My point exactly. Especially in a thread that was still pretty much in good shape, True the op had mentioned the door lock thing to, those were the only 2 things adressed in which the op had issues with. For someone to go one bonneville club and get a picture of nylon tie strap and engine mount is way wayout of left field and was used as a diversion to discredit my advice. Instead of telling him to start a new topic you choose to say "whoa what is that...blah blah" That is egging him on becasue you make it once again, ok for clown to do whatever he feels like. He is just a member, you are the moderator

Since you can't start a new topic, I will.



If you are agreeing with that whole statement, why are you aimed at me instead of the other moderators? If I moderate a thread that I involved in, and I am at odds with someone, then that isn't very fair is it?



The digression, as it usually does, begins with you.



The link was provided so that it could be discussed in the thread created for it, as that is how a discussion board works.

And it continues, because you don't feel the need to post where replies to different subjects belong.



Then you go again-



And there's the root of the now trashed thread. I can't believe I have to spoon-feed you this.

It gets worse, after you are told you are off topic.



Your continued digression was childish. See the definition in the etiquette thread.



In a separate thread. Anything you had to say about it, should have went there, before all focus was on the antenna thread, and the link was provided to discuss it in its proper place. What part of that is so hard to understand?



I know, I read both threads, and replied where the reply belonged. I replied later to the off-topic portion after you were telling him to pry off his door panel with a screwdriver.



Your flame attacks are also way out of left field. Again, here is a case where you attacked first, and are now bitching because someone retaliated.



Your advice was worth discrediting.



I've been over this. Read the damned reply.



In addition, I never continued the digression after Norm supplied the link, until you chose to defend it.



I haven't moderated your unwarranted flame replies either, and have received no complaints. What you don't get, is that in every thread, you start it, and he retorts. What do you want me to do about it? I can't control whatever garbage you type, and I am not going to spend my time editing and watching you like a fucking babysitter. You are not a child, grow up.

Again, are you telling me you want to be free to flame on, and have me punish him for reacting to you? Give me a fucking break.



And if/when he gets out of line, he will know. You don't need to worry about it.

Just because I am a moderator does not mean I lose my ability to post. If a member, such as yourself is giving bullshit advice, it is part of my duty as a representative of TOC to put a stop to it. The only person creating drama, was you. I participated because what I said, needed to be said, aside from a few smart-assed comments about potatoes and photography, to keep the discussion in good spirits.

Besides, if I was an active participant, and then I moderated you when you got out of control, you would call me a "wanabe dictator" again, and whine and bitch that I was being unfair. By addressing you in public, within the context of the threads, I was fair and unbiased, and if there was bias, it was in public.

I personally pride myself at giving sound mechanical advice, within the realm of my experience and my education. If I don't know all facets of a particular operation or procedure, I do not act like I do. Instead I work to try to point the OP in the right direction so he/she can find the information they are looking for.



They also separate the wheat from the chaff, which is what I have been doing this entire time.

If you have a problem with this, please feel free to either talk to the boss (Brando) or reply. If you reply, quote the statement you have a problem with.

ANdrew i called you a wanabe dictator because i couldnt get you to see that it takes two, i dont argue or start drama all by myself. If action were to be taken against me in a fair manner i would have no problem and immediatley change but like i said you refuse to see where im coming from to just because i cursed out norm in my first post...which is all you see and want to see, but my concerns have been voiced if you choose to ignore them fine..

I have seen it the entire time. The problem I have is that you think I should punish the person acting in self-defense, which is not right. If you get into a fight on the street, the person that punches back will not face consequences for hitting back.



Well, you did when you went off for no reason in the first place. You continued to in other threads as well. The format is as follows.

OP posts a question.

You answer, perhaps with something unclear, or that is painfully wrong.

Someone replies with a question, or a rebuttal to your advice.

You get pissed and flame them.

There are a good number of threads that you are active in where this has happened. But then, I am supposed to take your side?



This is not true, since I am being fair.



I see where you are coming from. You don't like the way Norm treats you. What you don't see, however, is that you started it.



I don't care about swearing. It was not the swearing that was the problem with the post, it was the content. Take those swear words out, and its still a flame aimed towards Norm, with no reason to flame him. You never apologized for the content of the post, only the language, and then you continue to escalate the situation. Then you act shocked when he doesn't treat you with the utmost respect that you think you deserve. Do you see the big hole in your logic?



If your concerns had basis for action by a moderator, it would have already been done. I reviewed each side, and you don't have a leg to stand on.

I am not doing this to take sides with anyone. I look at the facts, then make my judgment. Again, if you think I am wrong, post the quote, I'll review it again.

Moved from 85cieraholiday's thread "hard-starting- Delta 88":



That would be understandable, if the OP did not know what he had. Since he did, it had no place. We can only assume that what he is telling us he has, is what he actually has, especially the way he said it.

Just like you and Norm got on me for any misinformation, well the op wasnt giving out the proper info, especially when he said big red letters that say 3800, because a ln3 and l27 are diffrent, they use diffren intake's and the l27 (91-92) dosent have a egr valve, diffrent exaust mani's, diffrent TB's, do you get where im going? Thats why i was trying to give him the proper info, (and this is something i know to a tee.) So in actuality i wasnt being off topic all you have to do is double check





this is a l27 (series 1)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e ... II_L36.JPG

this is a Ln3 (pre-series 1)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e ... eville.JPG

It was the information that he wanted, not advice he was giving.



After you had already brought it up. How does that justify your initial hijack?



Yes, but we still haven't see his engine, and as far as anyone should be concerned, if he says its a Series I, then its a Series I. If it is not a Series I, he will know soon enough, when he gets Series I specific advice.



That's understandable, if that was the information he wanted.



He wanted some advice on where to look for the cause of its intermittent starting condition. He did not ask about engine codes.





Is there positive proof that there wasn't a single Series I that had red lettering on it?

Im not arguing about the series of engine he has honestly, Just to make this public knowledge, Like i said from the jump i was not trying to hijack a thread at all point blank, even though i consider posts like "how ironic and such" the real thread jack or off topic post, anyway like i said they have diffrent parts there are some diffrences between the motors at hand, but i will not discuss them again, I just wanted to make clear my intentions of saying what i did.

and to answer the question, no series 1 came with red lettering at all, they had a new design for the engine cover due to the intake manifold change over (91-92 all aluminum Egr less, UIM's)(93-94 have the composite UIM equipped with a EGR system integrated into the UIM, along with diffrent fuel pressure regulators and other diffrences)

Of course not. You have nothing to argue about.

Wait: Why did you stop arguing?


OK. You have never tried to hijack a thread. We believe you.

We always believe everything you say. Why? Because, for many years you have been building a reputation as a "stand up guy" who is known, worldwide, as a man whose "word" is so solid, one can wager his very life on it.

However, your BS posts seem to keep turning into multi page 91buickman BS defenses of 91buickman BS statements.

Yes. We already know, it is all Norms fault.


Whether they are, or are not, has nothing to do with your continuing BS posts and/or your inability to act like an adult.

Comic relief is a "time honored custom" on most message boards, and TOC is one of them. Following is an example:


Just a bit of harmless topical humor.


Which did not call for, yet, another personal attack, by a paranoid Troll.

And that made the following:

an excellent example, of the "Comic relief" I alluded to.

"Everyone else is doing it" is just another of your childish excuses for refusing to act like an adult.


From your second post, on TOC, you have given us ample evidence, in support, of your true intent.


No one cares about your answer to a question no one asked.

Until you have personal knowledge about that particular engine, in that particular car, Your "internet education" is not sufficient reason to believe it is anything other that what was stated.

A simple "Are you sure you have that engine right?" would have been an acceptable question, and his answer (whatever it might be) cannot be disputed without direct evidence to the contrary.

Even if your information were to prove correct, it is still contrary to the thread starter, and should be kept to yourself until that subject actually comes up.

An alternative, to showcase your vast knowledge, would be to write a "white paper" for inclusion in the TOC "tech" section.

Norm

I see you only posted images. The fact that you did not post the relevant pages, tells us you might be hiding something.

Probably only in my imagination, because we have no reason to believe you would do anything sleazy.

Norm