Regarding the Peter Wales issue and so-called advertising:
1. Shouldn't members on the list be welcoming professional vendors who
contribute their expert knowledge on particular subjects? Clearly we
don't want overly zealous commercial clutter, but why not be open to
advice from such companies? If a company wants to take the time to
assist us on the list and thereby further their reputation, I think
that's perfectly acceptable, and a just reward. Similarly, if they
give us bogus advice, unsubstantiated claims, or resort to
self-inflating hyperbole, their reputations will suffer accordingly.
This is Internet justice.
2. We shouldn't be so dogmatic about restricting anything that bears
any resemblance to an advertisement. There's a lot of grey area here.
If a company is offering a spectacular limited-time offer for Audi
owners (Redline at $5/qt), it serves us to know about it. In another
sense, isn't the whole list just a gigantic ad for Audis?
3. I would find it much more misleading and subversive if Mr. Wales
were to omit his signature line. When reading a post, I grant
credibility to the subject matter according to a) the logical sense it
makes; and b) the credibility and expertise of the person posting the
message. It is extemely helpful when reading a post such as Mr. Wales'
to know that it comes from someone with daily professional experience.
It sounds like some of you out there may have had bad experiences with
Superchips. If so, you are free to express your relevant opinions on
the list just like Mr. Wales. Then reality and common sense becomes
the final arbiter of the truth. But we shouldn't place what amounts to
a gag order on Mr. Wales/Superchips or any other company or individual
with potentially helpful information. That would only serve to limit
knowledge and to deprive other members from making fully informed decisions.
My opinion only.