Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 16:46:07 -0800
Reply-To: scott_s@DISCOUSA.COM
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Scott Sullivan <scott_s@DISCOUSA.COM>
Subject: Re: Deeply Saddened and Troubled
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Ouch!
Scot
82 Diesel Westy (Puka Puka)
00 Cabrio (The Cab)
88 Mazda 323 GTX (The zoom)
52 MG TD ( slower than Puka Puka)
Matt Sim <mattsim@WORLDNET.ATT.NET> on 06/19/2001 04:28:31 PM
Please respond to Matt Sim <mattsim@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
cc: (bcc: Scott Sullivan/Disco_Corp)
Subject: Re: Deeply Saddened and Troubled
HEY ! Frank wants to talk about diesels. Everybody talk about diesels.
Matt
New Cumberland, PA
'81 Westy (current)
'74 914 (current)
'95 Nissan Altima (daily)
'72 Fastback
'83 Rabbit
'81 Rabbit
----- Original Message -----
From: "Frank Grunthaner" <FrankGRUN@AOL.COM>
To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 5:11 PM
Subject: Deeply Saddened and Troubled
> I am deeply saddened and troubled by the recent turn of events as regards
> various posts to the Vanagon list. This comment is triggered by the
flurry
of
> posts triggered by the VW porn label and the vitriolic exchanges
triggered
by
> the vendor bashing outbursts.
>
> The outrage engendered by the opening of the post headlined by VW Porn
leaves
> me confused and fills me with a sense of uneasiness and dread. What
forces
> the nanometer skinned to open the post? Deletion of the scurrilous post
or
> group of posts is a pleasure on my Mac. Over the years since I first
joined
> this list (I think I found it a year after the fledgling beginning), I
have
> yet to open a frivolous Friday post. I routinely scan through each days
> postings and open the increasingly limited number of technical posts and
trip
> reports. The remainder go quickly and quietly to the virtual round file
on
> the base of my screen. Perhaps this clamor is generated by IBM users
> manipulated by the evil Microsoft takeoff of the Mac operating system!
>
> But back to the point. Now our list administrator has taken a position on
> this material and will use his limited time and resources to excise such
> material. Of course, I support any decision he makes regarding the list.
My
> sense of sadness derives from the way I see the porn response issue. This
> smacks of rank political correctness and I'm depressed to see that we
> (collective) must be protected from the outrageous things our species
> delights in. The quick polarization of the discussion whether on the VW
porn
> issue or vendor bashing shows a meanness, a sense of outrage together
with
> self-righteous indignation and a lack of tolerance that is truly
depressing
> to me. With my advancing years I see our infatuation with political
> correctness, and the abysmal lack of education of our youth as two of the
> most corrosive dynamics in the decline of our society.
>
> I joined this list with the gleeful eye to indulging in a number of
fruitful
> (technical) discussions with a number of fiscal masochists operating a
> notoriously unreliable vehicle, serviced by simians, but always a
pleasant
> adventure to drive. Recently (past several years) I have watched
technical
> discussions of problems and their solutions and of modifications and
their
> pitfalls give way vendor bashing, list closure issues and the defense of
> adult-like individuals from prurient material.
>
> A few weeks ago, I posted a response in perhaps excessive detail
challenging
> the list wisdom that the gearing of the diesel manual transmission was
such
> that that gasoline engine conversions would be spinning their pistons off
and
> consuming huge volumes of fuel. The list wisdom has counseled that the
only
> reasonable approach was to go to a trans from a Waterboxer or air-cooled
> predecessor. I squirmed at the thought of trying to lug a 1.8L engine
while
> pushing a 5300 pound vehicle with 90 to 115 hp (SAE for 1.8L inline 4).
The
> level of torque available (generally less than 125 pound foot) simply
demands
> torque multiplication for forward motion! I tried to explain that the I-4
> engine was designed to spin at rates from 4500 rpm to 5500 rpm for 100s
of
> hours continuously without lifetime degradation. I also tried to trigger
a
> discussion of the fuel efficiency of a small motor operating at elevated
> piston velocities but at minimal load. I got 4 responses to this
admittedly
> technical post (and heard nothing from the list member who's survey
prompted
> the discussion. Contrast this with the hundreds of posts on the porn
topic,
> vendor mistreatment, or list closure.
>
> There is so much to constructive to discuss, can't we let the issues of
> offending the picayune sensibilities of the readily outraged to our news
> media and the professionally disingenuous classes (lawyers, politicians
and
> infomercial producers)?
>
> Getting too old to be tactful,
>
> Frank Grunthaner
>
| 
