1970 911 s

[Frank Beck]

Good stuff.

Peter, THIS is what a forum should look like. Random discussions of political correctness (Peter, YOU started this!) on a 70S thread (BTW: I DO love this car.) and talk of dogs and seats on a behavioral thread down in Off Topic.

The moment you start steering and manipulating is when people get pissed. We're mostly adults here and while I have no problem with your acrostic I do cringe at the ridiculous PC and censorship that goes on. The subject of moderating should come up often because we all admire the effort this thankless job takes, NOT because you guys slash unnecessarily based on your sub-culture.

Yes. Sub-culture.

That is primarily what our opinions and attitudes are based on. Geography, politics, and local cultural norms define our sub-culture. You are part of a particularly thin-skinned, easily offended part of society. I believe most of us are not. Why allow the lowest common denominator and vast minority to run the show? Instead of the majority of members walking on eggshells and speaking some foreign language, perhaps the easily offended should grow some thicker skin and learn how to take a friendly jab? (That way when another member of society says "Boo!" to them, their lives don't come unraveled.) When the vast majority have to acquiesce to the vast minority something is askew.
You seem to forget that this community does a decent job of self-policing. When someone chimes in who was never taught to fight fairly or is consumed with their own pride then the community would be best served to have you remove their vile remarks. AND the community will let you know when this happens! I believe it is seldom necessary to take matters into your own hands before we speak.

BTW: I would love for one of you to defend removing an entire, very engaging and productive thread. Why is this EVER necessary in a forum like this?
Remember this famous quote?

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely"

Chilling reminder that those in authority should sacrificially place their personal agenda completely aside to effectively serve the needs of the community.

Thanks for ALL of your hard work.

(Hey, how about a Moderating Sticky so posts like this can be jettisoned to a common place? ... other than the delete file.)

[maspirito]

I agree as long as it isn't petty, malicious and insulting it should be allowed to fly.

[mohrgan]

So what's wrong with the car? Other than ride height, which is subjective, what else is there? I would love to have seen Frank's original critique. I don't understand all of the censoring?

[Frank Beck]

Oh Vey... This is slicing and dicing minutia but is probably a necessary exercise given the circumstances.

This all started with my original comment of (paraphrasing as it was so trivial I can't remember exactly):


"Beautiful and painful.

A shame that they went to so much trouble to restore and used the incorrect front bumper, useless mirror, and didn't black out under the rockers.

Still a very nice car."

That was basically it. My first sentence is a lengthy way to say "bittersweet". I restore 911's for a living. When I see an exquisite example and it's 1 or 2% from being perfect (relatively speaking) I'm going to say something. I am also going to gush over its attributes.
I have a hunch had I used the word "Bittersweet" it may have made Peter wince but not offended him to a degree where he felt the need to delete my post. Why is that? Because he runs words through a different filter than most here.

"Say something nice or don't say something at all" may apply to people in certain situations but since when did it become mandatory regarding inanimate objects? This takes the PC agenda to a whole new level. The idea that honest critique of a "thing" automatically reflects on the value of a human being is rubbish. It puts far too much emphasis on things rather than people.

[LiveFromNY]

*Frank Becks comments get removed

Things are getting bizarre around here...

[mohrgan]

"Beautiful and painful.

A shame that they went to so much trouble to restore and used the incorrect front bumper, useless mirror, and didn't black out under the rockers.

Still a very nice car."

I did notice the bumper and the mirror and I get why a quality restorer would single out those items...especially if a car is supposed to be concours correct. Also, I was blinded by the mirror finish on the rockers and missed the black out. I guess I could live with the S bumper but hate those passenger side mirrors. My car has one and it is mounted in the same orientation as the driver's side so it really is "useless".

Based on those two pictures alone, it is hard to say what else might be incorrect with the car and as Frank said, if someone were going through all of the trouble(read "money") to restore a car to that condition, I would do everything in my power to make it 100% "correct".

With that said, it does appear to be a beautiful car!!!

[72 IXXI]

One vote for Frank. I sit back and read a lot of this stuff and appreciate the criticism since I learn a lot about these cars from guys that forgot more than I will ever know. So it was not soft and nice..who cares its a fn car and not your mommy we are talking about

[72targa]

Good discussion. Just attempting to maintain decorum and good spirits. Carry on!

[Frank Beck]

Peter, I have to hand it to you; when you're cool, you're very cool.

You seem to be torn between the status quo and wackiness of San Fran and the normalcy of Dewey, AZ.

[edmayo]

Being a concour judge I can tell you that if the judging criteria involves originality (depends on the seriousness of the venue) that excessive deviation from 'standard' height would be worth a demerit. My biggest gripe on such low ride heights, although they look cool, is that the car becomes basically undriveable for anything more than slow speeds on roads you know. Know what happens in a car of that height when you hit an unexpected freeway dip at 80?