4 X 4's popular again!

[colin-yorkshire1]

highlander,

whilest I would normally echo the sentiments in your last post it must be understood that as an open forum there are forced to be differing views on just about any topic posted, the problems arise when a topic gets polarised between two camps with different views and the meaning of the original post is lost as each side brings in new arguments to support their views not helped by the few posters who deliberatly try to wind up one side or the other.

the moderators then step in to calm things down and get jumped on for interfering in free debate or are accused bias. this is what happend to the above topic it started as someones opinion on a emotive subject and then left to run. it should have been pulled right at the start but was not, it happens on every open forum and is the reason I no longer post on most of the forums I belong to, the exeptions being this one and the renault owners club. both forums have by enlarge a wealth of knowlege in their members that can be called upon to solve almost any problem or question.

however because the membership is so diverse both in experience and economic status it does become clear that polarisation is inevitable on certain subjects like politics and climate change any topic on a subject like 4x4s will bring to the surface the opposing views of the pros and antis quicker than anything else. thats why the mods have tried to stop these debates with I am sorry to say little effect, perhaps it is more to do with the fact that the forum engine is still powered by steam, but it must be said IMO only they still allow posts and topics to run as long as a one sided view is maintained and step in only when a argument starts or a set of posts goes off topic leading to a bias claim. for instance the post that kicked off all this global warming stuff was as you say.

"this guy posts asking about 4x4s and look where its led, incredible, and it could give good reason for other visitors giving the forum a wide berth."

the post was not a guy asking about 4x4s at all but rod one voicing his opinion (which he has every right to do) on the virtues of one particular type of vehicle and how maligned the owners are with a quick political dig at the PM and others who differ in opinion please read it again.

" Rod one 4 X 4's popular again!

28 Dec 2009 10:51 AM

Though I do not drive a 4 x 4 ( A CR-V is not a real one!), I have always sympathised with the owners of them, when they keep getting slagged off by all and sundry. I noticed with interest that with the recent bad weather, many local authorities were grateful for help from 4 x 4's. I've also observed much the same when saloon type car driver's get stuck on site and seek help from the much maligned 4 x 4 owner. Let's hope Brown and Co ( and some of the tree hugger's) remember this in the future !!"

It ws obvious from the next 5 posts that the pros would jump on the bandwaggon and attack anyone with a voice of dissent because thats what happens every time. a thread started with the exact opposite view would have gone exactly the same way.

the only answer is to pull all posts that could or might be controversal instantly but that will not happen so the arguments will continue, some visitors may be offended by this and go else where others will not that is the rub untill the mods grasp the nettle it will continue.

 

[Lutz]

Actually, my very first post in this thread was to try to establish what is actually meant by "a 4x4" as Rod says his CR-V is not a real one. Why is it not real? I would have thought that any car with four wheel drive would be of benefit in the snow. Someone even posted a link to a Youtube filmclip showing a Fiat Panda 4x4 doing some incredible things so I find it hard to differentiate between "real" and "unreal" 4x4's. My whole point was that does it always have to be a Range Rover V8 when probably in 90% of cases a Subaru Impreza would do the job, too (leaving towing ability aside for a moment)?

 

[Rodone]

Hello Lutz, It is all about what people define as a 4 x 4. My CR-V will do 44 mpg and the Co2 thingy is 173. We pay less road tax on it than we did on my better halves old Xantia. It is a 'real time' 4x4 and I doubt that it has gone out of it's usual front wheel drive more than a dozen times - and only then for seconds. In short, it is quite an economical medium sized car, that also tows a van reasonably well, and will get me off wet grass without churning it to mud. It did, neverthe less, attract the attention of a 'greeny' a couple of years ago, who managed to put a 'save the earth sticker' on it. I'm off now - to give a lift to a neighbour whose 2 wheel drive estate car cannot get him through the snow- to get provisions! when I return I shall put some more coal on my fire and sit contentedly in front of it - while some real polution goes out of my chimney!!

 

[Parksy]

Colin-Yorkshire has added more good sense to that already posted by others.

The trouble is Colin that if moderators stifle topics at birth (and I had in fact considered this when Rod One opened the topic) we would be acting as censors.

It's not up to us to decide what can be discussed, there are some exceptions of course. Political views invariably lead to arguments and the airing of some extreme opinions so we have tried to clamp down on that sort of thing but one would have hoped that a discussion about 4x4 ownership would have provided an interesting topical discussion given the current weather situation in the UK.

Your point about members being a random mix of people with different social and economic backgrounds is a valid one that is sometimes overlooked, the wonder is that most of the time we get along ok as a forum.

We try hard as mods not to take sides and allow both sides of any debate to have a fair hearing but when decency and good taste start to become compromised or forum rules are broken there is no choice other than for a mod to intervene whichever side of the discussion the untoward comments may stem from.

Of course an intervention from a moderator can understandably be upsetting for the person who's post has been edited or deleted and if possible I attempt to give some sort of explanation when I have intervened.

Unfortunately these matters can be taken personally and the moderator then becomes the subject of the discussion and sometimes the focus of abuse. I try not to take these things personally, it's only a caravan forum.

At least the 4x4 thread has occupied one or two of us during the post Christmas anti climax, we are that little bit closer to warmer days when most of us will be too busy enjoying our caravans to stay in and argue on this forum.

 

[colin-yorkshire1]

hi parksy

no one on this forum least of all me would ever suggest that the role of moderator was an easy one just the opposite in fact, it is not a role that would sit comfortably on my shoulders so I am quite happy to let others like yourself get on with it even when it appears a wrong decision has been made during a thread.

as a long standing member of this forum all I expect from the moderating team is consistancy and a neutral view that stands up to scrutiny this can be difficult when the mods are also regular posters with oppinions of their own but as long as those oppinions do not effect the desisions I for one am happy, this is not the case on some forums and the reason I no longer post there.

you say the moderators role is not one of censorship but actually it is in so much as defining when and where a line has been crossed or wether a certain post or thread could or would lead to arguments, politics is a good example of this and so is 4x4s it does seem somtimes that a thread or post expressing the virtues of them is accepable as is the contstant brown bashing that goes on unchecked, it is only when a opposing view is expressed that arguments start and the mods get involved leading to the accusation of bias.

IMO all such posts and treads should be stopped immediatly as soon as they appear as unsuitable material for a one subject forum like this is, the posting members would soon get the idea and the windup merchants would go elsewhere.

true rod ones thread has run for 100+ posts and kept us all amused for a couple of weeks even if most of the posts were off subject (inc this one?. :O)

topical at this time of year of course it is but was it right that is the question, last year this week we were at glen coe in the rain the ski slopes were closed due to lack of snow and the need for a 4x4 was as far away as a hot summer day in july funny how a quick cold snap and a couple of inches of snow suddenly turns them into the bees knees.

colin

 

[S_374382905]

Just following on from what Colin says - and in no way trying to apologise or defend my own position.

I am definitely not, and would be saddened to think it was the case, a 'wind up merchant'. Whilst I acknowledge that my own contributions were 'off topic', they were made when this 'straying' had already occurred.

For my part, I actually made great efforts to remain polite and balanced, and found the debate rather good and in general well mannered.

The title of the forum section concerned is indeed 'Chit Chat' and is provided to allow debate on 'non caravan related issues' and as such, this is the 'spirit' that I entered into.

There have been previous debates on this forum which have without doubt been totally unacceptable in the way some people expressed views which were contrary to any right minded person, and rightly the moderators stepped in.

Like Highlander, I too joined the forum to simply obtain information on caravanning and that remains my principal use of it. However, occasionally something crops up which I feel compelled to respond to - just like any other 'conversation' which I have an implicit 'invitation' to take part in if I choose.

Users of this forum are in effect part of 'virtual community' and like any community, members engage in debate on a range of issues where there is (as there surely is here under 'chit chat') a platform to do so.

I would not like to see the forum become so restricted that people cannot express a view on a topic which is put politely and respectfully. On the other hand, I would like even less to see the hard, unpaid efforts of the moderators result in any of them throwing in the towel.

 

[Parksy]

hi parksy

no one on this forum least of all me would ever suggest that the role of moderator was an easy one just the opposite in fact, it is not a role that would sit comfortably on my shoulders so I am quite happy to let others like yourself get on with it even when it appears a wrong decision has been made during a thread.

as a long standing member of this forum all I expect from the moderating team is consistancy and a neutral view that stands up to scrutiny this can be difficult when the mods are also regular posters with oppinions of their own but as long as those oppinions do not effect the desisions I for one am happy, this is not the case on some forums and the reason I no longer post there.

you say the moderators role is not one of censorship but actually it is in so much as defining when and where a line has been crossed or wether a certain post or thread could or would lead to arguments, politics is a good example of this and so is 4x4s it does seem somtimes that a thread or post expressing the virtues of them is accepable as is the contstant brown bashing that goes on unchecked, it is only when a opposing view is expressed that arguments start and the mods get involved leading to the accusation of bias.

IMO all such posts and treads should be stopped immediatly as soon as they appear as unsuitable material for a one subject forum like this is, the posting members would soon get the idea and the windup merchants would go elsewhere.

true rod ones thread has run for 100+ posts and kept us all amused for a couple of weeks even if most of the posts were off subject (inc this one?. :O)

topical at this time of year of course it is but was it right that is the question, last year this week we were at glen coe in the rain the ski slopes were closed due to lack of snow and the need for a 4x4 was as far away as a hot summer day in july funny how a quick cold snap and a couple of inches of snow suddenly turns them into the bees knees.

colin

Hi Colin

It's true that arguments often start on the forum when an opposing view is put forward to that expressed by the majority but often it is a member who subscribes to the majority view who becomes carried away and invites unwelcome attention from mods.

Moderators do participate in discussions, we are caravanners first and foremost but always try my best to ensure that all points of view are represented fairly and without those expouding their views being subjected to abuse or insult by any other member whatever their opinions.

I take your point about stopping threads but I try to treat people as adults, they ought to be able to discuss issues which interest them without me or anyone else preventing them from doing so.

We draw the line at topics which bring the forum or the Practical Caravan magazine into disrepute, we can't really host political discussions here but it is reasonable to suppose that articles about 4x4s and items on the letters page would appear in the magazine so there should be no reason why these matters cannot be discussed on the voice of the magazine, this forum.

From time to time wrong decisions are made by moderators but the decision to allow the 4x4 thread to proceed was sound as far as I'm concerned.

Everyone who was interested enough to post an opinion had their say, by and large the topic has been dealt with without rancour and the only moderator intervention came when things became a bit heated for one member who advocated genocide for environmentalists. The comment was childish and appeared to be meant to provoke a reaction, all that happened was that the comment was edited out so a bit of a non event really.

Thanks for your general support though, it is much appreciated and I'm always happy to hear criticisms of my actions and to learn from them wherever possible.

 

[Parksy]

Hi 'S'

Don't worry, we wont be throwing in any towels!

Don't worry about being 'on topic' or 'off topic', this forum doesn't work that way.

A topic starts and it then expands to encompass many issues surrounding the original post in the same way that any discussion between friends who's opinions cover a wide range would expand to let everybody have their say.

Now and then things get a bit heated, we are not face to face and it's easy to become a bit carried away when trying to express a point on a keyboard.

Mods then try to restore order,there's no drama just a slapped wrist now and again.

Please continue to enjoy the forum, if you want to make a point or express an opinion that's fine so long as everyone sticks to the rules and remains polite toward each other there's no problem.

 

[ProfJohnL]

Like Colin, I revisited the OP. I identified three distinct elements

Is a CRV 4x4 - "A CR-V is not a real one"

Political comment - "Brown & Co" (the Government)

And environmental issues - "Tree Huggers".

Any one or a combination of those elements is open to debate in the thread.

In respect of the CRV, yes it has 4 wheel drive so it is a 4x4. What I think Rod was trying to say was the CRV is not a massive gas guzzler - a point which he revisited later in the thread.

Not all 4x4 are Gas Guzzlers and there are plenty of large and generally luxury 2wd models that consume prodigies amounts of fuel, and as a consequence attract higher VED. By the same token, there are a number of 4x4's that are actually quite modest, and the CRV is one of the more modern ones that manage to be reasonably fuel efficient.

In respect of the political comment, the VED costs which are determined by Government, and are currently politically tied to climate change. Whether that link is technically justified is open to debate. I have see no evidence that by paying more VED, we are reducing our emissions, there is no real incentive, once it's paid then the sting is gone.

I do think we should all be looking for more fuel efficient means of transport and heating as supplies are limited.

I for one would prefer to see the VED disbanded and put entirely onto fuel duty. This way no one can reasonably avoid paying their fair share of car duty, and those who choose more frugal models benefit by paying less.

 

[602]

Just depends how much you value the undeniable advantage in a siutation which probably only occurs for a week or two versus the added cost during the rest of the year.

Hi Lutz,

So just because I don't want/need something very often, I cannot justify having it?

My cars have had seat belts ever since they became mandatory, and I have worn them ever since that became mandatory too. I cannot EVER remember my seat belt going tight due to heavy braking, nor actually hitting something. So can I argue that they are a waste of money?

There only needs to be one time that you really really need something, for it to prove it was needed.

Removes tongue from cheek.

602

 

[Lutz]

Only you know whether you can justify the extra cost, 602. That's a personal decision that everybody has to make for themselves. I just feel that one should seriously consider the possible unnecessary extra fixed and running costs of lugging a lot of deadweight around when it's not needed.

 

[xtrailman]

lutz

you can not get more dead weight than a battery?

unless you have lots of batteries.

plus a 3.5l petrol engine.

Hardly an advert for saving the planet, is it?

 

[emmerson2]

I've just driven back from Scotland in my 4.2litre V8 Range Rover, towing my Royale, at around 12mpg.I paid for all the fuel, I paid for the car, and I don't give a toss about global warming, carbon footprints, or polution, and nor will I give up my gas guzzling, resource-sapping expensive motor until I can't afford to run it anymore.

Am I banned now?

 

[machighlander]

I've just driven back from Scotland in my 4.2litre V8 Range Rover, towing my Royale, at around 12mpg.I paid for all the fuel, I paid for the car, and I don't give a toss about global warming, carbon footprints, or polution, and nor will I give up my gas guzzling, resource-sapping expensive motor until I can't afford to run it anymore.

Am I banned now?

well played buddy, an thats the way it should be at all times.

so many folk want to comment or criticise what others do or can do, but what i can do in my life is through working hard to earn the chance to achieve those goals. most of ther numpties are full of the green envy stuff, and probably hivny worked in their lives, **** them, thats my attitude, good on ye buddy, enjoy.

 

[landypete]

WELL PUT

Emmerson you pay your hard earned to use ase a range rover i think some should look at the junk on the roads today pumping out smoke ie buses lorrys so i dont think 4x4s should be put under the spotlight all the time and no i dont own one know just a2.0td est car but have ad 4 landys and 3 range rovers all v8s nice noise

 

[Lord Braykewynde]

Glad to see you've made it back Emmo, you're a brave 'un. I take it the roads had been gritted up to your abode.

 

[Guest]

Dog gone right Emmerson! When the car was new, Emmerson or somebody paid a premium price for it and a shed load of tax more then somebody buying a Smart Car. Every Gallon bought pays another shed load of tax to the UK exchequer. How many times is one person meant to pay? No one in the UK gives a fig about what tax's I pay in France and I doubt anyone else really gives a fig about what tax's or system they have for cars in Germany or what Lutz pays.

The odds are that if you buy a Range Rover in the UK you are already in a premium tax bracket and pay premium council tax's and more.

When comments come about 'justifying extra cost and hauling around extra weight' or comments come about 'saving resources or reducing the ammount used' I and others that visit here wonder about importing 2220 approx kilo's of 4x4 from across the world when you can buy a European made model.

For goodness sake, this is a caravan forum. If you want to tell people about saving resources try a greenpeace forum or the like, towing large chunks of alloy, steel and chemical resources around caravan form has to use more resources than sitting at home without a 4x4 or any car and caravan.

Millions of people share a one room home whilst most of us live in resource heavy oversized brick and concrete homes.

With some of the loony green propaganda and ideas I thought the grown ups here would realise that this 4x4 driver is not really the next Dr Death Dictator, but just having a tongue in cheek dig back.

Like Emmerson, we've paid and pay are dues and we drive what we choose and don't need anyone on a caravan forum or elsewhere telling us what we should or could be considering. We could all save resourcs and be making do with a tent or a pod caravan, but how many do that or just sit at home? Also the chinese could have saved thousands of tons of steel resources if they'd walked rather than cycled

Larger Quality cars, 4x4 or 2wd will always be popular until some nutters ban them, and that's never going to happen whilst they make money!

ps ( I think Ray is close to the mark )

 

[Lutz]

All I can say is those that don't care a toss about the environment won't care a toss about the cost either, so they shouldn't complain about the cost of motoring. If they've got the money to spare, that's fine with me. It means less taxes from other sources.

 

[Lutz]

Just to add, anyone who can afford well in excess of

 

[602]

Hi Lutz,

Here in the UK, you cannot claim tax relief on the cost of getting to and from your place of work. That's for both travel by private car, or public transport. Having arrived at work, you can then, maybe, claim for the expense of going to another place of work ...... provided its not "regular".

Of course, if you are self-employed, you can claim for the expense of travelling to and from work. Otherwise you would claim for garaging your car, while you caught the bus home, wouldn't you.

I look sideways at the Electricity Board Land Rover that has been parked outside a neighbour's house every evening for the last several years. I'm guessing that he travels to and from work for free, at my expense. But no doubt it can be justified. I just wonder when I get my share. Still, I had better not upset him this week.

602

 

[Lutz]

That's interesting, but doesn't that put people on a low income in the UK at a disadvantage if they have to travel a long distance to get to their place of work?

The tax relief over here applies equally for the use of public transport, by the way, too.

 

[602]

Hi Lutz,

Going OT here.

Way back in the 1960s. my mate wanted to buy a house in South London. But the government put a limit on the amount of money you could borrow to buy a house .... at that time 2.5 times your annual salary. He couldn't find a house in South London that he was allowed to buy. He WAS able to buy a brand new house about 30 miles South of London.

At that time you could claim tax relief on the interest on the money you borrowed to buy a house. As the travel costs were more than the extra interest that would have been payable on a London mortgage, and he couldn't claim tax relief on his travel expenses, it was costing him a lot more than if he had borrowed to live in London.

But those are the challenges of being young. He recently popped his clogs, but knowing it was imminent, he was able to sell his 30ft speedboat and his Lotus 7 (not Caterham), prior to the event.

602

 

[emmerson2]

Just to add, anyone who can afford well in excess of

 

[Rodone]

Managed to make the village pub last night (two miles) courtesy of a friend who has a 4x4 pickup.All those present had to rely on 4x4 transport. So, with the extra tax on the 4x4, and the tax on best bitter, the Goverment did quite well. I'm not complaining though.....

 

[Lutz]

Just to add, anyone who can afford well in excess of