Pistonheads on the Piper V Hales court case
Discussion
i'm going to try & keep this opening post to a minimum, as no-one likes someone who waffles 
now, the original 30-odd page thread was a very interesting one, the type of thread that goes down pretty well, namely some very strong views on a pretty emotive subject.
& it is without a doubt a very emotive subject, in that a great number of us on Pistonheads hold mark hales in very high regard, as i imagine so do some of the editorial team at PH Towers.
we had tweets of support for the accused by Chris Harris, talk of a main page article, some ways of funding to help Hales seeing as though it is looking like he may be in the position to lose his home over what pretty much everyone agreed was a very silly mistake.
even a paypal account was opened & posted on the thread for where people could pledge their support.
& then the judgement of the trial was published.
now, threads get locked down fairly often on here, it's par for the course. but it seemed strange to many as to why it was locked down at that particular time in the discussion? we had practicing lawyers making contributions, friends of the accused etc & everything seemed pretty much above board to my eyes (note i am not a lawyer!).
we had an indication of PH's stance on the case in that they were actively writing on the thread about what they were going to do to support & then nothing?
has this stance changed? if so for what reason?
currently there is a thread in the porsche section on this very same subject that is still running, why lock one thread down & not the other?
in fact, as i posted in the other thread there were much worse things being said (to my eyes) in that thread.
if someone was potentially putting Pistonheads in a tricky situaltion with regards to the law & or libelous statements i assume that the moderators of the PH editorial team have the power to delete certain posts, why could that have applied in this case?
the reason for this long winded post is as i said in the other thread (i'm trying not to derail that one off topic by starting this) is that like many others who hold MH in high regard we're now left without being able to keep track of events on the case.
should PH make their thoughts & comments on the subject known?
we as readers look to publications (online or in print) for an insight into things we don't necessarily have close hand experience of, be that whether the new bmw 320i is a relatively good steer, what an old porsche racing car is to drive or what happens to its driver when the engine lets go.
the fact PH did comment on the thread in case suggests you do have views with which to impart on your readers but what are we to take from you locking down of the thread?
now, the original 30-odd page thread was a very interesting one, the type of thread that goes down pretty well, namely some very strong views on a pretty emotive subject.
& it is without a doubt a very emotive subject, in that a great number of us on Pistonheads hold mark hales in very high regard, as i imagine so do some of the editorial team at PH Towers.
we had tweets of support for the accused by Chris Harris, talk of a main page article, some ways of funding to help Hales seeing as though it is looking like he may be in the position to lose his home over what pretty much everyone agreed was a very silly mistake.
even a paypal account was opened & posted on the thread for where people could pledge their support.
& then the judgement of the trial was published.
now, threads get locked down fairly often on here, it's par for the course. but it seemed strange to many as to why it was locked down at that particular time in the discussion? we had practicing lawyers making contributions, friends of the accused etc & everything seemed pretty much above board to my eyes (note i am not a lawyer!).
we had an indication of PH's stance on the case in that they were actively writing on the thread about what they were going to do to support & then nothing?
has this stance changed? if so for what reason?
currently there is a thread in the porsche section on this very same subject that is still running, why lock one thread down & not the other?
in fact, as i posted in the other thread there were much worse things being said (to my eyes) in that thread.
if someone was potentially putting Pistonheads in a tricky situaltion with regards to the law & or libelous statements i assume that the moderators of the PH editorial team have the power to delete certain posts, why could that have applied in this case?
the reason for this long winded post is as i said in the other thread (i'm trying not to derail that one off topic by starting this) is that like many others who hold MH in high regard we're now left without being able to keep track of events on the case.
should PH make their thoughts & comments on the subject known?
we as readers look to publications (online or in print) for an insight into things we don't necessarily have close hand experience of, be that whether the new bmw 320i is a relatively good steer, what an old porsche racing car is to drive or what happens to its driver when the engine lets go.
the fact PH did comment on the thread in case suggests you do have views with which to impart on your readers but what are we to take from you locking down of the thread?
Will_ makes a good point here and in the other thread. A large proportion of the 'contributors' feel qualified to share their knee-jerk reactions but aren't interested enough to read the judgement document. I was leaping to all the same assumptions unti I read the judgement which makes it quite plain.
I posted in the (now closed) thread in support of Hales, having read the judgment.
The post immediately after mine suggested I was accusing him of insurance fraud, whereas the point I was trying to make was that his statement to the insurance company had seriously compromised his case.
I have no doubt that at the time he made his statement to the insurance company, he believed that he was covered by insurance, and I was certainly not accusing him of any attempted fraud.
I would have liked to have been able to correct this impression (having returned to the thread today), but the thread is locked. I'm posting it here rather than clutter up the other running thread.
The post immediately after mine suggested I was accusing him of insurance fraud, whereas the point I was trying to make was that his statement to the insurance company had seriously compromised his case.
I have no doubt that at the time he made his statement to the insurance company, he believed that he was covered by insurance, and I was certainly not accusing him of any attempted fraud.
I would have liked to have been able to correct this impression (having returned to the thread today), but the thread is locked. I'm posting it here rather than clutter up the other running thread.
As I've said on one of those threads, the threads are spoilt by people wading in with assumptions and rather spiteful opinions without reading the facts first. The same rubbish keeps being spouted time and again and too many people are coming up with analogies involving mundane cars and Rentacar etc.
The threads have run their course imo.
ETA: I see now that on the bottom of this page http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a... a chap called german has apologised for his comments now that he has actually taken the time to read the facts.
I suspect he'll possibly be the only to apologise though.
The threads have run their course imo.
ETA: I see now that on the bottom of this page http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a... a chap called german has apologised for his comments now that he has actually taken the time to read the facts.
I suspect he'll possibly be the only to apologise though.
Edited by heebeegeetee on Wednesday 23 January 09:42
heebeegeetee said:
As I've said on one of those threads, the threads are spoilt by people wading in with assumptions and rather spiteful opinions without reading the facts first. The same rubbish keeps being spouted time and again and too many people are coming up with analogies involving mundane cars and Rentacar etc.
Indeed, but we have some moron called Ali calling Piper a "c**t". And that appears to be acceptable to PH, unless it was directed at Hales it seems in which case the thread would be locked.Edited by heebeegeetee on Wednesday 23 January 09:42
Double standards? Protecting one of "their own"? Either way, a very poor handling of this matter by PH.
will_ said:
Indeed, but we have some moron called Ali calling Piper a "c**t". And that appears to be acceptable to PH, unless it was directed at Hales it seems in which case the thread would be locked.
Double standards? Protecting one of "their own"? Either way, a very poor handling of this matter by PH.
The posting of the Ali you mention, along with stuttgartmetal, has been disgusting imo and they should apologise. They are the reason that threads get locked.Double standards? Protecting one of "their own"? Either way, a very poor handling of this matter by PH.
heebeegeetee said:
will_ said:
Indeed, but we have some moron called Ali calling Piper a "c**t". And that appears to be acceptable to PH, unless it was directed at Hales it seems in which case the thread would be locked.
Double standards? Protecting one of "their own"? Either way, a very poor handling of this matter by PH.
The posting of the Ali you mention, along with stuttgartmetal, has been disgusting imo and they should apologise. They are the reason that threads get locked.Double standards? Protecting one of "their own"? Either way, a very poor handling of this matter by PH.
If they were decrying Hales, who knows - maybe they would have been already?
will_ said:
heebeegeetee said:
will_ said:
Indeed, but we have some moron called Ali calling Piper a "c**t". And that appears to be acceptable to PH, unless it was directed at Hales it seems in which case the thread would be locked.
Double standards? Protecting one of "their own"? Either way, a very poor handling of this matter by PH.
The posting of the Ali you mention, along with stuttgartmetal, has been disgusting imo and they should apologise. They are the reason that threads get locked.Double standards? Protecting one of "their own"? Either way, a very poor handling of this matter by PH.
If they were decrying Hales, who knows - maybe they would have been already?
Yet again, I click onto the Chris Harris penned thread & a new page, a new poster who is commenting having only read Chris' blog & doesn't have the full facts.
I do wonder if there is something more to this story that is yet to come out as hinted at by the poster Stacy, I mean according to them MH is preparing a statement with his legal team in reply to the ruling.
Doesn't sound like a man who is about to lose his home to legal costs if he is looking to increase them does it?
So the GG thread on is now at 37 pages & we're still getting the following pearls of wisdom
steveobes said:
As i have posted before.
Piper must have known that a new engine rebuild by a porsche engine expert will have put a lot of
value on the sale of his race car, more than the cost of doing the work.
Knowing this he decides to go for Hayles,knowing this would cripple him.
Piper would have not lost any money at all.
Piper to me is just plain greedy.
Does pistonheads' editorial stance have any effect on such deluded posts? Obviously a forum by its very definition allows members of the public to express their opinion but when a front page article by a leading writer on this site results in these types of comments I'm at a loss as to how there isn't a relation.Piper must have known that a new engine rebuild by a porsche engine expert will have put a lot of
value on the sale of his race car, more than the cost of doing the work.
Knowing this he decides to go for Hayles,knowing this would cripple him.
Piper would have not lost any money at all.
Piper to me is just plain greedy.
It seems obvious to me that the original GG thread was locked to allow a new one based on Chris Harris' and PH admin's pro-Hales opinions to take its place.
The new thread contains much more vitriol, abusive language and general BS than the previous one yet is left to run...
As always though it's PH's trainset and they'll use it to further their agendas if they wish to.
The new thread contains much more vitriol, abusive language and general BS than the previous one yet is left to run...
As always though it's PH's trainset and they'll use it to further their agendas if they wish to.
Stuart said:
I've made my feelings known on the other thread. It was closed for what we consider to be the right reasons. I've neither the time nor particularly the inclination to go into great depths defending every moderation decision we make.
Thanks,
Stuart
I like you. You're well feisty!Thanks,
Stuart
tbc said:
can someone explain what this is about
I won't go into details here because I don't want to re-open the discussion in this thread, but in a (non partisan) nutshell, a journalist drove someone else' historic racing car and the engine broke. There was a difference of opinion over why it happened and therefore who should foot the bill so it went to court. The court decided the journalist should pay and he now faces a large bill for the engine and legal fees on both sides.There was a HUGE thread on it earlier this week. You can read the original here:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Gassing Station | Website Feedback | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff