Google| Subject | Re: Will Tony apologize? (was: Re: Colonial Photo & Hobby) |
| From | Sandman |
| Date | 2014-04-23 20:38 (2014-04-23 20:38) |
| Message-ID | <slrnllg2b2.hhd.mr@irc.sandman.net> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Tony Cooper |
| Followups | Tony Cooper (21m) > Sandman Tony Cooper (37m) > Sandman Tony Cooper (2h & 13m) > Sandman |
In article <rnqfl9ttfnl3j7d2l8ui5i7vobo3v0qo3k@4ax.com>, Tony Cooper wrote:
Yeah, why do you keep it up?Tony CooperTony CooperSandman
Your "motives" are a broader category of reason and involve a plan or a recurring impetus to do something.
So "motive" is yet another word illiterate Tony doesn't understand.
Oh, dear. More shallow thinking and running with the wrong definition.
So you think "motive" is a synonym for "reason" and can be used interchangeably with that word?motive noun 1 a reason for doing something, esp. one that is hidden or not obvious:
In the sentence "What's your reason for inviting John to the wedding?" would you use the word "motive" in place of "reason"?Sure, if I felt that the reason wasn't obvious, there must be some hidden motive, since the person hasnt invited John for anything in years. What was his motivation for inviting John this time? Why now? I don't understand.
The reason may be that John is a cousinSo why even ask? If John is a cousin, that's obviously a perfectly valid reason to invite him, right? So you wouldn't even ask. You would only ask if you didn't understand the reason behind the invitation, it was not obvious or hidden.
That's where you fail in English.Hahaha! My irony meter just exploded.
You don't understand the appropriateness of certain words in certain context.And now it's on fire.
The word may be an appropriate substitute in one context, but not in another.And now my house burned down.
Most learners of a second language accept the input of native speakers and adjust their future usage.I invite a native speaker to come with input. Illiterare trolls on usenet? Not so much :)
Some are even appreciative of the input.People like me, for instance.
You, however, defend your inappropriate usage and claim the native speaker is illiterate.If you don't want to be called an illiterare, learn to read and write.
Nope.I note that you have still not explained what you meant.Sandman
Of course not. Had you asked from the beginning, I could have told you. But you didn't ask, you said:"I don't think that a business feels that optimizing profitability is a "shame"."And when I replied by explicitly telling you that I never said it was, you replied with:"When you deny something, do try for some plausibility."Clearly saying that me saying "Which is a shame" meant that I think that a business thinks it's a shame to optimize profitability.Tony Cooper
Re-writing history are you now?
Just lying?Never happened.
Here's the exchange:
"Some lament that Colonial does not discount accessory items or have sales other than factory-sponsored specials, but that's not a size issue."
Sandman: "Naturally. But that's a shame."
Optimizing profitability hadn't come into the discussion yet. Discounting items does not optimize profitability anyway.Which is why it was really weird why you even brought it up. But you do lots of weird things.
That was followed by you reiterating the observation saying it is a shame to make a business decision to not discount accessory items.This is a lie. Why no quote marks? Because you couldn't find a quote of me saying the things you just attributed to me.
"Some lament that Colonial does not discount accessory items or have sales other than factory-sponsored specials, but that's not a size issue."
Sandman: "Naturally. But that's a shame."
Tony Cooper "No, it's a business decision."
Sandman "Which is a shame."
I introduced "optimizing profitability" in a later postExactly, it was never said by me in relation to "is a shame" in any capacity. It was only mentioned by you and then attributed to me.
That was only after you had already told me I was denying that it was in relation to business profitability.SandmanTony Cooper
So there was never a question from you.
Another lie. I later asked: "What, then, am I to take from your statement "Which is a shame"? Who is shamed? What is the reason for the shame? Why did you write this?"
I totally understand why you had to chop up the exchange to make it out of order. Here is the actual exchange, as it happened:
Tony Cooper Some lament that Colonial does not discount accessory items or have sales other than factory-sponsored specials, but that's not a size issue.
Sandman Naturally. But that's a shame.
Tony Cooper No, it's a business decision.
Sandman Which is a shame.
Tony Cooper I don't think that a business feels that optimizing profitability is a "shame".
Sandman I never said it was.
Tony Cooper When you deny something, do try for some plausibility.
Sandman I'll give you one million dollar if you can quote me saying that it's a shame if a business wants to optimizie its profitability. One million dollars, just for you.
Yes, please do.SandmanTony Cooper
You just said I denied your whacky interpretation and that was the end of it. If you instead had gone "Oh, so what did you mean by shame then",
See above.
Obviously so. In the third post above in my quoted exchange, posted by you - had you just asked "Why do you think that's a shame?", you would have gotten an answer.SandmanTony Cooper
then you would have been an adult and would have been treated as such and had gotten a response.
Obviously not.
Incorrect.Tony CooperJust substantiate why it's a shame that the store doesn't discount accessory products and put an end to it.Sandman
See, you didn't even understand just what part "is a shame" was in reference to - now you're talking about "accessory products" when that's not what I was talking about initially.
Bullshit.
Another lie.I never lie.
"Accessory products" is in the post where "...that's a shame" appeared the first time.As is "or have sales other than factory-sponsored specials" and "but that's not a size issue.", both of which could be the part that I think is a shame.
Again, if you're unclear just what I think is a shame, feel free to ask without telling lies about me, then you'll get an answer.
I've quoted it above. It's in the paragraph you responded to.You know, I can respond to a paragraph of text with "it's a shame" without it actually encompassing the paragraph in its entirety.
If you could read, you could have read this part from me before:
Sandman Colonial Photo & Hobby 04/14/2014 <slrnlkoaer.tho.mr@irc.sandman.net>
"Prices weren't really good though, and they had a very small number of cameras on the shelves, so hard to browse around really. No one there had any knowledge or experience with the Sony A7 so I wasn't able to get good feedback, but since the prices weren't better than in Sweden, I suppose that's ok."
Which you even responded to, so if you had half a brain you should have been able to figure out just what price-related topic "it's a shame" might have been in relation to. And if not, you could have just asked.
If you are not responding to what's in that paragraph, what in the world would you be responding to?I did respond to what was in the paragraph. I just assumed that you had remembered why I was there so you'd know just what part I was in reference to, and if not - would just ask me to clarify.
You continue to shovel faster and the hole gets deeper.What's that? Can't hear you down there. Is it getting warm yet?
-- Sandman[.net]
2014-04-14-
