Lotus 7 Club - is it worth it?
Discussion
Crossflow Kid said:
Stop being a silly tit by assuming everything refers directly to you personally.
I meant "you" in the commonly recognised generic third person plural form. "You" as in You, Me and Everyone.
I was also speculating and preempting, so although though "you" may not have said it in the past nor posted it here, I mentioned it as the sort of thing that typically might get said.
Is that clear enough or d'you want a diagram?
It's second person plural actually if you are going to get all grammatical . Third person is they .I meant "you" in the commonly recognised generic third person plural form. "You" as in You, Me and Everyone.
I was also speculating and preempting, so although though "you" may not have said it in the past nor posted it here, I mentioned it as the sort of thing that typically might get said.
Is that clear enough or d'you want a diagram?
P
Wow.
So you knew what was intended all along and we're just being a t
t? I can see why BC appeals.
Anyway, you'll have to excuse my grammar - I was giving this thread as much attention as it deserves.
coppice said:
Crossflow Kid said:
Stop being a silly tit by assuming everything refers directly to you personally.
I meant "you" in the commonly recognised generic third person plural form. "You" as in You, Me and Everyone.
I was also speculating and preempting, so although though "you" may not have said it in the past nor posted it here, I mentioned it as the sort of thing that typically might get said.
Is that clear enough or d'you want a diagram?
It's second person plural actually if you are going to get all grammatical . Third person is they .I meant "you" in the commonly recognised generic third person plural form. "You" as in You, Me and Everyone.
I was also speculating and preempting, so although though "you" may not have said it in the past nor posted it here, I mentioned it as the sort of thing that typically might get said.
Is that clear enough or d'you want a diagram?
So you knew what was intended all along and we're just being a t
t? I can see why BC appeals.Anyway, you'll have to excuse my grammar - I was giving this thread as much attention as it deserves.
Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 7th December 18:29
coppice said:
No - but I do wish people would leave JK alone. He may wear his learning a little heavily sometimes but his heart is in the right place and unlike many he is unfailingly courteous, in contrast to some of his more vocal critics. And of course- you don't have to read it !
I agree FWIWcoppice said:
No - but I do wish people would leave JK alone. He may wear his learning a little heavily sometimes but his heart is in the right place and unlike many he is unfailingly courteous, in contrast to some of his more vocal critics. And of course- you don't have to read it !
Isn't that the point? You DO have to read it and plenty of people find him extremely wearing. To the extent that he spoils their use of BC to the degree that they don't frequent any more, (myself included after 14 years). It (BC) was dying a death some time ago before the switch to the new format which now seems to have pretty much killed it.It just isn't right that the management team allow him to allow his disability to impact on the enjoyment of so many other users. If he was being defamatory , or rude they'd stop it or ask him to wind his neck in.
He knows that he pisses most people off but he doesn't care or is unable to perceive the harm that he causes because he is so desperate for the Oxygen of "being helpful" and thus liked. Ironic really that in pursuit of popularity he has played a significant part in killing off what was a thriving web community.
IBDAET said:
Toaster, One day you will understand the effort made.
Nigel, Bob and Graham, thanks for your support.
I do know the effort believe me your not the only one who has had to organise an event, I know some of the people you know, I read the posts on BC and I saw you in action, the organisation you did was welcomed but things change and Le Mans is a while ago, be pleased you had an impact and what you achieved. But nothing lasts forever and 'others' may have felt a change was needed after all its a club (whether they are right or not is immaterial).Nigel, Bob and Graham, thanks for your support.
Club Politics are problomatic http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/club-polit... and oh so common so your not alone
kenny.R400 said:
Shame mate. However other far easier to use 7 related websites are now available and are getting busier by the day.
It is. It's basically a well run club by people with good intentions who do it in their spare time but I just think it's lost its appeal for me. I would stil recommend it as a good idea for those starting life with a 7 for the first time though Smollet said:
He's very good at resurrecting threads from a long time ago that seem to have died a natural death. Perhaps he's trying to show that he alone is very good at using the not fit for purpose search facility. I won't be renewing next year for a variety of reasons.
Toby, you are kidding I hope? 
AVES said:
Isn't that the point? You DO have to read it
What a stupid statement, or course you DON'T have to read any posts, it's your choice to open them.But what would you expect from the man that has just thrown all his toys out of the pram?
Edited by Guy Lowe on Friday 19th December 09:34
I can see both sides of this one - he is irritating and reduces any thread to a list of links and barely relevant information and condescending comments. He does try to "beat" everyone that responds to a subject and that is frankly draining.
However, you don't have to read it, I simply stop reading a thread he becomes involved with (most of them to be fair)as it will veer off course and the original post subject will be lost.
I wouldn't be leaving the club on the basis of an irritant - you have the choice to read or to not read.
Many forums have a block facility - it's a shame BC doesn't!
However, you don't have to read it, I simply stop reading a thread he becomes involved with (most of them to be fair)as it will veer off course and the original post subject will be lost.
I wouldn't be leaving the club on the basis of an irritant - you have the choice to read or to not read.
Many forums have a block facility - it's a shame BC doesn't!
Chrisp5782 said:
I can see both sides of this one - he is irritating and reduces any thread to a list of links and barely relevant information and condescending comments. He does try to "beat" everyone that responds to a subject and that is frankly draining.
However, you don't have to read it, I simply stop reading a thread he becomes involved with (most of them to be fair)as it will veer off course and the original post subject will be lost.
I wouldn't be leaving the club on the basis of an irritant - you have the choice to read or to not read.
Many forums have a block facility - it's a shame BC doesn't!
That's my point really - In that he feels the need to condescend in almost every thread(often more than once), you end up reading none.However, you don't have to read it, I simply stop reading a thread he becomes involved with (most of them to be fair)as it will veer off course and the original post subject will be lost.
I wouldn't be leaving the club on the basis of an irritant - you have the choice to read or to not read.
Many forums have a block facility - it's a shame BC doesn't!
Do I give a FF what GL thinks? Nope. Have I ever? Nope.
Of course, the fundermental problem arose when the Club seperated itself from the membership by becoming a Limited Company. The decision to limit the membership of the company to just three or four people effectivly relagated all the others to the rank of customer, with no influence beyond paying subscriptions or not, and with any form of critical comment being frowned upon. However, it's just a car club so not very interesting or important in the general scheme of things.
What I don't understand is why it's called the Lotus 7 Club when the vast majority of "customers" have the continuation Caterham 7, particularly when it is such a significantly better car than the original version? Surely it would be better to call it the 7 Club, with a section for Lotus, Caterham, Westfield etc??
What I don't understand is why it's called the Lotus 7 Club when the vast majority of "customers" have the continuation Caterham 7, particularly when it is such a significantly better car than the original version? Surely it would be better to call it the 7 Club, with a section for Lotus, Caterham, Westfield etc??
I have seen that comment quite a lot. About the limited company thing and I dont really get it. I dont know what it was that was so much better before. In my first days of membership it seemed a very cliquey place with a few dominant characters. seems the same today. what am I missing?
dptdpt said:
What I don't understand is why it's called the Lotus 7 Club when the vast majority of "customers" have the continuation Caterham 7, particularly when it is such a significantly better car than the original version? Surely it would be better to call it the 7 Club, with a section for Lotus, Caterham, Westfield etc??
That has been raised many times. There was a "vote" about changing the name a few years ago iirc.I dont think the car snobs would like to be associated with Westfields though
BertBert said:
I have seen that comment quite a lot. About the limited company thing and I dont really get it. I dont know what it was that was so much better before. In my first days of membership it seemed a very cliquey place with a few dominant characters. seems the same today. what am I missing?
I have seen it mentioned too but suspect its an excuse for something to blame.I do really think that the clubs priority is what causes some of the issues. It should be about a hobby, for fun and about what is best for the members rather than whats best for the club.
Lots of clubs are companies outside the car world and I belong to at least 4 which are incorporated. Can't say it has been an issue really - the same volunteers end up running them anyway. And because a non incorporated club doesn't have a legal identity in its own right company status makes a lot of things easier and can reduce personal liability of officials - which in these ultra litigious times can be useful
dptdpt said:
What I don't understand is why it's called the Lotus 7 Club when the vast majority of "customers" have the continuation Caterham 7, particularly when it is such a significantly better car than the original version? Surely it would be better to call it the 7 Club, with a section for Lotus, Caterham, Westfield etc??
But that isn't the club though. It is a club for owners and people interested in Lotus and Caterham 7s. And as such operates in conjunction/cooperation (or some such suitable word) with Caterham Cars. It isn't a club "for" any type of 7-esque vehicle. That's just the way it is. The name I think is pretty immaterial.The logo says it ok as far as I am concerned!
http://www.lotus7.club/sites/default/files/logo_0....
Bert
Gassing Station | Caterham | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff