Automotive Vloggers (Vol. 5)

[Quags]

Retro_Jim said:

It's good to see Soup motoring is getting back on with the Esprit and working on shorter videos but releasing stuff sooner.

It is, but I'm growing tired of long intro, long outro and 9-13mins of the same thing which is mostly thanking the patrons, blowing dust off something and refurbishing a small part.

Seems like a decent guy, but no idea what he does with the rest of his time.

[123DWA]

Mezzanine said:

And that PH was akin to AIDS or something to that effect.

Not a million miles from the truth. Given the reputation this website has, I've never admitted to anyone IRL that I'm on here or even browse it.

[Rusty Old-Banger]

123DWA said:

Mezzanine said:

And that PH was akin to AIDS or something to that effect.

Not a million miles from the truth. Given the reputation this website has, I've never admitted to anyone IRL that I'm on here or even browse it.

We all know you're on it, Dave.

Regards,

Geoff from next door.

[Mezzanine]

123DWA said:

Mezzanine said:

And that PH was akin to AIDS or something to that effect.

Not a million miles from the truth. Given the reputation this website has, I've never admitted to anyone IRL that I'm on here or even browse it.

I’m not sure comparing it to AIDS on a public broadcast is really that smart or grown up either way.

[123DWA]

Rusty Old-Banger said:

We all know you're on it, Dave.

Regards,

Geoff from next door.

Geoff,

Please can you keep your weeds from straying on to my side of the shared drive before I am forced to start a thread in Speed, Plod & Law about how much I can sue you for.

Dave

[Silver3ides]

Truckosaurus said:

In other news, the 'Tasty Classics' Spitfire (Triumph not Supermarine) turned out nice for something painted in a open fronted garage.

I'm impressed at his dedication to only putting out 90min-2hr videos which seems to go against what everyone else does, but perhaps that is the way to make your channel standout in an ever more crowded market.

Yes , Bens great on camera , very funny guy too , It's not often hooked watching anything over 30 minutes on YT car related but Ben has it nailed .

[614-HSO]

I don't think anyone here is how Jezza would describe that someone if they saw you in a pub would be "I saw you turned up in a courtin did you know that actually they produced 47 of those" if anyone would do that it would be Sam.

Also I don't think other creators would be happy about him spreading lies about them either?

It is like how he was going to lie to the people who paid to go on a road trip with him on the cost of the coffees, or how he just drove off from the paying guests in the convoy.



Maybe everyone here was correct about Sam and I was in the wrong?



I won't make the same mistake again!



And Sam if you do see this and feel like responding, go ahead, but use a real account!

[614-HSO]

Mezzanine said:

123DWA said:

Mezzanine said:

And that PH was akin to AIDS or something to that effect.

Not a million miles from the truth. Given the reputation this website has, I've never admitted to anyone IRL that I'm on here or even browse it.

I’m not sure comparing it to AIDS on a public broadcast is really that smart or grown up either way.

I agree, it is something a pompous buffoon would say, maybe also a charlatan perhaps?

[InformationSuperHighway]

AJB1971 said:

InformationSuperHighway said:

They love us discussing their content. The issue for me is:

“I found the address for the Shmuseum”
“I looked on companies house and he made X profit”
“His missus works at X”

Etc…

I agree with two of your examples, but you do realise that Companies House is a public record? It’s designed to be able to quickly and easily find information.

For example, if a YouTuber were to misrepresent their business interests, you don’t think that a thread that started out asking if they were a scam would be an appropriate place to correct such information?

Yes of course I know it's publicly available. No doubt also is the address for the Shmuseum and a bit of digging on LinkedIn could find where someones missus works... but it doesn't mean it's right to go digging for the purposes of posting on here.

It's a moral issue vs a factual issue for me.

[PinkHouse]

This thread should just be about light hearted fun and anyone taking it way too seriously has missed the point. As long as we've got free entertainment and the creators aren't hurting anyone then it's all good in my opinion

[AJB1971]

InformationSuperHighway said:

AJB1971 said:

InformationSuperHighway said:

They love us discussing their content. The issue for me is:

“I found the address for the Shmuseum”
“I looked on companies house and he made X profit”
“His missus works at X”

Etc…

I agree with two of your examples, but you do realise that Companies House is a public record? It’s designed to be able to quickly and easily find information.

For example, if a YouTuber were to misrepresent their business interests, you don’t think that a thread that started out asking if they were a scam would be an appropriate place to correct such information?

Yes of course I know it's publicly available. No doubt also is the address for the Shmuseum and a bit of digging on LinkedIn could find where someones missus works... but it doesn't mean it's right to go digging for the purposes of posting on here.

It's a moral issue vs a factual issue for me.

That seems contradictory. What about the morals of the person misrepresenting their business interests? Anyway, we will agree to differ.

[InformationSuperHighway]

AJB1971 said:

InformationSuperHighway said:

AJB1971 said:

InformationSuperHighway said:

They love us discussing their content. The issue for me is:

“I found the address for the Shmuseum”
“I looked on companies house and he made X profit”
“His missus works at X”

Etc…

I agree with two of your examples, but you do realise that Companies House is a public record? It’s designed to be able to quickly and easily find information.

For example, if a YouTuber were to misrepresent their business interests, you don’t think that a thread that started out asking if they were a scam would be an appropriate place to correct such information?

Yes of course I know it's publicly available. No doubt also is the address for the Shmuseum and a bit of digging on LinkedIn could find where someones missus works... but it doesn't mean it's right to go digging for the purposes of posting on here.

It's a moral issue vs a factual issue for me.

That seems contradictory. What about the morals of the person misrepresenting their business interests? Anyway, we will agree to differ.

Fair point, we only have to look at JWWs 'interpretation' of business interests vs personal ownership of the cars. No wonder folks go digging.

[614-HSO]

InformationSuperHighway said:

AJB1971 said:

InformationSuperHighway said:

AJB1971 said:

InformationSuperHighway said:

They love us discussing their content. The issue for me is:

“I found the address for the Shmuseum”
“I looked on companies house and he made X profit”
“His missus works at X”

Etc…

I agree with two of your examples, but you do realise that Companies House is a public record? It’s designed to be able to quickly and easily find information.

For example, if a YouTuber were to misrepresent their business interests, you don’t think that a thread that started out asking if they were a scam would be an appropriate place to correct such information?

Yes of course I know it's publicly available. No doubt also is the address for the Shmuseum and a bit of digging on LinkedIn could find where someones missus works... but it doesn't mean it's right to go digging for the purposes of posting on here.

It's a moral issue vs a factual issue for me.

That seems contradictory. What about the morals of the person misrepresenting their business interests? Anyway, we will agree to differ.

Fair point, we only have to look at JWWs 'interpretation' of business interests vs personal ownership of the cars. No wonder folks go digging.

I doubt James would post lies on here about other creators under a fake username though.

[PT1984]

614-HSO said:

Mezzanine said:

STG said he likes to occasionally post ‘grenades’ on this thread under a pseudonym.

And that PH was akin to AIDS or something to that effect.

How childish.

Not a man of his word.

Hypocrite.

Disappointing.

My critique about Sam was that he was putting his very young child in a forward facing car seat in a somewhat dubious rear seat conversion. My real issue is that he has a platform and he was promoting such stupidity. For me I do everything in my power to protect my child. Also that his content is sometimes filler, not killer.

I don’t believe anyone else had anything worse to say. Nothing that wasn’t valid opinion or fact.

And yet that is his opinion. Shame. Maybe il tell my boss he is like hepatitis tomorrow when he critiques my work.

[Rusty Old-Banger]

But, put simply, he doesn't care. He's got a fat nobility fortune to fall back on (how many of us can drop everything and disappear to Italy for a coffee?), and he doesn't care what the little people think. Same with Mark McCann, and several others - YT is a mere hobby for them, so they, ultimately, don't NEED the views, so don't care if they upset anyone. That's not to say they're not entertaining (Apart from McCann, I just can't listen to that accent, same with CarWow bloke), but we are not supporting them, so maybe in their minds, they re doing us a favour by creating content. "Thanks for watching" is often just lip service.

[jayemm89]

PinkHouse said:

This thread should just be about light hearted fun and anyone taking it way too seriously has missed the point. As long as we've got free entertainment and the creators aren't hurting anyone then it's all good in my opinion

I am reporting this post for level headed thinking and common sense. Expect your ban to be swift and merciless

[Truckosaurus]

Rusty Old-Banger said:

But, put simply, he doesn't care.....

I suspect to be any sort of social media 'personality' with intact mental health, you totally have to 'not care' what anyone thinks of you, especially randoms on forums - however valid their criticisms are.

[AJB1971]

InformationSuperHighway said:

Fair point, we only have to look at JWWs 'interpretation' of business interests vs personal ownership of the cars. No wonder folks go digging.

Yes, it’s funny that his name should come up in this conversation.

614-HSO said:

I doubt James would post lies on here about other creators under a fake username though.

I’ve listened to the bit you highlighted about this thread and he starts by saying: "I just want to go in there." That then changes to: "Every now and again, I just go and leave a grenade, like, just on a fake username." There’s a clear difference between wanting to do something and actually doing it. I think he’s embellishing what he's saying to try and look clever.

There’s an interview technique to put people at ease so that they speak freely. Tell them something about yourself, and wait for them to reciprocate. Matt seems to be good at that. If they say something controversial, it will increase views.

Sam's future anecdote: The time I wound Pistonheads' members up by pretending to post under a fake username. It was chaos!

Edited by AJB1971 on Thursday 2nd May 16:23

[PinkHouse]

PT1984 said:

614-HSO said:

Mezzanine said:

STG said he likes to occasionally post ‘grenades’ on this thread under a pseudonym.

And that PH was akin to AIDS or something to that effect.

How childish.

Not a man of his word.

Hypocrite.

Disappointing.

My critique about Sam was that he was putting his very young child in a forward facing car seat in a somewhat dubious rear seat conversion. My real issue is that he has a platform and he was promoting such stupidity. For me I do everything in my power to protect my child. Also that his content is sometimes filler, not killer.

I don’t believe anyone else had anything worse to say. Nothing that wasn’t valid opinion or fact.

And yet that is his opinion. Shame. Maybe il tell my boss he is like hepatitis tomorrow when he critiques my work.

If you watch the clip, you could tell that he is very obviously joking with the host when he says that and last time I checked we're still allowed a bit of humour

[mattdavies]

PinkHouse said:

PT1984 said:

614-HSO said:

Mezzanine said:

STG said he likes to occasionally post ‘grenades’ on this thread under a pseudonym.

And that PH was akin to AIDS or something to that effect.

How childish.

Not a man of his word.

Hypocrite.

Disappointing.

My critique about Sam was that he was putting his very young child in a forward facing car seat in a somewhat dubious rear seat conversion. My real issue is that he has a platform and he was promoting such stupidity. For me I do everything in my power to protect my child. Also that his content is sometimes filler, not killer.

I don’t believe anyone else had anything worse to say. Nothing that wasn’t valid opinion or fact.

And yet that is his opinion. Shame. Maybe il tell my boss he is like hepatitis tomorrow when he critiques my work.

If you watch the clip, you could tell that he is very obviously joking with the host when he says that and last time I checked we're still allowed a bit of humour

Same with the buying Coffees quote you referenced, it was said in jest and that is clear when you watch it.