Letter to EPA from ATS

If anyone needs to borrow a crayon from me to help explain things, I'm willing to give up a few of mine if it'll make everyone happy.
 
partsguy662 said:
If anyone needs to borrow a crayon from me to help explain things, I'm willing to give up a few of mine if it'll make everyone happy.
Click to expand...

Partsguy,

Thanks for helping out but this thread is now about boats and stripper poles:rockwoot:. I know your the boss around here but let's try and keep it on topic:hehe:

Dennis
 
Eric, in an attempt to remain neutral in this post, let me give you a bit of advice.

First, you need to remember that the damage has been done. Anything and everything that is said by you or any other ATS employee will only help or hurt the current situation.

To give you an insight as to what is going on in the eyes of a bystander (such as myself who has no ties or anything with ATS), many people feel that ATS is currently taking a someone hostile stance to the situation, and is dodging a few key issues. It is no secret that ATS does not have a very good reputation on the forums (and has not had a good reputation in quite some time), so you need to take that into consideration when speaking to members here and elsewhere.

First and foremost the biggest issue... why was the letter written in the first place? This is the question that is unanswered by you and ATS. The reason people are questioning this is because this letter is "a follow-up letter" to prior events, discussions, etc between ATS employees, ATS lawyers, and the EPA. So what begs to question is that if this is indeed written originally as a follow up letter (disregard the fact of whether it was ever intended to even be sent), then what is suggested by the context of the letter is what people feel may or may not have been discussed in person between Clint, the EPA, and Stewart. Maybe what was written in the letter was in fact discussed in person, or maybe the subject was never once brought up. People are going to make assumptions. Unfortunately in your case, you have no way to prove or disprove anything that was held in conversation. Many people are going to assume the worst and/or the most obvious. The most obvious being that if this letter was written, it was brought up in conversation prior to the time of it's writing. I won't even attempt to know all the facts of the case, but this is how it appears to everyone on the forums reading this. I'm just stating the obvious, and nothing more.

The other issue is your statements made on these forums as well as statements made by others at ATS. My advice would be for the company to simply stick to the facts of what is out there, apologize for the letter being written, and make no further mention of future litigation, threats of lawsuits, etc. Those issues are of a private matter for ATS , and should remain that way. Bringing that forward does in no way help your cause, and only shows more defiance and anger in the eyes of readers.

People will accept an apology. We all know that business owners and employees get angry, upset, say things they probably shouldn't, etc. It's the normal part of everyday business. Clint and everyone else at ATS has a right to think and feel how they want about customers and competitors. Unfortunately with the public release of that letter, some internal private feelings were allowed to be known, so naturally people are going to be angry with the attitude that is fostered in the letter. It also doesn't help that ATS has not shared a very strong reputation on this and other forums.

In the end, it was wrong to write the letter, and it was wrong to have that letter seized and released like it was. Unfortunately the damage is done, so I hope that what I've said does not come off as offensive, but rather as something to consider for the very near future. I would personally like to see an issue like this put to rest, than to continue on and eventually hurt the diesel performance industry.
 
So, Dennis, can I have a ride on your boat, that thing is swweeet:bow::Cheer:
 
haz-mat19 said:
So, Dennis, can I have a ride on your boat, that thing is swweeet:bow::Cheer:
Click to expand...

I want to ride too, if those are coconut trees you can shove them up someones tailpipe and kick their butt in a race. no emissions at that point. thats a epa certified mod, I asked the Epa about it. TOTALLY LEGAL
 
Pocket said:
Eric, in an attempt to remain neutral in this post, let me give you a bit of advice.

First, you need to remember that the damage has been done. Anything and everything that is said by you or any other ATS employee will only help or hurt the current situation.

To give you an insight as to what is going on in the eyes of a bystander (such as myself who has no ties or anything with ATS), many people feel that ATS is currently taking a someone hostile stance to the situation, and is dodging a few key issues. It is no secret that ATS does not have a very good reputation on the forums (and has not had a good reputation in quite some time), so you need to take that into consideration when speaking to members here and elsewhere.

First and foremost the biggest issue... why was the letter written in the first place? This is the question that is unanswered by you and ATS. The reason people are questioning this is because this letter is "a follow-up letter" to prior events, discussions, etc between ATS employees, ATS lawyers, and the EPA. So what begs to question is that if this is indeed written originally as a follow up letter (disregard the fact of whether it was ever intended to even be sent), then what is suggested by the context of the letter is what people feel may or may not have been discussed in person between Clint, the EPA, and Stewart. Maybe what was written in the letter was in fact discussed in person, or maybe the subject was never once brought up. People are going to make assumptions. Unfortunately in your case, you have no way to prove or disprove anything that was held in conversation. Many people are going to assume the worst and/or the most obvious. The most obvious being that if this letter was written, it was brought up in conversation prior to the time of it's writing. I won't even attempt to know all the facts of the case, but this is how it appears to everyone on the forums reading this. I'm just stating the obvious, and nothing more.

The other issue is your statements made on these forums as well as statements made by others at ATS. My advice would be for the company to simply stick to the facts of what is out there, apologize for the letter being written, and make no further mention of future litigation, threats of lawsuits, etc. Those issues are of a private matter for ATS , and should remain that way. Bringing that forward does in no way help your cause, and only shows more defiance and anger in the eyes of readers.

People will accept an apology. We all know that business owners and employees get angry, upset, say things they probably shouldn't, etc. It's the normal part of everyday business. Clint and everyone else at ATS has a right to think and feel how they want about customers and competitors. Unfortunately with the public release of that letter, some internal private feelings were allowed to be known, so naturally people are going to be angry with the attitude that is fostered in the letter. It also doesn't help that ATS has not shared a very strong reputation on this and other forums.

In the end, it was wrong to write the letter, and it was wrong to have that letter seized and released like it was. Unfortunately the damage is done, so I hope that what I've said does not come off as offensive, but rather as something to consider for the very near future. I would personally like to see an issue like this put to rest, than to continue on and eventually hurt the diesel performance industry.
Click to expand...

This is the best post in the entore thread!!! It is also the best advice!!!!

The more ATS tries to defend itself, the worse it will get. Time to appologize, suck it up and move on.

Consider this a learning experience for everyone!!
 
Pocket said:
Eric, in an attempt to remain neutral in this post, let me give you a bit of advice.

First, you need to remember that the damage has been done. Anything and everything that is said by you or any other ATS employee will only help or hurt the current situation.

To give you an insight as to what is going on in the eyes of a bystander (such as myself who has no ties or anything with ATS), many people feel that ATS is currently taking a someone hostile stance to the situation, and is dodging a few key issues. It is no secret that ATS does not have a very good reputation on the forums (and has not had a good reputation in quite some time), so you need to take that into consideration when speaking to members here and elsewhere.

First and foremost the biggest issue... why was the letter written in the first place? This is the question that is unanswered by you and ATS. The reason people are questioning this is because this letter is "a follow-up letter" to prior events, discussions, etc between ATS employees, ATS lawyers, and the EPA. So what begs to question is that if this is indeed written originally as a follow up letter (disregard the fact of whether it was ever intended to even be sent), then what is suggested by the context of the letter is what people feel may or may not have been discussed in person between Clint, the EPA, and Stewart. Maybe what was written in the letter was in fact discussed in person, or maybe the subject was never once brought up. People are going to make assumptions. Unfortunately in your case, you have no way to prove or disprove anything that was held in conversation. Many people are going to assume the worst and/or the most obvious. The most obvious being that if this letter was written, it was brought up in conversation prior to the time of it's writing. I won't even attempt to know all the facts of the case, but this is how it appears to everyone on the forums reading this. I'm just stating the obvious, and nothing more.

The other issue is your statements made on these forums as well as statements made by others at ATS. My advice would be for the company to simply stick to the facts of what is out there, apologize for the letter being written, and make no further mention of future litigation, threats of lawsuits, etc. Those issues are of a private matter for ATS , and should remain that way. Bringing that forward does in no way help your cause, and only shows more defiance and anger in the eyes of readers.

People will accept an apology. We all know that business owners and employees get angry, upset, say things they probably shouldn't, etc. It's the normal part of everyday business. Clint and everyone else at ATS has a right to think and feel how they want about customers and competitors. Unfortunately with the public release of that letter, some internal private feelings were allowed to be known, so naturally people are going to be angry with the attitude that is fostered in the letter. It also doesn't help that ATS has not shared a very strong reputation on this and other forums.

In the end, it was wrong to write the letter, and it was wrong to have that letter seized and released like it was. Unfortunately the damage is done, so I hope that what I've said does not come off as offensive, but rather as something to consider for the very near future. I would personally like to see an issue like this put to rest, than to continue on and eventually hurt the diesel performance industry.
Click to expand...
:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:
 
MAXTORQ said:
Not bragging Eric. Just stating the facts,

Yet you've completely failed to own up to the fact that what you've said is utterly hypocritical.

your nothing but hired damage control.

I'm not sure if that's supposed to be a stinging jab at me or not, but you seemed so confident that you could punch all types of holes in things - surely just a lowly "damage control" agent such as myself could not stand stand up to the damning points you're sure must exist...

But thats ok I could give a pile about the Barney building and it's contents.

Really? You seem to be investing a lot of time & attention to this thread for somebody that doesn't care... And since you brought up all the customers you've got that came here first, it might interest you to know about your former customers' vehicles that are at this very moment included in the contents of this "barney" building (quite original). After you're finished walking on water if you'd care to exchange names via PM we could do that...
Click to expand...
Pocket said:
Eric, in an attempt to remain neutral in this post, let me give you a bit of advice.

First, you need to remember that the damage has been done. Anything and everything that is said by you or any other ATS employee will only help or hurt the current situation.

To give you an insight as to what is going on in the eyes of a bystander (such as myself who has no ties or anything with ATS), many people feel that ATS is currently taking a someone hostile stance to the situation, and is dodging a few key issues. It is no secret that ATS does not have a very good reputation on the forums (and has not had a good reputation in quite some time), so you need to take that into consideration when speaking to members here and elsewhere.

First and foremost the biggest issue... why was the letter written in the first place? This is the question that is unanswered by you and ATS. The reason people are questioning this is because this letter is "a follow-up letter" to prior events, discussions, etc between ATS employees, ATS lawyers, and the EPA. So what begs to question is that if this is indeed written originally as a follow up letter (disregard the fact of whether it was ever intended to even be sent), then what is suggested by the context of the letter is what people feel may or may not have been discussed in person between Clint, the EPA, and Stewart. Maybe what was written in the letter was in fact discussed in person, or maybe the subject was never once brought up. People are going to make assumptions. Unfortunately in your case, you have no way to prove or disprove anything that was held in conversation. Many people are going to assume the worst and/or the most obvious. The most obvious being that if this letter was written, it was brought up in conversation prior to the time of it's writing. I won't even attempt to know all the facts of the case, but this is how it appears to everyone on the forums reading this. I'm just stating the obvious, and nothing more.

The other issue is your statements made on these forums as well as statements made by others at ATS. My advice would be for the company to simply stick to the facts of what is out there, apologize for the letter being written, and make no further mention of future litigation, threats of lawsuits, etc. Those issues are of a private matter for ATS , and should remain that way. Bringing that forward does in no way help your cause, and only shows more defiance and anger in the eyes of readers.

People will accept an apology. We all know that business owners and employees get angry, upset, say things they probably shouldn't, etc. It's the normal part of everyday business. Clint and everyone else at ATS has a right to think and feel how they want about customers and competitors. Unfortunately with the public release of that letter, some internal private feelings were allowed to be known, so naturally people are going to be angry with the attitude that is fostered in the letter. It also doesn't help that ATS has not shared a very strong reputation on this and other forums.

In the end, it was wrong to write the letter, and it was wrong to have that letter seized and released like it was. Unfortunately the damage is done, so I hope that what I've said does not come off as offensive, but rather as something to consider for the very near future. I would personally like to see an issue like this put to rest, than to continue on and eventually hurt the diesel performance industry.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry if my attitude has appeared hostile here. It's a combination of answering the same questions dozens of times & frustration with people reading only bits & pieces of what's been stated before posting their own input, along with being caught up in the general atmosphere of this forum in particular. If you've seen my posts on other forums, you'll see that I'm not a hostile person, and I've taken great pains to remain civil throughout the frustrations of the last day and a half.

To address the reasons behind the writing, that's no secret whatsoever and I have no need to prove or disprove what was said. The discussions were indeed held in person, and they were public meetings hosted by the EPA at SEMA specifically to address the subject of diesel emissions. DPF deletes & all aftermarket products in general were discussed at length in a public meeting / seminar (whatever you'd like to call it), and I'm sure at least a few of the members here were present for these talks; I personally was in the booth the entire time & was not able to attend any of them.

I think we've done nothing but stick to the facts, and have presented them all; the chief example being Clint's insistence that we post everything. We could've just as easily ommitted elements, saying we didn't send it to the EPA (which is true) without coming right out & saying it did originate here, but that's not what we did. The only future litigation that's been implied was directed toward the individual(s) that illegally accessed the e-mail and then posted it with false information to give the impression we have done something that we did not. They would be private matters, as the e-mail itself was, had somebody not chosen to illegally access them & make them public. We are simply expressing the fact that we won't take this highly personal violation lightly.

Regarding an apology, we will not be apologizing, as we have done nothing wrong. ATS did not choose to spread this across every diesel forum out there, the OP's did. I feel it is unreasonable to ask somebody for an apology and to condemn them because of a passing thought they had, or in this case the fact that the letter was ever written. I've posted this elsewhere, but I think it's a good analogy so I'll post it here too:

I'd be curious to know how many that have posted are married or have ever been in a relationship, and can honestly say that during the course of that relationship have never ever looked at an attractive person walking by.

Condemning ATS over a stolen internal communication that was never going to see the light of day is no different than saying a man's a bad husband because of a thought that went through his mind when that woman in the low cut top walked by. Is the man guilty of anything for merely having that thought, even though there's no intention of doing anything with it?

Unless you've never so much as looked at somebody else, or to step outside my above example and say unless you've never had any thought that you decided not to act upon, isn't posting in this regard a touch hypocritical?
 
Eric @ ATS said:
I'd be curious to know how many that have posted are married or have ever been in a relationship, and can honestly say that during the course of that relationship have never ever looked at an attractive person walking by.

Condemning ATS over a stolen internal communication that was never going to see the light of day is no different than saying a man's a bad husband because of a thought that went through his mind when that woman in the low cut top walked by. Is the man guilty of anything for merely having that thought, even though there's no intention of doing anything with it?

Unless you've never so much as looked at somebody else, or to step outside my above example and say unless you've never had any thought that you decided not to act upon, isn't posting in this regard a touch hypocritical?
Click to expand...

how about you look at what you just said and picture it this way. what if YOU were or ARE married and you did the same thing. looked at a girl walking by. now what would happen if you wrote a letter to that girl saying you wanted to do this and that from head to toe to here but didnt send it. all of a sudden the letter gets out and your wife finds it. would you tell her not to be mad because it was only a thought and you never intended to send the letter or would she be pissed because you actually had that thought and wrote it out with almost intentions to send it? what if her family or your family found out about that letter. would they think differntly of you? absolutely they would

you have to look at it from both sides and understand why people are pissed off at you guys, well ATS in general.
 
inline6power said:
how about you look at what you just said and picture it this way. what if YOU were or ARE married and you did the same thing. looked at a girl walking by. now what would happen if you wrote a letter to that girl saying you wanted to do this and that from head to toe to here but didnt send it. all of a sudden the letter gets out and your wife finds it. would you tell her not to be mad because it was only a thought and you never intended to send the letter or would she be pissed because you actually had that thought and wrote it out with almost intentions to send it?
Click to expand...

LMFAO:hehe::hehe::hehe:
 
Eric @ ATS said:
I'm sorry if my attitude has appeared hostile here. It's a combination of answering the same questions dozens of times & frustration with people reading only bits & pieces of what's been stated before posting their own input, along with being caught up in the general atmosphere of this forum in particular. If you've seen my posts on other forums, you'll see that I'm not a hostile person, and I've taken great pains to remain civil throughout the frustrations of the last day and a half.

To address the reasons behind the writing, that's no secret whatsoever and I have no need to prove or disprove what was said. The discussions were indeed held in person, and they were public meetings hosted by the EPA at SEMA specifically to address the subject of diesel emissions. DPF deletes & all aftermarket products in general were discussed at length in a public meeting / seminar (whatever you'd like to call it), and I'm sure at least a few of the members here were present for these talks; I personally was in the booth the entire time & was not able to attend any of them.

I think we've done nothing but stick to the facts, and have presented them all; the chief example being Clint's insistence that we post everything. We could've just as easily ommitted elements, saying we didn't send it to the EPA (which is true) without coming right out & saying it did originate here, but that's not what we did. The only future litigation that's been implied was directed toward the individual(s) that illegally accessed the e-mail and then posted it with false information to give the impression we have done something that we did not. They would be private matters, as the e-mail itself was, had somebody not chosen to illegally access them & make them public. We are simply expressing the fact that we won't take this highly personal violation lightly.

Regarding an apology, we will not be apologizing, as we have done nothing wrong. ATS did not choose to spread this across every diesel forum out there, the OP's did. I feel it is unreasonable to ask somebody for an apology and to condemn them because of a passing thought they had, or in this case the fact that the letter was ever written. I've posted this elsewhere, but I think it's a good analogy so I'll post it here too:

I'd be curious to know how many that have posted are married or have ever been in a relationship, and can honestly say that during the course of that relationship have never ever looked at an attractive person walking by.

Condemning ATS over a stolen internal communication that was never going to see the light of day is no different than saying a man's a bad husband because of a thought that went through his mind when that woman in the low cut top walked by. Is the man guilty of anything for merely having that thought, even though there's no intention of doing anything with it?

Unless you've never so much as looked at somebody else, or to step outside my above example and say unless you've never had any thought that you decided not to act upon, isn't posting in this regard a touch hypocritical?
Click to expand...

Slight difference. The guy checking out the chick didn't have the thought, create a draft and then submit an invoice for billable hours based on his thought. Possibly go back and revise his thought, and then keep on churning out billable hours while using google or thumbing through the pages of magazines "laying" around the office.

For your example to have any relevance he would have had to tell a buddy about the girl in the low cut top, and then his buddy would have had to mention it in front of the guys wife leading to him having to deffend himself and his thought to the wife.
 
PSDPlayer said:
Slight difference. The guy checking out the chick didn't have the thought, create a draft and then submit an invoice for billable hours based on his thought. Possibly go back and revise his thought, and then keep on churning out billable hours while using google or thumbing through the pages of magazines "laying" around the office.

For your example to have any relevance he would have had to tell a buddy about the girl in the low cut top, and then his buddy would have had to mention it in front of the guys wife leading to him having to deffend himself and his thought to the wife.
Click to expand...

pretty much what i said:Cheer:
 
Eric @ ATS said:
I'm sorry if my attitude has appeared hostile here. It's a combination of answering the same questions dozens of times & frustration with people reading only bits & pieces of what's been stated before posting their own input, along with being caught up in the general atmosphere of this forum in particular. If you've seen my posts on other forums, you'll see that I'm not a hostile person, and I've taken great pains to remain civil throughout the frustrations of the last day and a half.
Click to expand...

The general atmosphere of this form may appear to be more "hostile" than others because there are a great deal more hardcore diesel enthusiasts per capita at Comp D than any other place I can think of....... Couple that with the fact that we moderate a bit more freely than other places and well, things get dicey from time to time. Comp D is not and was not intended to be a "chip and exhaust" forum, so the members cannot be expected to be as nonchalant as those who make 300 hp, pull a camper and only read event coverage in a magazine. The guys here are quite opinionated and very loyal to those who support them. Take John Porterfield for example. That guy would walk through fire for you guys. Now imagine a place with a bunch of folks who are just as enthusiastic as John and support any number of manufacturers with just as much tenacity................. That is Comp D.

BTW, when it comes to opinions of folks, I'll say this:
Clint has never been anything but professional with me. Many folks I am close to speak super highly of you guys and I value their opinions very much. I have had no direct dealings with ATS other than shooting the breeze from time to time with Clint and other staff, so I have no place commenting on how you guys do business or your products.

Thanks for coming on and taking part in the discussion Eric. The crowd here may not show it, but it is appreciated.
 
inline6power said:
how about you look at what you just said and picture it this way. what if YOU were or ARE married and you did the same thing. looked at a girl walking by. now what would happen if you wrote a letter to that girl saying you wanted to do this and that from head to toe to here but didnt send it. all of a sudden the letter gets out and your wife finds it. would you tell her not to be mad because it was only a thought and you never intended to send the letter or would she be pissed because you actually had that thought and wrote it out with almost intentions to send it? what if her family or your family found out about that letter. would they think differntly of you? absolutely they would

you have to look at it from both sides and understand why people are pissed off at you guys, well ATS in general.
Click to expand...
:thankyou2:
 
Timbeaux38 said:
The general atmosphere of this form may appear to be more "hostile" than others because there are a great deal more hardcore diesel enthusiasts per capita at Comp D than any other place I can think of....... Couple that with the fact that we moderate a bit more freely than other places and well, things get dicey from time to time. Comp D is not and was not intended to be a "chip and exhaust" forum, so the members cannot be expected to be as nonchalant as those who make 300 hp, pull a camper and only read event coverage in a magazine. The guys here are quite opinionated and very loyal to those who support them. Take John Porterfield for example. That guy would walk through fire for you guys. Now imagine a place with a bunch of folks who are just as enthusiastic as John and support any number of manufacturers with just as much tenacity................. That is Comp D.
Click to expand...

You should put that on the front page, and in the disclaimer. :) well said! :)
 
schaef_12 said:
:thankyou2:
Click to expand...

no problem. i just dont understand how they cannot see it from our point of view. even after i use his way of thinking. dont know how they can say they will not apologize cause they did nothing wrong yet he is the one being hypocritical.
 
inline6power said:
no problem. i just dont understand how they cannot see it from our point of view. even after i use his way of thinking. dont know how they can say they will not apologize cause they did nothing wrong yet he is the one being hypocritical.
Click to expand...

Exactly this is all to familiar with the actions of politicians. Are we sure ATS isnt based out of Chicago?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top