Re: Apple To Lose 2% Of Its Retail Locations

In article <lu2mu2tnttiqc4mc5f80j5huiih5ss4k9p@xxxxxxx>,
Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.of.rlyeh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sat, 03 Mar 2007 16:28:06 -1000, David Fritzinger
<dfritzin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:

In article <1b3ku25a8b3bg769gbj2qe66sbdb8c9935@xxxxxxx>,
Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.of.rlyeh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 19:05:49 -1000, David Fritzinger
<dfritzin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

In article <f9nhu29kpg1umn5n6dqictituepd95uruq@xxxxxxx>,
Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.of.rlyeh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 2 Mar 2007 18:24:37 -0800, "Dave Fritzinger" <dfritzin@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

On Mar 2, 3:46 pm, Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.of.rl...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2 Mar 2007 17:14:00 -0800, "Dave Fritzinger"
<dfrit...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:



On Mar 2, 2:55 pm, Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.of.rl...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On 2 Mar 2007 09:06:00 -0800, "Dave Fritzinger"
<dfrit...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

On Mar 2, 12:21 am, Nashton <n...@xxxxx> wrote:
Dave Fritzinger wrote:
On Feb 28, 8:24 am, Mayor of R'lyeh
<mayor.of.rl...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
http://www.betanews.com/article/CompUSA_to_Close_Half_its_Sto
res
/11
72...

Cuss and discuss.

Boy, speaking of misleading topic headings...

I hate to tell you this, Mayor, but the story was about
CompUSA.
Apple
was just mentioned in passing.

IOW, you were being fairly dishonest in your title for this
thread,
Mayor.
--
Dave Fritzinger
Honolulu, HI

Fritzinger's comprehension skills seem to be on the Fritz.

"..The decision would likely impact Apple the most, which
stands
to
lose
two percent of its retail locations."

Doh.

I see that honesty thing just isn't working out for you either,
Nicky.
My complaint is that the Mayor's heading ignored the main thrust
of
the article, that CompUSA was closing a bunch of its stores, and

only
mentioned the possibility that it may impact Apple. Do you get
it
yet?

I didn't think so...

Flat out amazing. Dave is actually unable to make the connection
between my emphasisng the portion of an article that affects
Apple
in
an Apple group.
Let's try this:

Topics in Article:
CompUSA
Apple

Topic Of Group:
Apple

Do you see anything in there that matches?; anything in there
that
doesn't match?

Nice try at attempting to justify your dishonesty here, Mayor, but
it
doesn't work. A more honest title might have been: "CompUSA to
close
stores; Apple most affected" That would have shown the actual
content
of the article (as opposed to your title for the thread), and still
connected it to Apple/Mac advocacy.

The amazing part is where you claim that a title lifted nearly word
for word from the article is 'dishonest'. Are you really this
desperate to label anything that doesn't fit into the Fritzinger
worldview a lie?

The fact, which you are so desperate not to admit, is that the main
thrust of the article was that CompUSA was closing more than half of
its stores.

Anyone who read the article can see that.

Yup. And, they will also see that your thread title was dishonest.

Actually they'll see that you're a loonie having a hissy fit.

Not at all, Mayor. You are just upset because I called you on your
dishonesty.

LOL! You seem to have a need to believe that I am 'upset'. Bemused is
more like it. I did what you're supposed to do. I posted something
relevant to Apple in an Apple newsgroup. You, however, came boiling up
from the depths to howl your outrage in the wind. Me thinks ol'Dave is
doing a bit of projection.

But, Mayor, even you later admitted that it was not of real consequence
to Apple at all. And, since you claim not to care about the CompUSA part
of the article, one has to wonder why you bothered to post it at all.

What's really behind this bit of silliness of yours, Dave? Were you
heavily invested in CompUSA stock? Did they close a store where you
had a computer in for repair? Its got to be something because your
stated cause is just too stupid to be the real source of your anger.

No anger on my part, Mayor. I don't even like CompUSA, and I can't
remember the last time I bought something there. Heck, I now have 2
Apple stores near my house, plus the campus book store which sells Macs,
as well as a bunch of other computers. I just like pointing out your
dishonesty, and it really is quite amusing to see how defensive you
become.




There was exactly one sentence in the article that
mentioned Apple.

Which is what I highlighted. Can you figure out why?

Highlighted? Only in your later justifications.

It was highlighted all along. That is the whole basis of your
complaint after all.

What you did was ignore the point of the article. That was where you
were dishonest.

This is just plain asinine Dave. Once again, I highlighted the part of
the article relevant to Apple. I posted the URL so anyone could read
it. For some reason you insist on acting as if I were hiding
something.

See my example below, Mayor. You deceived because you did not state the
main point of the article. You won't admit it, but I will keep pulling
your leg about it. What is really funny is that you later said that the
2% loss of retail space was really quite inconsequential for Apple,
which makes me wonder why you bothered to post the article at all.



The title of the thread implied that the main thrust
of the article was Apple losing 2% of their retail space, while it was
not the main thrust of the article.

You need to look up 'imply' and 'infer'. Just because you inferred
something doesn't mean I implied it.

Words are powerful things. Perhaps if you don't know how to use them
properly, you shouldn't use them at all.

Says the guy with linguist skills so poor he can't understand that a
factual statement is not a lie just because he says so.

There are different types of lies. Let me give you another example.
Let's say that we finally captured bin Laden, but during the fight to
capture him, 5 US soldiers were killed. I then cite the article in a
post, but give the post a title of "5 more US soldiers killed". Those
very words are in the article, but my title would be a lie, because it
would misrepresent the thrust of the article I cited.

Do you really think that capturing bin Laden rises to the level of a
Usenet posting? You're waaaay to emotionaly invested in this story for
some reason. Tell us what's really eating away at you, Dave.

Speaking of not reading for comprehension, I am not comparing the
importance of the ComnpUSA to bin Laden. I am pointing out how your
thread title was misleading. And it was. That you refuse to admit it was
says far more about you than it does about me. And, I'll give you a
hint. What it says about you isn't good.


The amazing thing is that you keep coming back to this.

Says the guy who is busy screaming that a factual statement is a lie
simply because it doesn't fit into his preconcieved notions.
Great attitude for a researcher to have.

Umm, thee goes that reading comprehension problem again.

Said Dave to the man in the mirror.


You tried that joke earlier in this thread, Mayor. It didn't work then
either.

What joke? Its the only way to make your sentence make sense.


Obviously, I
know the article said that Apple might lose 2% of their retail outlet
space.

Something you keep insisting is both true and a lie. I guess the 60's
were good for somebody.

Now you are lying about what I am said.

You've admitted it was a true statement. You also keep insisting that
it was dishonest. Dishonest means 'lie', Dave. Look it up.

It was a misleading thread title, as I have shown. That you won't admit
it says something about you.


But, you totally ignored the fact the article was about CompUSA,
and only mentioned Apple as an aside.

For some reason Dave thinks thisis comp.sys.compusa.advocacy.

Yet another strawman from the Mayor.

How can the very basis of your whining be a strawman?

I'm not whining, Mayor. Unless pointing out your dishonesty is whining.
I'm sorry that my doing so gets you in such a tizzy, but, well, tough.

After all, this isn't
comp.sys.global.warming, but you have started numerous threads here on
that subject.

And I've always slapped an [OT] in front of them.

And, I'm not complaining about you starting off topic threads. I have
started a few myself. However, you are lying again when you say that I
think this is comp.sys.compusa.advocacy. The fact is you made a post
with a misleading title. And, you have admitted that the expected 2%
loss to Apple wasn't at all consequential, so one has to wonder why on
earth you did it in the first place.


Let me give you an example. Let's
say I referenced an article about Katrina, which talked mainly about the
number of lives lost and the fact that large swaths of the Gulf Coast
was destroyed, and the article also mentioned that Trent Lott lost his
house as well. So, when I started a thread about the article, my
headline was "Katrina destorys Trent Lott's home". Wouldn't that be a
bit dishonest, because it ignored the major thrust of the article?

I've got a better example. Let's say you're citing a source for a
paper. The source is a long paper outlining some procedure. You're not
really interested in that main part of the paper. You're interested in
some process mentioned as tried but discarded. You think this process
might be useful for something you're working on. In your cite do you
just mention the relevant part, leaving out the stuff that's not
relevnt or do you cite 212 pages of things that have no relevance?

No, it is a poor example, because in any cite, I would give the title of
the aritcle.

Its not a 1 to 1 comparison, just a general one.

And, a very poor one. But, you probably already know that. At least, I
hope you do.

Not only that, but I would explain why I am citing that
article. As an example: DNA was sequenced by the method of Sanger (1),
where the number 1 would refer to a complete reference given later in
the paper. So, you are wrong, again.
[snip]

Sorta like posting the URL. Which makes me right.
Better luck next time, Dave.

Nope. The title of the thread was still misleading. I'm sorry that you
are not honest enough to admit it.

--
Dave Fritzinger
Honolulu, HI
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: PC & MAC wireless system
    ... Mayor of R'lyeh wrote: ... chose to bless us with the following wisdom: ... no one had ever heard of 802.11 before Apple uttered it. ... Yes it the Apple ate several thousand dollars in cost per unit ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: PC & MAC wireless system
    ... Mayor of R'lyeh wrote: ... chose to bless us with the following wisdom: ... no one had ever heard of 802.11 before Apple uttered it. ... Yes it the Apple ate several thousand dollars in cost per unit claim ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: PC & MAC wireless system
    ... Mayor of R'lyeh wrote: ... chose to bless us with the following wisdom: ... no one had ever heard of 802.11 before Apple uttered it. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: PC & MAC wireless system
    ... Mayor of R'lyeh wrote: ... chose to bless us with the following wisdom: ... no one had ever heard of 802.11 before Apple uttered it. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Apple To Lose 2% Of Its Retail Locations
    ... CompUSA. ... mentioned the possibility that it may impact Apple. ... What's really behind this bit of silliness of yours, Dave? ... factual statement is not a lie just because he says so. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
Loading