I know that they say they want to get these cars off the road, but for some people these are verry nice cars. Example they say the +1vehicle is a 98 explorer, umm i want a 98 explorer ill pay you 2500$ for it. Thus giving money back to the government. Why destroy perfectly good vehicles when they could resale them and recoop some money. Makes no sense at all
hey hey, I live in L.A., i may not be perfect but i have always apologized when i needed to
That wasn't directed at you, dude. My personal vendetta against the incorrigible douche RedFoxGT continues...
1991notchbacklx has one of the cleanest faptastic cars on the forum, how can you say he doesnt have a stang?
All I've done in these past two threads where I've called you out is to redirect the negative energy you bring to them. I have only ever seen you make positive comments AFTER someone has called you out on saying something demeaning or underhanded in a thread. Those on this forum who see me post know the kind of person I am. I rarely lash out and if I don't have something nice to say, I usually don't say anything at all. I've sent a bunch of member parts for free without even asking for shipping, because I care about members on here and like to see car enthusiasts like myself happy with their respective rides. Joking is one thing, but your comments are out of line sometimes and they come from left field. Do you think it's coincidence that so many other members (including two mods) feel the same way I do? I can't believe you'd even attempt to justify your words by reverting back to the "I've been on this forum longer than you" argument. That doesn't even make sense. Let me guess, we're all wrong and you're correct for saying the things you say though, right?
Thanks!
Guys, please disagree about politics and please be vehement about your beliefs. That's what the forums are for - passionate dialogue. Arguing can be fun and interesting, but the personal bashing and name calling is how the threads get locked and accounts are banned or suspended. No one gets in trouble for stating their opinion, even if it's terrible
No one is getting banned here, but keep in mind that you're hurting your own reputations when you resort to bashing others' cars, age, experience, etc... Try to keep arguments civil, and on topic. Please note that even though I disagreed with a post and was pretty miffed, I was still able to avoid name calling or personal bashing.
Rather, I got a bit upset at being told that I overlooked something that had nothing to do with the subject of the discussion. I am also insulted by the implication that I supported the money spent on the war. And yes, that implication was made, hence the use of the word, "convenient," as if to say that I avoided using that example because spending that money was ok. To me it's obvious that a 694 Billion dollar war hasn't anything to do with the merits of a completely seperate spending program. If you would like to debate the merits of spending 694 Billion dollars on our activities overseas, feel free to start a seperate thread where that is in the subject instead of "cash for clunkers." I'd love to debate that subject as even though I disagreed with going to war, I do believe that spending most of that money was absolutely our obligation since we are responsible for cleaning up the messes we make.
Being a moderator grants the privilege of getting the last words in a locked thread. However, should anyone care to continue this discussion, please feel free to PM me or start a new and civil thread.
Chris
No one is getting banned here, but keep in mind that you're hurting your own reputations when you resort to bashing others' cars, age, experience, etc... Try to keep arguments civil, and on topic. Please note that even though I disagreed with a post and was pretty miffed, I was still able to avoid name calling or personal bashing.
Rather, I got a bit upset at being told that I overlooked something that had nothing to do with the subject of the discussion. I am also insulted by the implication that I supported the money spent on the war. And yes, that implication was made, hence the use of the word, "convenient," as if to say that I avoided using that example because spending that money was ok. To me it's obvious that a 694 Billion dollar war hasn't anything to do with the merits of a completely seperate spending program. If you would like to debate the merits of spending 694 Billion dollars on our activities overseas, feel free to start a seperate thread where that is in the subject instead of "cash for clunkers." I'd love to debate that subject as even though I disagreed with going to war, I do believe that spending most of that money was absolutely our obligation since we are responsible for cleaning up the messes we make.
Being a moderator grants the privilege of getting the last words in a locked thread. However, should anyone care to continue this discussion, please feel free to PM me or start a new and civil thread.
Chris
- Status
- Not open for further replies.