Honda Car Forum

Waiving the right to remain silent, Dean Dark <ddrake@comcast.notthis.net>
said:

> On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 19:45:22 -0400, Luca <we@qw.net> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 19:18:05 -0400, Dean Dark
>><ddrake@comcast.notthis.net> wrote:
>>
>>>What is even more absurd is that it apparently didn't occur to you to
>>>use Google to search for *opinions* about products, as well as the
>>>products themselves.
>>>
>>>Now, that *is* absurd.
>>
>>And how did you arrive at that conclusion?
>>
>>Maybe I wanted more opinions than I found by Googling...you think maybe
>>that could be the case?
>
> As an earlier post by someone else said, "you didn't say that."
>
> Maybe it could be the case that you should learn from this little
> episode that you could do *much* better in how you frame your
> questions?
>
> Being explicit is likely to be way more productive than expecting the
> rest of us to be mucking findreaders...

Exactly...

The appropriate framing of the question would have been, "I did a search
on this, but couldn't find the types of opinions I was looking for. Does
anyone here have personal experience with this?"

That should have avoided all this intermediate crap...

--
Larry J. - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail

"A lack of common sense is now considered a disability,
with all the privileges that this entails."

On Thu, 01 May 2008 02:11:03 GMT, Larry in AZ
<usenet2@DE.LETE.THISljvideo.com> wrote:

>Waiving the right to remain silent, Dean Dark <ddrake@comcast.notthis.net>
>said:
>
>> On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 19:45:22 -0400, Luca <we@qw.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 19:18:05 -0400, Dean Dark
>>><ddrake@comcast.notthis.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>What is even more absurd is that it apparently didn't occur to you to
>>>>use Google to search for *opinions* about products, as well as the
>>>>products themselves.
>>>>
>>>>Now, that *is* absurd.
>>>
>>>And how did you arrive at that conclusion?
>>>
>>>Maybe I wanted more opinions than I found by Googling...you think maybe
>>>that could be the case?
>>
>> As an earlier post by someone else said, "you didn't say that."
>>
>> Maybe it could be the case that you should learn from this little
>> episode that you could do *much* better in how you frame your
>> questions?
>>
>> Being explicit is likely to be way more productive than expecting the
>> rest of us to be mucking findreaders...
>
>Exactly...
>
>The appropriate framing of the question would have been, "I did a search
>on this, but couldn't find the types of opinions I was looking for. Does
>anyone here have personal experience with this?"
>
>That should have avoided all this intermediate crap...


OK, I should have been more clear. Let's move on.

Now that you all know what I am asking and what actions I have already
taken, let's see just how productive you can be in terms of my
original question.

On Thu, 01 May 2008 06:17:32 -0400, Luca <we@qw.net> wrote:

>Now that you all know what I am asking and what actions I have already
>taken, let's see just how productive you can be in terms of my
>original question.

I think it would better motivate people to help you if you could be
just a bit more condescending than that...
--
Dan.

In article <bd6j141c60rktgqkaef7rc6vdosphtarga@4ax.com>,
ddrake@comcast.notthis.net says...
> let's see just how productive you can be in terms of my
> >original question.
>
>
You are correct Dan. It appears he thinks he is "owed" or "entitled" to
direct others in this NG to work for him. Even politicians concede
their error better than he did.
--
I. Care
Address fake until the SPAM goes away ;-}