If you are trying to effect change, I'd humbly suggest you consider the tone of your posts as well as their content. It is pretty hard to win people over when you are either belittling or berating them. Often I think your message is lost in the acrimonious nature of your posts.
(And yes I should take my own advise as it is in my nature to be overly sarcastic on (these) forums as well.)
Like I said, my desired change was effected simply by making the post. Trying to change anyone's mind is a waste of time.
Like I said, my desired change was effected simply by making the post. Trying to change anyone's mind is a waste of time.
Rob, you are being obtuse. Deliberately? Can't tell. The comments about tone relate to your critique of SCCA volunteers, not the accident. But nice obfuscation...
Rob, you are being obtuse. Deliberately? Can't tell. The comments about tone relate to your critique of SCCA volunteers, not the accident. But nice obfuscation...
The comments about tone relate to your critique of SCCA volunteers, not the accident. But nice obfuscation...
Well since it was my post, the comment actually was in general and referred to just about every single post Rob makes. Don't get me wrong, I think Rob often has valid points, some of which I agree with. I just think the message is lost, and it's pointless to post unless he's just trolling. At some point people just dismiss you out of hand, or don't bother to read your posts at all. (E.g., Any post by Bench on parity that is more than a paragraph. )
Well since it was my post, the comment actually was in general and referred to just about every single post Rob makes. Don't get me wrong, I think Rob often has valid points, some of which I agree with. I just think the message is lost, and it's pointless to post unless he's just trolling. At some point people just dismiss you out of hand, or don't bother to read your posts at all. (E.g., Any post by Bench on parity that is more than a paragraph. )
Bench's posts on parity are rarely more than a sentence fragment. He will post some little cryptic blurb, known as trolling, and then watch the frenzy. I truly believe only Drago understands half of what he is saying or maybe he is just pretending to understand.
Bench's posts on parity are rarely more than a sentence fragment. He will post some little cryptic blurb, known as trolling, and then watch the frenzy. I truly believe only Drago understands half of what he is saying or maybe he is just pretending to understand.
Yeah I agree, but we all have to begrudgingly admit that Bench's non-stop posts about the lack of parity "might" have had a part to play in the recent changes made to the NA 1.6, which has resulted in some NA 1.6's showing up and competing well. Something about the squeaky wheel that gets the grease! Cannot wait for Bench's posts for the NA 1.8 parity demands, because I am sure that he wasn't selfishly just doing this because he was personally "campaigning" a 1.6, I mean surely he must have been doing it for the good of the SM class.
Yeah I agree, but we all have to begrudgingly admit that Bench's non-stop posts about the lack of parity "might" have had a part to play in the recent changes made to the NA 1.6, which has resulted in some NA 1.6's showing up and competing well. Something about the squeaky wheel that gets the grease! Cannot wait for Bench's posts for the NA 1.8 parity demands, because I am sure that he wasn't selfishly just doing this because he was personally "campaigning" a 1.6, I mean surely he must have been doing it for the good of the SM class.
I demand the NA 1.8 gets a +1mm restrictor plate change or gets its rev limiter adjusted. All is fair.
Yeah I agree, but we all have to begrudgingly admit that Bench's non-stop posts about the lack of parity "might" have had a part to play in the recent changes made to the NA 1.6, which has resulted in some NA 1.6's showing up and competing well. Something about the squeaky wheel that gets the grease!
We had parity in 12... Be careful what you wish for It's coming!
Yeah I agree, but we all have to begrudgingly admit that Bench's non-stop posts about the lack of parity "might" have had a part to play in the recent changes made to the NA 1.6, which has resulted in some NA 1.6's showing up and competing well. Something about the squeaky wheel that gets the grease!
Danny really!!!, you are enabling bench. Please watch your posts please.
I'm sure this is not the place for this but here goes. Na1.8 needs plate removed completely.so my intentions are clear I don't own any never have and never will.
Be careful Chris you might have your 99 NB driving privileges revoked by mentioning anything that the NA 1.8 has a parity issue. Then you will be required to go to rehab and start NB therapy and take medication until you say that the NA 1.8 is equal to the NB. I have already started my therapy.
Yeah I agree, but we all have to begrudgingly admit that Bench's non-stop posts about the lack of parity "might" have had a part to play in the recent changes made to the NA 1.6, which has resulted in some NA 1.6's showing up and competing well.
Begrudgingly? Why?
Dave is one of the few guys on here who is consistent...believes what he writes, does it without personal attacks and only follows the "in" crowd when what is being said is fair and accurate. Because he writes a lot and repeats things often to me isn't a reason to take what he says any less serious...agree or disagree. It seems some have decided to use Dave(Bench)as the go to punching bag for snarky, sarcastic, belittling remarks even when he has nothing to do with the discussion. My guess is most on here are adults and would all have a great time sitting around having a cocktail discussing the latest SM drama. But we would do so with respect and politeness...why does the internet have to be any different?
Danny really!!!, you are enabling bench. Please watch your posts please.
Ron, my experience is that Bench is pretty good at defending himself. But I think I understand the intent of your post - which is consistent with your approach of desiring civility. With that said, methinks you doth take Frank and Danny's posts too seriously. I read them as teasing Bench, not anything else.
CNJ
Jim Drago, FTodaro, Danny Steyn and 1 other like this
Ron, my experience is that Bench is pretty good at defending himself. But I think I understand the intent of your post - which is consistent with your approach of desiring civility. With that said, methinks you doth take Frank and Danny's posts too seriously. I read them as teasing Bench, not anything else.
CNJ
Agree on all points...because as you I have a very good idea how Frank and Danny conduct themselves but sometimes to the newbie or not so well informed, the subtle "teasing" gets lost or misunderstood!
Sign In
Create Account
Back to top
Report
Don't get me wrong, I think Rob often has valid points, some of which I agree with. I just think the message is lost, and it's pointless to post unless he's just trolling. At some point people just dismiss you out of hand, or don't bother to read your posts at all. (E.g., Any post by Bench on parity that is more than a paragraph. 
)
