Faye Brother

I've got pre-facelift 17"s on the car, but unfortunately the spare set of wheels are tucked away in storage so I can't try the caps for you, Nic.

Might be wrong, but I think the facelift wheels have dimpled centre caps? This is a picture of the centre caps I have on my spare set of 17"s.

That's not the issue I'm questioning.

One last time: Everyone has to pay to post in the Classifieds. It's not like the other forums where you enjoy a certain amount of 'free' posts. A new user/existing non paying user contacts a moderator and asks whether they can have their advert in the For Sale section. Moderator agrees and non-paying user is now advertising for free. Yes, the discretion exists for the moderator to say yes or no, but that is not the point. The point is that the flexibility to permit a non-paying member to advertise exists in the first place, irrespective of who may or may not exercise it. You appear to be confusing my agreement of the fact that it is permissible for a moderator to make that decison in the current circumstances, with my actual question of whether or not the flexibility to make such a decision should exist in the first place given that the Classifieds section is pay to post.

No, that's not what I'm saying. My point relates to the fairness or otherwise of permitting (in certain circumstances) non-paid up members to advertise for free in the Classifieds section, when it's pay to post for everyone else.

I disagree that you've answered my question, but you're then going to disagree with me disagreeing with you, etc, etc. I don't think it unreasonable that a moderator be allowed to make that decision. What I'm questioning is whether or not it is fair that the flexibility exists to make that decision in the first place, especially considering that the Classifieds section is pay to post only. As we're clearly at odds on this matter, and unless you want to go on like this for ever and a day, I'd suggest we leave it here.

Do you actually believe it is fair that someone who isn't a paid up member can receive free advertising exposure on here then? The majority of people have to/do pay as the Classifieds section is pay to post only.

I think you nearly answered my question in there.........somewhere........ In summation, some people don't have to pay to advertise, other people do. Just depends on what you're selling and how you go about it initially. Thanks.

I favour discretion generally, but not in the context of how it is applied to whether or not someone has to pay for their For Sale thread. My fault for not making that clearer. Whether or not I agree with the current system doesn't alter the fact that it does appear to work well at present. Both you and Ian cite that the flexibility is there for the benefit of members and I can see that argument. However, the principle established by this is that someone will get free advertising whilst someone else will not, which clearly isn't fair especially if you've paid your money. No matter how unlikely you consider such a situation to be, it is a distinct possibility that someone will raise this an issue. If I were in that position I would certainly either request that the other person paid up or that I received a refund so I could benefit from some free advertising. If you're going to run the Classifieds on the basis that only paid up members can post that is how it should remain. Regarding your hypothetical question, if Ewen's friend wants to advertise himself then he has to pay. If, on the other hand, Ewen were to post on his behalf (which I understand is acceptable practice on here) then he wouldn't. Personally, advertising on behalf of a third party is a no-no for me as well, but that's for another thread. As I've had the courtesy of replying to hypothetical question, perhaps you could do the same to mine? Two near identical cars are advertised at similar prices. Seller 1 doesn't pay, but Seller 2 does. Seller 2 raises this apparent discrepancy and asks that either Seller 1 has their advert removed or they pay up, or that they (Seller 2) receives a refund. How do you tackle that with your discretion? (Assumption that both users have signed up to sell their cars)

Ian, Definitely one of those 'agree to disagree' moments. One more hypothetical question if I may, though? Say for arguments sake my two situations outlined above did occur, would Seller No.2 be entitled to their money back? Or would Seller No.1 be required to pay to advertise? Contrary to what my sister may think , I do favour discretion and the system would appear to operate well at present. In fact, it probably will do right up until someone who has paid to advertise notices that someone else hasn't and decides to pursue it further. As I apparently don't make any suggestions, would it be in order for me to suggest some way (and assuming that this doesn't happen already) in which to advise new users that if they're not paid up members and consider they have something of community benefit to sell, that they can contact a moderator first? Anyway, thanks for your polite replies. Much appreciated.

Ian, They might pay if they consider it would be lead to a sale. That is, after all, the whole point of advertising. The point about not being into forums was not meant from the perspective of whether they are good places to advertise or not, rather that they may have lives outside of the cyber world (sounds unlikely, but I have heard of such people) and would therefore not be regular posters, but still may wish to contribute, for example, some technical knowledge in the future. I appreciate the point about potential benefits to existing members, but that still doesn't alter the fact that some people get free advertising whilst others have to pay for it. By the way, I hope I haven't upset you as I may be needing your skills with the Emanage at some time in the future.

Example 1: I've got a car to sell which has a value of 9k but I don't want to pay my £10 because I'm tight and I know that there's a possibility that if I make a one off request I'll get my advertising for free. My request is approved and I sell the car for 9k to a 'lurker' who isn't a member. I'd be the only one who got any benefit out of that - 9k in my pocket with absolutely nothing to the club. Example 2: I've still got a car to sell, but I realise that I've got to be a paid up member to advertise so I pay my £10. I'm not particularly into forums so I won't be posting much but the £10 is money well spent for advertising on here and they are the rules as far as I know, so it's is fair enough. I then discover that the person in Example 1 is advertising a similar spec car to mine at a comparable price, but because they chose to contact a moderator first they've gained their advertising for free. I would probably feel that is a little unfair. Now, I know you'll say they're far fetched examples, but look past that and at the principle instead. It surely cannot be equitable that one person can advertise for free, whilst the other pays for the privilege?

I know you mean that in jest.

Mawby, I'm sorry you think that I'm looking to 'pick holes' in the forum rules as that is not the case at all. I'm just trying to understand why some people are seemingly allowed to advertise an item or a car when they're not paid up members. Surely that is unfair to people who do pay their subs? As you will know from this thread, I did indeed offer some suggestions to altering the Classifieds section. You seem to be a little upset with my question, so I apologise again to you.

http://mkivsupra.net/vbb/showthread.php?t=48308

S'alright, Ewen. I wasn't having a pop at your particular request. I'm just finding it difficult to understand exactly what the rules are for the Classifieds section. Mawby seems to be saying that there can be exceptions to people not being paid up members but who are allowed to advertise in the Classifieds. Or have I got that wrong?

Does that not defeat the whole object of only allowing paid up Members to post in the Classifieds section, though?

Spotted at about 3.15pm heading east. Car was looking impressively dirty.

Rather off topic, but I read the thread title and thought it was some sort of kit car for sale! Sounds a real beast, though. Perhaps you could hire it out as an aquarium 'enforcer'?

Type S spoiler can be seen here: http://trdparts.jp/english/parts_aero-supra.html Looks like Type S is the official designation for the wing that is commonly referred to as the 'TRD spoiler' on here.

As I read it, the Bomex is a temporary measure pending Matt sorting out his 'one off' bumper.

Green screwdriver for me.

Yep. It's probably not too much of an exaggeration to say that every other post involved him trying to flog something or other.

If he continues on here like he did on Scoobynet, then he'll probably be banned by tomorrow morning, CJ.

I see you've started to trade commercially on here after you were banned from Scoobynet for doing the same thing.