Automotive News / Industry / Future Vehicle Discussion Automotive news and discussion about upcoming vehicles

a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Nov 16, 2004 | 10:04 PM
  #106  
Jason E's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,376
From: Sarasota FL
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

Originally Posted by muckz
Are you an id|ot, or you just pretending to be one?
No, he really isn't pretending. This is par for the course. Sure, he may have seen base cars that high, but they were loaded base cars, with things such as navigation, that weren't even on a C5. But that doesn't matter to him, right?? I've seen a couple in person, and think its quite stylish and avoids the "big butt" look a C5 has. Hell, its even cheaper as a base model.

Just because the car was styled by Tom Peters means the car is doomed, in his book. Thankfully it looks nothing like an Aztek, and I have yet to see any car magazines say the styling looks worse than a C5. But because he thinks it does, it must be...right?

Redzed ownage continues...

Last edited by Jason E; Nov 16, 2004 at 10:10 PM.
Old Nov 16, 2004 | 10:10 PM
  #107  
Jason E's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,376
From: Sarasota FL
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

One more thing...assuming Red will not be posting again (for at least some time), I just want him to know it was a sincere pleasure meeting him at the F Body Gathering last year, and that I hope he continues to prowl around here and see what we all have to say. With people like him on the side of the enthusiast, I pray GM can once again return to dominance in the performance car market.

It is true, he never divulged anything he was not supposed to, and more often than not went out of his way to say "I can't comment."

Red, I wish you the best of luck. I hope you do keep in touch with this board, in the future...
Old Nov 16, 2004 | 11:18 PM
  #108  
30thZ286speed's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 2,030
From: Frankfort, KY U.S.A.
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

This is a sad day, the forum will never be the same. Thanks to the idiot who ruined it.


Take care, RP.
Old Nov 16, 2004 | 11:54 PM
  #109  
SageofKnight's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 1999
Posts: 218
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

I must say when I first saw those pictures I thought they were just one of a million photoshoped versions. Even when the whole "leak" thing started I figured they were just a little too close for GM's comfort. Now after reading this whole blow up I realize how serious this whole thing was. I even feel bad for posting a link to gminsidenews and the pics previously.

With that said, I think GM needs to get with the times already. Apparently they haven't noticed just how powerful the internet is yet. If cars were on the radar of hackers like videogames and music are, a sole picture leaked would be a joke. It may be completely wrong, but a thing like a picture being posted around is nothing in today's world.

The very idea of RED taking any heat for posting here is just proof of how out of the loop GM is. Having a enthusiast employee to know what and where all the sites are is a good thing. Having someone in REDs position to stop me from buying a Mustang or EVO or WRX or 350Z etc with some encouraging words is a good thing too. But NOOOOO GM has to come down hard on people [employees] doing nothing wrong, when some dork behind a computer or some nobody way down the supply chain does 100x the damage they ever were accused of.

The thing that leaves a bad taste in my mouth is GM doesn't seem to know that it's the enthusiasts that are going to protect your propety and interests.
People here seriously spend enough time defending GM against Imports/Ford and everthing else to get paid for it...you'd think that would be worth SOMETHING.

How about some FORGIVENESS even?
Old Nov 17, 2004 | 12:28 AM
  #110  
Big Als Z's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,306
From: Jersey Shore
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

Originally Posted by muckz
The overpriced C6 Z71.....

Z71!!! 35 inch mudders with 10 inch lift package? AWESOME!!
















I belive the model you are refering too is the Z51.
Old Nov 17, 2004 | 12:33 AM
  #111  
Z284ever's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

Originally Posted by SageofKnight
I must say when I first saw those pictures I thought they were just one of a million photoshoped versions. Even when the whole "leak" thing started I figured they were just a little too close for GM's comfort. Now after reading this whole blow up I realize how serious this whole thing was. I even feel bad for posting a link to gminsidenews and the pics previously.
Well, I linked my thread to your thread...and I wasn't sure it wasn't a PS either.

As far as this RP issue, I haven't talked to him very recently, so I don't know quite what to make of it.

But I can tell you this.....

Although RP and I haven't always agreed on everything, he is a true enthusiast. His "have faith" attitude is truly the only shread of hope that anyone has ever cared to offer us. Anyone!

His bosses should ( and I don't know if they do or don't), encourage him to get on the internet more often and help stir more enthusiasm for Chevy products.

That's all I've got to say..........
Old Nov 17, 2004 | 12:35 AM
  #112  
Big Als Z's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,306
From: Jersey Shore
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

Despite RP's recent departure, I hope that I will one day get to meet him. Be it at NYIAS, or some National Camaro show, but I would most deffinatly want to meet the man.
Old Nov 17, 2004 | 06:14 AM
  #113  
Bearcat Steve's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 210
From: Cincinnati, OH
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

Originally Posted by SageofKnight
I must say when I first saw those pictures I thought they were just one of a million photoshoped versions. Even when the whole "leak" thing started I figured they were just a little too close for GM's comfort. Now after reading this whole blow up I realize how serious this whole thing was. I even feel bad for posting a link to gminsidenews and the pics previously.

With that said, I think GM needs to get with the times already. Apparently they haven't noticed just how powerful the internet is yet. If cars were on the radar of hackers like videogames and music are, a sole picture leaked would be a joke. It may be completely wrong, but a thing like a picture being posted around is nothing in today's world.

The very idea of RED taking any heat for posting here is just proof of how out of the loop GM is. Having a enthusiast employee to know what and where all the sites are is a good thing. Having someone in REDs position to stop me from buying a Mustang or EVO or WRX or 350Z etc with some encouraging words is a good thing too. But NOOOOO GM has to come down hard on people [employees] doing nothing wrong, when some dork behind a computer or some nobody way down the supply chain does 100x the damage they ever were accused of.

The thing that leaves a bad taste in my mouth is GM doesn't seem to know that it's the enthusiasts that are going to protect your propety and interests.
People here seriously spend enough time defending GM against Imports/Ford and everthing else to get paid for it...you'd think that would be worth SOMETHING.

How about some FORGIVENESS even?
Sorry, but this is yet another example that harkens back to my previous post.

Once again.... slowly.....

In keeping with Sarbanes/Oxley legislation, it is ILLEGAL for Scott or anyone else from GM to "leak" info here that has not been divulged to ALL investors. If that law is broken, company officers and directors can be held PERSONALLY responsible and they can serve time behind bars.

Please grow up.......
Old Nov 17, 2004 | 07:26 AM
  #114  
Doug Harden's Avatar
Prominent Member
 
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,282
Exclamation Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

Originally Posted by RoMaD
Haha! I love it. Nice little jab at the "I know something you don't know" crowd.

MunchE, you've pretty much summed up my feelings on this one. I'm sure you'll continue to take a flaming from the "insiders", but know there are people that agree with you..........
WTF?!? I thought we were all in this together?

If you haven't noticed....I get NOTHING from this...I don't run a commercial website...I don't write for any magazine....I am simply an enthusiast like the rest of you, as is Charlie.

I've sent the last 12 - 35 years just being the strongest supporter of the Camaro Brand that I can be.

I've been president and an officer of one of the largest and most active Camaro clubs in the country, for most of those years....and through that effort have forged many freindships with people inside and around Chevrolet.

I've also made it a point to try and understand how and why things happen.....and tried to keep an open mind as possible.

If anyone thinks I'm just a cheerleader for GM...then you haven't been paying attention....hell, ask Red how often I ask the tough questions.

GM had a legal duty to it's owners and shareholders to keep hard earned and expensive future product information where it should be.......and as a result of this theft, they'll tighten the clamps as tight as need be to make sure it doesn't happen again.

Make no mistake here....GM trusted the wrong person somewhere along the line and got burnt.....now, until that trust can be rebuilt, it'll be harder to get any inkling of information, lest employees and vendors put themselves in jeapordy.

Simple p*nis envy is not a very productive way of getting those who "might" be able to sneek a peak into GM's cookie jar to make any effort to share it with the rest of you....
Old Nov 17, 2004 | 07:35 AM
  #115  
JasonD's Avatar
Admin Emeritus
 
Joined: Dec 1997
Posts: 11,157
From: Nashville, TN area
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

Uh...guys?

As far as I know, Scott made the decision himself to back off from most Internet posting at least until things got cleared up with the "leaked" Z06 issue. There was never any mentioning of GM coming down on him for being here. He has never done anything wrong here to my knowledge, but all he wants to do is make sure that he does not risk his career while the "leaked" Z06 image heat is still on.

No need to jump to conclusions.
Old Nov 17, 2004 | 07:42 AM
  #116  
Doug Harden's Avatar
Prominent Member
 
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,282
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

One more point......I'm very proud of this.....

http://www.indycamaro.com/IRP/ScottS...eAutograph.jpg

......at least I'm doing what I can......
Old Nov 17, 2004 | 07:51 AM
  #117  
1fastdog's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,808
From: FL/MI
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

Originally Posted by JasonD
Uh...guys?

As far as I know, Scott made the decision himself to back off from most Internet posting at least until things got cleared up with the "leaked" Z06 issue. There was never any mentioning of GM coming down on him for being here. He has never done anything wrong here to my knowledge, but all he wants to do is make sure that he does not risk his career while the "leaked" Z06 image heat is still on.

No need to jump to conclusions.
I talk to Scott on a regular basis and the last conversation we had was yesterday evening. Scott's reasons for participating here or elsewhere on the internet are his OWN.

As I consider him a friend, gentleman, enthusiast, as well as a beyond dedicated colleague, I accept that he's making choices based on personal wisdom and not mandate.

He's busy, but not too busy for enthusiasts.

I think everyone that budgets their time has to choose the most productive ways to make the most of their effort and hours available.

Last edited by 1fastdog; Nov 17, 2004 at 08:52 AM.
Old Nov 17, 2004 | 08:07 AM
  #118  
Bobby1Kenobby's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 43
From: Austin
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

Originally Posted by muckz
And there is a problem with your analogy as well. See if any cops are going to take you seriously if you come to them claiming your wallet was stolen when you left your window down. It's not even worth reporting the crime, isn't it?

No, it is worth reporting the crime. It was still a crime whether you were an idiot for leaving the windows rolled down. Personal stupidity of the victim is not a defense for the criminal. Whether cops have sympathy for you is irrelevant.
Old Nov 17, 2004 | 08:09 AM
  #119  
Bobby1Kenobby's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 43
From: Austin
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

Originally Posted by AronZ28
Hey, don't put words into my mouth. I didn't say that stealing the pics from GM is okay. STEALING IS ILLEGAL AND IMMORAL.

All I am saying is GM should do a better job of safeguarding their secrets from dishonorable, dishonset theifs. Or not hire those type of people who leak secrets.
Sorry, I may have read too much into your particular post, but I believe it has been said elsewhere that this was GM's fault for not protecting themselves.
Old Nov 17, 2004 | 10:31 AM
  #120  
Z284ever's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

Originally Posted by Doug Harden
WTF?!? I thought we were all in this together?

If you haven't noticed....I get NOTHING from this...I don't run a commercial website...I don't write for any magazine....I am simply an enthusiast like the rest of you, as is Charlie.
Yes sir.

I spend an awful lot of time working this issue, (it's crazy,really). But I can't help it, I've got a passion for the car. That's why I get so upset when I see anything that threatens it or my vision for it. I just hope that GM doesn't end up eventually bleeding my enthusiasm dry for it though.

BTW, I've written for various magazines, off and on for about a decade. I have turned down, more than once, over the past year or two, the offer to write about a possible future Camaro. At this point, I don't believe it would be good for the "cause".

And the "cause" is all that concerns me here.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:46 AM.