Posting on thisFORUM

[Guest martin]

I frankly don't care how many members, subscribers or hangers on any of the various sites have. The quality of the advise on this, and any other Forum, is what really matters. May I propose that all regular writers and contributors to MMM are clearly identified on this Forum as their experience and relationship with the magazine is important. I value their comments over those of a fellow enthusiastic reader. But there might have been, for example, a potential conflict of interest over the mailing list being sold to an insurance company ... or some other contentious issue. On that matter the Moderator represented Warners with simple dignity - but the fighting continued - even thought the point was made and conceded. When it comes to travel experiences, Aires, routes and swapping tales of distant places then this Forum is great and we are all equal. When it comes to technical or scientific stuff some are positively better qualified than others - as with the gas alarm issue. We all have opinions - facts are not so easy. And as for David's taunt that "my website's bigger than yours ..." Please ... Life's too short ... 20 posts is 18 too many!

[Guest Mel E]

At first sight, a nice idea, Martin. But wouldn't doing so simply devalue everyone else's input and turn the forum into an extension of MMM's Technical Pages? If any MMM subscriber is especially anxious to get an authoritative reply, all they have to do is email George Collings who so ably edits those pages and they'll get a rapid response to almost any query. But surely this forum benefits from postings by the less immediately knowledgeable who can add useful info such as 'I did that with a left-handed widget 5 years' ago and it really worked.'

[Guest martin]

Surely the point is that the casual MMM reader or passer by who discovers this place wouldn't have the foggiest idea who George is! ... let alone have access to his email address. I only discovered his name last week - and I'm still unsure of exactly what he does and where he fits into the Jago web of enthusiasts!

[Guest Clive]

If you want to contact anybody at the MMM team then email to mmmeditor@warnersgroup.co.uk and the editorial team will email on technical questions to George & Val Collings who in turn dish them out to whome they think is best equipped to answer them. This way you get an individual researched answer which may make it in print in the mag. And the "team" get another brownie point! The email bit is quite fast, seeing things in print in the mag takes ages!. Hope that helps Clive

[Guest Brian Kirby]

Martin A reader, more so a subscriber, should know who George is, since his name is at the head of the "Interchange" section every month. It may not be immediately apparent that he keeps a "loose" eye on the forum, but he does. However, I'm not sure this is especially relevant. Where I depart from your original post is in the suggestion that responses from MMM staffers and contributors should be given especial weight. I have not noticed any of them swank their qualifications, although their experience speaks for itself. Forum contributors may just be enthusiastic readers, or they may hold a Masters in Mechanical Engineering or some other relevant attainment or qualification. In the same way that the MMM crew don't crow, neither do the forum contributors. However, there is usually a tangible ring of truth or common sense that comse across when you get to "hear" the real expert, that somehow tells you he/she knows their stuff, and their answer can be relied upon. I think that's part of the delight. Suddenly there's that ray of light, cast onto the topic of the day, and you just say "ah", and take note. The point surely is that expertise has many forms, each of which has limited application. There are no formal qualifications on motorhomes that I'm aware of and this we all start equal. Then up comes the tricky topic and the expert can speak and we can all learn. He/she doesn't really need to declare their qualification to speak, indeed I think it would be a bit boring if they did. Besides, it would only be a matter of time before someone started adding irrelevant "qualifications" (or as has happened) totally spurious ones in an attempt to add weight to the bee in their particular bonnet. I say leave well alone, it's fine as it is. Regards Brian

[Guest Ruth]

I agree with Brian. A well-worded reply, whoever it is from, should be make it fairly clear whether that person is offering a factual response or a personal opinion. Either (and often both) may be relevant. It is very helpful to distinguish the two. This is (in my opinion!)the best of the forums for techical queries benefitting as it does from the wealth of knowledge of it's contributors, several of which are MMM consultants. They are generous with their time and have helped all of us endlessly. However sometimes even they may give a very biased answer as so often in life there is more thn one way to approach things! I work with young families often confused by the minefield of advice about parenting and one of the best tips I can give them is to read/listen to all the advice but to go with the advice that feels right for them. Only in certain fields (e.g. safety, for example) are there black and white answers to a question.

[Guest Brian Kirby]

Now, I don't want you to think I'm quarreling with you Ruth, because in fact I agree. However, some years ago a house was virtually destroyed by an explosion in its roofspace. The homeowner was extensively burned, albeit relatively superficially, and survived. An insurance investigation into the circumstances revealed that the homeowner had been working on his car, in his integral garage, just prior to the explosion. He had removed the petrol tank from the car, to clean it of contamination that was causing fuel starvation. To do this, he had drained the petrol from the tank into an old kitchen bowl on the garage floor. In his garage was the central heating boiler for his home. The central heating was not on, but the water heating was. Because the boiler had been working to supply hot water, it and the flue were warm, with buoyant warm air inside rising up to the rooftop flue terminal. The bowl of petrol had inevitably released fumes, and these had been drawn up into the boiler flue along with the air. It seems his wife then decided to run a bath. Hot water out of hot water cylinder into bath. Hot water cylinder therefore replenished with cold water. Thermostat on cylinder, responding to inflow of cold water, demanded heat. Boiler fired in response. Unfortunately, the concentration of petrol fumes in the flue had, by that time, reached an explosive mixture. So, as the boiler fired, the petrol/air mixture in the flue detonated, and the roof and most of the gable wall of the house were blown off. So, while I agree that we should listen carefully to experts in their fields, we should always remember that not all experts are equal. Oh, I nearly forgot, the above homeowner worked as a safety adviser! It was just that garage work wasn't his field, so he didn't spot the danger. Funny old world, isn't it?

[Guest Ruth]

Nice one. Well it really just adds more weight to the same, doesn't it? Take ideas but it's up to you in the end to decide if it's advice worth acting on!

[Guest enodreven]

Hi, Very interesting debate, but i think the last answer from Ruth has covered it perfectly. We should welcome comments and suggestions from everyone and then decide which ones if any we will follow, its just common sense ?? "I wouldn't put my head in a gas oven" no matter who told me ?? Brian