Dalslandia Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 (edited) What happen to the not to be mentioned propeller brand thread? if it was removed it is good if the moderator leve a note that so have been don. I don't think it was needed to remove all the posts. if any that I missed. jan Edited September 26, 2016 by Dalslandia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bizzard Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 Indeed. I'm not really concerned about all the propeller stuff, its the loss of the pictures of my beautiful Limit fan that bothers me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalslandia Posted September 25, 2016 Author Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 yes nice pictures, and some good thoughts. I know now the reason, so it is ok. Jan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightwatch Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 Where are the pictures of that nice Limit fan? We have similar in sons loft. Sorry Bizzard but ours looks in better condition. And like yours it works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Dunkley Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 Perhaps one of the Mods has recently bought an Axiom propeller ventilation fan, and can't bear to be reminded about it ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Ambrose Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 (edited) Huh, just normal now, threads and posts disappear all the time. Problem is only the people following any particular thread notice, the rest of the membership are happy in their ignorance. Phil Edited September 25, 2016 by Phil Ambrose 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alan_fincher Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 Huh, just normal now, threads and posts disappear all the time. Problem is only the people following any particular thread notice, the rest of the membership are happy in their ignorance. Phil What you may not be unaware of is that apparently nearly all of the people who did have the title of "moderator" are not currently actually able to do the role for some reason or another. Often, (in fact I suspect "usually"), there will be perhaps only one moderator available, who may well have many other things going on in their life, or may simply be at the end of a very poor connection where it may be possible to hide an entire thread, but may be quite impossible at that time to pick through it, and weed out just the contentious stuff. Where a thread disappears it often doesn't mean it has gone for good - often it will reappear, maybe after a moderator has discussed with Dan, and maybe removed just some entries. IMO it is an entirely thankless task, and I'm sure the small number of mods still active at all have enough to do without deliberately disappearing posts or threads for no other reason than to upset the membership. If that thread is currently hidden, my bet is that eventually someone posted something in it that meant it was deemed necessary. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiggs Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 (edited) When commercial companies are being criticised and threaten to take legal action against a forum that is run only on a voluntary basis there is no choice but to delete the thread / criticisms. (I have no idea if this happened in this instance.) If you enjoy this forum please support or at least tolerate the moderators. Edited September 25, 2016 by Tiggs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Brooks Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 Or threats have been issued. Readers may conclude by whom but I could not possibly as I do not know. If so it is right and proper that Dan and teh forum is protected by taking the thread down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frangar Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 Surely a quick note to say why the thread has gone wouldn't hurt or take long. It's getting so less people want to contribute these days as threads seem to go on a whim. Cheers Gareth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Brooks Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 If by chance my supposition is correct saying why the topic was removed could be represented as aggravating the alleged commercial damage so it may not be wise to publish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athy Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 If a CWFer has been poorly treated by, or received unsatisfactory goods or service from, a trader, it is his duty to let us know, and the forum's duty to publish it, as that is for the benefit of all our members because it will prevent them from making a similar mistake. Not so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cobaltcodd Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 The damage has been done though - Having read through the thread a couple of times and actually seeing the email exchange (much more of a 2-sided story than we ever get) I doubt I would ever approach that company to buy a prop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Brooks Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 If a CWFer has been poorly treated by, or received unsatisfactory goods or service from, a trader, it is his duty to let us know, and the forum's duty to publish it, as that is for the benefit of all our members because it will prevent them from making a similar mistake. Not so? That is the ideal but as far as the law is concerned and the internet in particular the maxim "might is right sums" it up. Even if we all clubbed together I doubt we could raise the cash needed to fight a company through the courts AND prevent the site host taking the whole site down. I think one has to be realistic and pragmatic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athy Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 That is the ideal but as far as the law is concerned and the internet in particular the maxim "might is right sums" it up. Even if we all clubbed together I doubt we could raise the cash needed to fight a company through the courts AND prevent the site host taking the whole site down. I think one has to be realistic and pragmatic. But, if a statement is true, what grounds would Axiom (or anyone else) have to do so? The laws of libel apply, I think, to damaging untruths. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Brooks Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 But you have to be prepared to go to court to prove it. You do not need to go to court if the web host decides they do not want any hassle when they get issued with a take down notice and simply takes the site down. You may then have to go to court to make them put it back up. What the law says and how the law works for ordinary people is two different things. I have my own thoughts of what might be gong on but as they are supposition based on experience I can not put them on the forum. I will PM them to you if you wish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geo Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 But you have to be prepared to go to court to prove it. You do not need to go to court if the web host decides they do not want any hassle when they get issued with a take down notice and simply takes the site down. You may then have to go to court to make them put it back up. What the law says and how the law works for ordinary people is two different things. I have my own thoughts of what might be gong on but as they are supposition based on experience I can not put them on the forum. I will PM them to you if you wish. Please PM as I would be interested Even though the site has taken the posts down I believe that it is still possible for the company to take the OP to court. Particularly as in this case where the OP is know to the company and identifiable from the emails published. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athy Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 Even though the site has taken the posts down I believe that it is still possible for the company to take the OP to court. Particularly as in this case where I believe not, as long as he has proof (the e-mails which he has apparently kept) that the company did write the words to him that he said they wrote to him. It is, surely, rather like a boatbuilder taking umbrage because I say that the narrowboat which he built for me is seven feet two inches wide and thus not fit for its purpose. The only proof needed can be provided by a tape measure, which will determine whether I'm telling the truth or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geo Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 I believe not, as long as he has proof (the e-mails which he has apparently kept) that the company did write the words to him that he said they wrote to him. It is, surely, rather like a boatbuilder taking umbrage because I say that the narrowboat which he built for me is seven feet two inches wide and thus not fit for its purpose. The only proof needed can be provided by a tape measure, which will determine whether I'm telling the truth or not. As always the perfect defence is that what was said was the truth. Then I believe it becomes a matter of what is the truth and on the balance of probabilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nb Innisfree Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 I'm gradually returning to CWDF and careful what I post including in this thread which I was enjoying. Waste of time and effort contributing. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albion Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 I'm gradually returning to CWDF and careful what I post including in this thread which I was enjoying. Waste of time and effort contributing.Absolutely. If you are not allowed to return to the demerits of a technical product (discussed before at length) without the thread being taken down then what is the point. Roger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Brooks Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 Please PM as I would be interested Even though the site has taken the posts down I believe that it is still possible for the company to take the OP to court. Particularly as in this case where the OP is know to the company and identifiable from the emails published. No way. Although I take care in the way I phrase my written comments you seem far too close an supportive of the company. That offer was to Athy, NOT you. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geo Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 No way. Although I take care in the way I phrase my written comments you seem far too close an supportive of the company. That offer was to Athy, NOT you. Thank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bizzard Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 Some old Seagull outboard motors had multi blade props with similar square blade profile with no twist, they were extremely efficient. My bit of experience of most wide beam boats with 2.1 boxes with conventional props is that when put into gear when stationary their props cavitate badly ''big roar and bubbles'' for a few seconds until the boat gets on the move and the prop starts to get a grip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MtB Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 Some old Seagull outboard motors had multi blade props with similar square blade profile with no twist, they were extremely efficient. My bit of experience of most wide beam boats with 2.1 boxes with conventional props is that when put into gear when stationary their props cavitate badly ''big roar and bubbles'' for a few seconds until the boat gets on the move and the prop starts to get a grip. Point of order your Bizzardness... Bubbles show the effect you descibe is aeration, not cavitation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Featured Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now