As will I.

 

I will say that the site admins are certainly within their rights to ban whomever they please...it's their site, so they don't need any real justification. However, I don't come here to get "sponsor messages" and "sponsor messages" only. If this turns into a situation of not even being able to recommend another product that competes with a sponsor, I for one will be out of here and expecting a refund on my premier membership. It's not enough that they group buys are now limited to premier members only, now we're going to start banning people who post about other products?

If you want to keep them from posting, fine; delete their posts, do whatever you want, but banning is just stupid.

 

Nobody's saying that the admins MUST offer anything for free. They're certainly welcome to close their doors and go home, offer this for free, or do what they're doing now and risk turning it into something with the SNR of a glossy trade magazine.

The comparison of someone endorsing a product and someone advertising their own can seem a clear difference, but is that really what we mean? Where is the line drawn? Is it OK for me to advertise someone else's product that I don't make, but I make money based off of their sales? I would assert that such activity would be met with the same response, but it brings to light the basic issue: is the post going to bring financial gain of some sort to the poster, and if so, is he a paying sponsor? The issue may seem cut a dry, but if it is expressed that way, a case can be made that ANYONE from potential customer to CEO can benefit financially by the increased exposure of the product. Conceivably, the added business could drive prices down on the product (because of increased competition, the ability to buy in bulk, etc.) which would mean financial gain for any potential customers, ie they pay less than they would have, had the exposure (free or otherwise) not been given. Is paying a discounted price any less of a "financial gain" than direct compensation and paying the same? At the end of the day, you go home with the same amount of money in your pocket.

In the end, it's not legitimate to say that "well these things cost money, so whatever they do is gold!". I have played the server and forum admin role many times, and it all comes down to motivation. MONEY IS NOT A LEGITIMATE MOTIVATION FOR RUNNING A DISCUSSION FORUM. There are far more lucrative opportunities that involve a lot less work than managing a circus of differing views on things as subjective as cars. Certainly, there is a cost involved, as there is with anything in life. But the owner knew (or should have known) that this was the case from the outset; to think otherwise is foolish. People who are legitimately surprised by the success of their site ask for DONATIONS, they don't start the gimmick of "For only $29.95, yes YOU can have access to...group buys (oh, they give those away for free at other sites? What, people are still doing them in the non-premier area? There AREN'T any real premier member benefits aside from the Anything Goes forum??)". They do not limit the functionality of those who came to the site as a RESOURCE and not a country club.

</soapbox> I'm done ranting. The admins will run the site in whatever manner they see fit, and ban whomever they want to ban. This issue doesn't even affect me, but it's principle. Whatever. I won't be renewing unless something drastic happens.