Which you're entitled to do.Just_a_fan wrote:S'funny - I agree with him and I gave him a +1 because of it...Cam wrote: Ferrari disagree with you. To tell people to go watch something else based on an assumption proved to be incorrect, should be food for thought when you post poor quality info. your post is a fine example of -1.
I gave 2 examples where two of the biggest names in F1, Brawn and Montezemolo (arguably Ferrari play a critical role in F1 and its future) whereby both have stated in public that there does in fact need to be 'more' relevance for road cars in F1. I posted fact based information available in the public domain and suggested to a poster, that to make a sweeping statement countering information supplied by key personal involved in the sport - may not be good information to post, furthermore, to attack a poster to 'go elsewhere' deserved a -1 - is actually championed by some people - astounds me.
No one on this forum, in any thread, that I can find, or in the public domain, has ever supplied (by a leading team member or FIA representative) a statement, printed document or any other facts that prove that F1 does not have any relevance to road cars. Never. Yet not only are personal opinions treated as fact, to show evidence that contradicts that is openly criticised, with those criticising receiving endorsement.
Maybe everyone is right, the voting system is worthless. I shall be more cautious with what I post. If I actually post anything from this point on. It really is pointless trying to have an open fact based discussion on here.