be about.

I emailed Palmersport yesterday, asking for specific reasons why I was banned; I have yet to receive a response of any kind.