AVSIM's Position on Posting FS2004 Related Material

[Tom Allensworth 1,532]

I have read the now locked thread regarding other site's policies regarding the posting of material on FS2004. AVSIM's position is simple; the boys and girls at Redmond have an open line of communications to the senior staff at AVSIM, including yours truly, and we haven't heard boo from them. It is obvious that FS2004 has been released to the public starting, apparently, in Sweden. For whatever reason, and no one on AVSIM can answer the implied question, release of FS2004 occured prior to the announced date. That's a problem between MS, its distributors and retailors. So, if you haven't noticed, AVSIM is open for business with FS2004!

[Guest]

A truly wise decision Tom!Thank you for your openmindness and understanding of business.//Leif

[flyking 0]

Thank You Sir! Your wisdom on this issure is very refreshing and makes perfect sense. Thanks for allowing the free exhange of ideas and not stifling the joy and excitement that many of us are feeling at this time. flyking

[Guest]

Thanks, Tom. We're already seeing a lot of great observations, hints and tips from our "alpha testers" out there...they will make things much simpler when the rest of us get our paws on this puppy...Good stuff,Dave"negative tally, still looking..."

[Guest jmarcure]

Hi Tom,I posted this over at Flightsim as a reply to a

[Tom Allensworth 1,532]

Jon, I am not going to comment on FS.com's rules other than to say that whatever they are doing works for them. I will address AVSIM's policies and philosophies however.We have established the position and have maintained from day one of our system, that indeed these are private forums. When you sign up to have an account on these forums, you implicitly agree to our policies and rules; one of which is that there is no freedom of speach here. See the rules you agreed to before you signed up here: http://forums.avsim.com/toc.htmlIt's very simple; you are a welcome guest here, and as long as you abide by our policies, you are welcome to continue to visit. Unfettered freedom of speach is not one of things that you should expect. What you should expect is that as long as discourse is mature, non-infammatory, or not hurtful of others, then we'll allow it. We expect people to treat others as they would want to be treated and we'll enforce that expectation.Now to the bigger issue of the release of FS2004. There appear to have been some outlets that have released FS2004 in advance of the allowed release date. That is in violation of MS' agreement with those retailers, as far as I can tell. Having said that, a flight sim enthusiast who purchases a copy of FS2004 in good faith from one of those retailers should not be held accountable for that violation, breach of contract, whatever... IMHO. The issue is one that is between MS and their distribution network and retailers, and one that AVSIM can neither enforce or police. Therefore, owners of FS2004 should not be precluded from posting about their FS2004 here.

[Guest]

What I understand to be true is that when someone signs up to become a "member" of a forum, they waive certain rights of free speech. This may be found in the small print- you know where it says read this first before you sign up? After that, all bets are off and what is posted or not posted or locked is completely up to the mods and the forum administration.Jonathan

[Guest]

That makes perfect sense to me. It's like inviting someone into your home and expecting them to adhere to even simple common courtesy. If people would practice just -that-, none of the problems of flamers, whiners, etc. would even be a case. Some people expect to be able to come to a discussion forum like this and cuss and harp and insult everyone in the roster, but the moment they're shushed these same people cry foul and censorship. Ah well, when it's not insulting, it certainly is laughable from a third person pov.But... that's taking it to another level. The fact that Best Buy, or Provantage made the sim available early ISN'T the consumer's fault. It's the old Field of Dreams Principle modified. If you make it available, they will buy. Now that it's out, rather than bicker about it, these other sites should jump on the bandwagon and strive to have the best coverage of this new version ever, complete with shots, tips, tricks, anecdotes, whatever. In the end, it just makes it better for we Joe and Jane Publics who use these places as a source for FS info.Thanks,Yet Another Jon. :)

[Guest jmarcure]

Tom,I well understand the forum rules but my question is in regards to the opinions stated in posts. By imposing no freedom of speech and that one is an invited guest you are implying that the views and opinions of those invited represent those of AVSIM and its management. I question this position because it could alienate people and would be a disservice to the advertisers because of less exposure. My coming to AVSIM has resulted in the purchase of product from the companies that advertise here. I would guarantee that if I went to any of the forums and posted an

[W2DR 1,859]

At last...a voice of sanity and reason. Thanks Tom. - Doug

[Tom Allensworth 1,532]

"I well understand the forum rules but my question is in regards to the opinions stated in posts. By imposing no freedom of speech and that one is an invited guest you are implying that the views and opinions of those invited represent those of AVSIM and its management. I question this position because it could alienate people and would be a disservice to the advertisers because of less exposure." That's a stretch of logic that I can't attain. What you are saying is that when we allow messages to be posted and do not remove them, we therefore approve of them, ergo they match our opinion, position, ad naseam. And then you take that stretch and assert that by our tacit agreement, our implied support of those positions could alienate folks and our advertisers. I think you are trying to make more of this than there is. I do give our readers, and certainly our advertisers, credit for having more intelligence than that, credit which you don't seem to want to give.I invite you into my home. You are a democrat and I am a republican (insert your favorite political rivalery here). You believe in oh, I don't know, a government subsidized school lunch program. I don't. But, with your logic, by having you over to my home and not throwing you out on your ear, I would tacitly be agreeing and therefore appearing to espouse or at a minimum, support your beliefs. And by doing so, my mortgage company might foreclose on the home. See where the logics starts to fall apart here?To put it succinctly, our advertisers have never complained about the management of our forums and appreciate the quality that is represented here, both in terms of users and in terms of our rules and policies and our enforcement there of. The thousands of users that visit this forum every day seem to appreciate it too. That's proof enough for me.

[Guest kyle]

Good for you, Tom.If I can just interject a statement here on this free speach thing. I think the point is free speech is always welcome, but everyone seems to think they are not accountable for what or how they practice their free speech. I run a few 'real world' aviation web sites with forums and we get hit with this too. My answer it simply... "You can have all the free speech you want but you are going to be accountable for what you say or write. Additionally, if what you write puts this web site into a libelous situation, then you will be banned, your posts will be removed and every effort will be made by us to comply with the complainant."

[TonyB 1]

Hey Tom, can we vote people off the island? That would be great! Just kidding of course. :)Tony

[Guest jmarcure]

Two things.1. I

[Tom Allensworth 1,532]

"I guess that our businesses are just too dissimilar to try and draw any parallels between them or to draw any conclusions that may expand my knowledge of the difficult to please customer. Thanks for your opinions on the subject I really appreciate them."Maybe. On the other hand, they may be more similar than you think. Here's the crux of it... If our advertisers and readers, or at least the majority of them, are convinced that 1.) we establish rules, 2.) we enforce those rules, and 3.) we are even handed in assessing those areas that fall into the "shades of grey", then we make everyone happy. We have had innumerable posts that take shots at our advertisers (and even our non-advertisers). We don't automatically pull the plug on those messages. That doesn't always make our advertisers (and non-advertisers - who interestingly complain the most!) happy, but they also understand that we are a resource for the community and that if we started to really "limit free speach" it would have both an impact on our credibility and their visibility. Impact AVSIM's credibility and their advertising dollars don't mean much. It IS a double edged sword and one that we handle daily as best we can.