|
|
Post by Dieter on Mar 14, 2004 19:02:48 GMT -5
Oooops, initial post to the BBS MGF General looks like going in wrong direction  |
|
|
|
Post by apttony on Mar 14, 2004 22:32:06 GMT -5
My earlier comment refers to the reaction on the BBS to the "Quality of parts for MGF/TF's" started by 'MGF Quality". As you can see, it prompted a very negative reaction since it was in effect unsigned. Needless to say, MGFquality@aol.com has not received any messages.  Dieter - Thanks - I'll have a look at the shame.4mg.com |
|
|
|
Post by apttony on Mar 14, 2004 22:35:14 GMT -5
Sorry Rob - that was your comment - not Dieter's  |
|
|
|
Post by Rob Bell on Mar 15, 2004 6:36:29 GMT -5
Yes, I've seen how that thread has developed  Not your fault, but I guess that the 'anon' aspect got people's suspicions aroused Not sure that we are going to be able to ressurect that thread. I think that something along Paul Lathwell's dealership guide or the shame.4mg.com kind of data collection site where products can be praised as well as slated would be the best way forward? |
|
|
|
Post by apttony on Mar 18, 2004 4:02:13 GMT -5
Yes - not the best of threads My current plan is to let that thread die, and in the mean time work on structuring a database to drop stuff in to. I've actually had one reply  , so along with anything I can add, and hopefully if any of you have something to add as well, I can then go back to the BBS with a link to the new database. This time I'll do it openly, since it's obviously the only way it will work. It only takes a few negative responses to put an end to an idea. So........if you have any quality comments, can you mail them to MGFquality@aol.com and I can build them in. Ta.  |
|
|
|
Post by apttony on Mar 18, 2004 4:08:04 GMT -5
Yes - not the best of threads My current plan is to let that thread die, and in the mean time work on structuring a database to drop stuff in to. I've actually had one reply , so along with anything I can add, and hopefully if any of you have something to add as well, I can then go back to the BBS with a link to the new database. This time I'll do it openly, since it's obviously the only way it will work. It only takes a few negative responses to put an end to an idea. So........if you have any quality comments, can you mail them to MGFquality@aol.com and I can build them in. Ta. |
|
|
|
Post by ScarletFever on Mar 18, 2004 7:08:57 GMT -5
This i feel is a good idea, but from my point of view i have so many experiences (good and bad) of so many different suppliers that i have no idea how i'm going to organise even a small selection for submitting to your database.
The other problem i have is that if i even managed to qulify and quantify even half of them then it would skew your results quite a lot.
I feel that people who are 'aftermarket addicts' like myself need to be treated carefully otherwise we could alter the overall trends in the data and end up with an unbalanced result.
If you want me to put together a reasonable account of my experiences i am willing, but you need to take it all with a pinch of salt to avoid a bias on the data.
To date i have used:
Mike Satur - extensively
MGF Centre - extensively
SP Performance - a lot (now defunct though)
Brown and Gammons - a lot
Motobuild - a little
Newton Commecial - a little
Holes in my knowledge include:
DVA - Hopefully soon to be resolved
TechSpeed - Scarlet had suspension mods (Mike Satur) before they were pushing the aftermarket side of the business. Back then there were only three aftermarket specialists (Mike, SP and Motobuild). TechSpeed were around, but their profile outside of racing/official circles wasn't very high.
|
|
|
|
Post by apttony on Mar 18, 2004 11:38:19 GMT -5
Andy, Maybe a bit at a time? For a start, I don't think it matters how much a person may use a particular supplier - it's how they perceive each individual item that matters. A supplier may be very good at making one item and totally useless at another. Obviously its going to be subjective - there is no way around that - but the more data the better. Perhaps if you look at those items that have been "perfect" and those that have been "lousy", then these can be used as benchmarks for judging everything else. It's not going to all come together overnight, so I wont need all the results until Saturday  ;D |
|
|
|
Post by apttony on Mar 20, 2004 9:21:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by apttony on Mar 21, 2004 5:03:38 GMT -5
As a further comment on the page, the person who mailed me his quality comments has requested that I remove his name, since I had originally said the whole thing would be anomymous. Apart from him and this board, no one else yet knows of the page.
The following is my reply to him..........
Hi xxxxxxxx,
I've taken you name out & replaced it with "withheld".
However, I am not convinced that it will have the same effect by doing that. If you followed the threads both on the MGF General & Technical BBS, you will have seen the reaction to things being anonymous. The general concensus was that "no name" on my part meant that no one was going to take part. In which case, I think it only fair that if I put my name up front as collator, then contributors should be prepared to do the same.
My original posting said "Any e-mails that are received in response to this survey will be treated confidentially and will not be passed on to the supplier concerned. If such action is considered later, then we will contact you beforehand." and I stand by that. I have no intention of passing on any emails or email addresses.
As to names, well, I'm not sure. If I am going to go to the effort of running this, I want it to be effective, otherwise it is a waste of time.
I have now fed the web page address to a small group of MGF owners who supported the orginal idea and await their comments and hopefully their input.
Regards
Tony
-----------------------------------
Thoughts anybody?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob Bell on Mar 22, 2004 7:54:27 GMT -5
Well I know who your 'name withheld' is anyway, as that spark plug was ejected when he was en-route to my stag-night!!! ;D The format looks good Tony. I think that the categories make a lot of sense. Your troubles will start when it comes down to attempting to collate a lot of disparate items from different suppliers - but that is a problem for some point in the future. You got to start somewhere, and this a good start ;D My one single criticism is the way that people have to inform you of their thoughts on products: an email based system is fine, but it means that people who submit have to do a lot of work which either means that they won't bother, or they'll mail you with incomplete responses. The work load could be lessened if there was a form to fill in, maybe using pull-downs for giving certain set responses (as used on the MGF Register registration form: www.mgcars.org.uk/carclub/mgfregister/fregister/register/index.htm. Is there a reason why a form might not be suitable?
|
|
|
|
Post by apttony on Mar 22, 2004 9:49:33 GMT -5
Thanks for your comments Rob. I'm wondering if "you know who" will accept putting at least his christian name & maybe a location - I'll email him - it's got to be better than "name withheld". As regards using a form - yes I agree completely - that is my next stage, but thanks for the pointer - maybe I'll just half-hitch the code! The only thing I want to make sure with a form is that I can pick up the email addresses, then at least I may be able to filter out repeaters and/or suppliers. Or am I just being cynical? |
|
|
|
Post by Dieter on Mar 22, 2004 15:03:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by apttony on Mar 22, 2004 19:50:57 GMT -5
Okay you guys, while I organising building in a reply form, how about some contributions? There must be some from amongst you all ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Dieter on Mar 23, 2004 16:26:50 GMT -5
Ooops, assistance ...  Rob, do you recall this one ? www.mgfcar.de/survey/survey15e.htmLOL. Never finished .. ;D Anyway, Tony, use any FOC database tool. The above was made with german language provider. (closed down unfortunately) www.DataPage.de is another perfect tool I think there will be other in the *right* language. "CGI hosting" is probably a useful search term for googl'ing. |
|
