[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
DISC: Ads vs. tech information
I will make this my last post on this subject. Apologies to any who are
annoyed by this thread ...
I consider this list to be my primary external source for information on
Audis [not just Quattros]. We certainly have a rare [if not unique] col-
lection of folks with direct experience on maintaining and upgrading them.
IMO, with a few exceptions, we are still amateurs. There are very few in
the world who have made a chosen vocation out of upgrading them. I be-
lieve that simply dismissing this source of information out of hand dimin-
ishes the capability of the list to provide information to its subscribers.
Some advertisements are blatantly that, and I doubt there is any issue with
whether or not we provide an open [and cost free] forum for that informa-
tion. I'll be the first to state that we must be very careful about how
much access we provide to those who are as I would refer to as hostile wit-
nesses; which are people who may have gained a great deal of technical
information [to share], but are also interested in their own goal of sell-
ing a product. Yes, I am interested in gaining technical information from
Ned Ritchie, Trevor, Al Solaroli, or anyone that has experience with im-
provements in performance, whether that be engine, suspension, braking, etc.
Perhaps the way to maintain a bit of control over the hostile witnesses is
to do what happens in court to hostile witnesses; ask leading questions.
The list of questions previously posed for TAP would be an example of this.
The list members would prepare a list of questions to be answered by TAP,
IA, Hypertech, Dinan, etc. (in this example). We could make use of the
fact that we are talking about a reasonable amount of business in order to
get information from the vendors [hey, the other guys got a copy of the
list too, and we will be making our decisions based on the responses]. If
we expect disinformation or outright lies in the response, then we did not
pose the questions correctly.
Most anyone who has read a copy of the QCUSA newsletter has seen articles
written by Ned Ritchie in response to a technical problem that he has exp-
erience with. I personally have been a beneficiary of this kind of assist-
ance. What has been proposed is that we artificially limit ourselves by
considering this kind of information anathema. We can benefit immensely
by encouraging this type of interchange ...
I have noticed that list members have expressed a hesitancy to discuss the
aftermarket vendors with which they have experience. Here is more informa-
tion that is not available to the subscribers. Personally, I would like to
see a brief list of these vendors from anyone who has the time to provide it,
noting the name of the vendor and whether the vendor would be recommended.
Anyone who was interested in more information could then get it off-line.
When I subscribe to the BMW motorcycle digest I got a rating form for my
experiences with BMW service providers ... I thought that was an excellent
idea. I don't know if they have some kind of automated processor of the
information, or if the data is organized manually.
Maybe we could use a forum for tech presentations by vendors, like a mag-
azine. It's interesting to note that Mark Salem proposed the creation of
an on-line magazine that could be accessed through his web page. Perhaps
this is the solution to the issue ... provided that there is an editor.
Maybe the standard practice would be for the source to have a single file
in the archives that could be accessed by the list members ... I don't know
what the best solution is, but turning one's back definitely is not IMO.
Well ... I've taken enough time preparing this note [I've been contemplating
this for the past few days ...]
Steve Buchholz
s_buchho@kla.com