For the trolls

I'm not inside the moderator's head, but I have a feeling the descent into tit-for-tat lay legalese threats, anatomy-measuring, and personal insult was a big part of how another recent thread got closed.

And maybe if the same thing happens here, given the whole thread title is "For the trolls", this thread might be no great loss.

But it would be unfortunate for the same kind of thing to keep happening.

I don't expect Azusa to show any increased restraint (not after getting what he wanted once, silencing a thread where someone he disagreed with was posting).

So it may be on others to aim higher in responding (or deciding when that's even worthwhile).

 

PriusChat is for helping people keep their Prius and Toyota hybrids on the road and sharing expertise so we're all more proficient at caring for Toyota hybrids.

This malicious descent into targeted campaigns to attack and destroy the reputation of each other to the point that lawyers on all sides are getting involved is not, nor has ever been, the purpose of PriusChat.

Justifying this behavior in the name of "safety" when no one has ever had their vehicle destroyed or been injured is a weak and getting weaker excuse every day.

I'm all for intelligent fact finding and honest discussion, but the level of exaggeration, hyperbole and innuendo has gone way too far and is not something our moderator is going to put up with much longer.

 

Who you talking about?

 

PriusCamper has used different tactics elsewhere to achieve the same results.


With the current moderator presumably not even passively involved in day-to-day discussions, I don't imagine their reaction would be any different if they were to wake up to a similar report. Is there anything stopping any member from casually threatening legal action against PC for not taking down a post they dislike?

I get the feeling that the overwhelming majority of members here do not stand to profit financially from what they post on this site. Those that do, as evidenced by their constant use of affiliate links and codes, are quick to get dissenting voices drowned out in a sea of bilge and in threatening to lawyer up when they see something that might hurt their ability to commercialize their posts. PC already has rules in place for preventing this but they rarely seem to be enforced. Either that, or these members have the blessing of an administrator.


...


If the goal is to encourage helpful behavior rather than devolving into a platform enabling money-grubbing, maybe the answer lies in just enforcing this existing rule?

 

wow

 

I think that although the approach may not have been to everyone's like, there are objective items that have come to light that are worth discussing regarding the Nexcell products.

PriusChat seems to be the correct platform for this seeing that replacement battery packs are regularly discussed on this site.

The public looks to PriusChat to be a trusted (neutral) site when it comes to information like this.
I can't imagine how many times a day the question "I think my hybrid battery is failing, anyone have suggestions on what my options are?" comes up.

Unfortunately, I'm still not clear the best path forward to have that discussion occur in a way that doesn't involve ongoing moderation.

There are people defending Nexcell products that financially gain from promotion of said products. (For example, PriusCamper had (has?) affiliate links to Nexcell products, both the lithium and sodium packs.) Therefore it makes sense that they may have a financial incentive to ignore any objective criticism, and quash criticism of Nexcell.

I've joked about having a simple cheat sheet showing the breakdown of the varying things such as (Not sure I've summarized either party's opinions quite right, but hopefully you get the idea.)

Worldview
- mudder | Nexcell
- Sodium needs cell level monitoring | Sodium does not need cell level monitoring
- Soldering is not recommended for automotive battery packs | Soldering is ok for automotive packs
- Signal soother bridges HV disconnect and is unsafe | *I'm not sure if the4re has been a rebuttal?
etc, etc​

And maybe the parties could share more data or citations to back things up?
I know That's what mudder was starting at one point.

Anyone else have some ideas?

 

I like that cheat sheet as it focuses on the technical.

Clearly there have been posts that failed to steer away from the personal, and those were on both sides of the |.

Steering away means both: not taking it there, and not going there if somebody else takes it there.

I'm pretty sure I heard Tideland's dad-voice saying "I don't care who started it! Who's big enough to know better?"

I think it's good to be aware of potential conflicts on both sides, in just the same way that a published journal article usually has a disclosure of potential conflicts. Some members here have known financial interests aligned with Nexcell, and mudder has openly disclosed being a possible future battery competitor.

I don't think those conflicts on either side should be used to dismiss either side's technical claims out of hand.

I think it's better when technical claims get compared and evaluated on evidence.

 

People with enough of a knowledge base in common manage to have technical discussions all the time without all needing to have the same item in front of them. Might even argue that when human technological progress really took off was after people figured out how to do that. There's nothing 'low' about it.

I also don't buy that there was anything 'low' about mudder offering to pay anybody for an item that they had.

It is only because of mudder that this community learned what the signal soother actually does. Only vague nonspecific verbiage had been seen until then. Before mudder offered to examine one, I had also offered to do so, only I didn't offer any bounty, and when mudder offered to, he did. And that enabled him to answer the question that more than one person had asked in that thread without getting a technical answer to that point. PriusChat is better off for it.

It is only because of mudder that this community learned any battery prototype shipped out with disconnect terminals that don't disconnect anything. We don't know how many shipped out like that but we know it at least happened once.

PriusChat is better off knowing about that. Was it disproportionate for mudder to say, in that post, something like "immediately go and take out that battery"? A little, yeah. I would have thought it adequate to say something more like "go with a meter and check whether the one you've got has working disconnect terminals, if it does, carry on."

But I can see how mudder might not have written something quite that measured, in the immediate aftermath of discovering disconnect terminals that were dummies.