"Larry Varney" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
> > But you do not know how to weigh anything. You think
> > perhaps that the quality of the components is the equal
> > of the overall weight of the bike
or
> > of the price. That is why I regard you as an idiot.
> > Also, criteria never depend solely on the individual.
> > There are always universal criteria and
if
> > the individual does not recognize those universal
> > criteria, well then
the
> > individual is an idiot - which you prove every time
> > you post.
> >
> >
>
> Wrong again, Dolan. I do know how to weigh the
> different criteria. I just don't take the arrogant
> stance that *my* subjective weighing is the only, the
> correct, the best for everyone. Have I said anything
> remotely like the quality of the components being the
> equal of the overall weight or the price? Nope, never
> did - and yet, for *something I never said or wrote*,
> you think I'm an idiot. What does that make you, Dolan,
> for condeming me for something I never said? And as for
> the "universal criteria" - Dolan, what the hell are you
> talking about? NO ONE has said there aren't criteria
> that would apply to just about everything - remember,
> I'm the one who keeps pointing out to you and your
> friend, that there are more than two to consider - it's
> the relative importance of those criteria that matter -
> to the individual.
It is the job of the professional reviewer who has expert
knowledge to weigh and give due consideration to the
various aspects of the product he is reviewing. All this
business (with respect to value) about everything being
subjective and up to the individual is nothing but a lot of
****. It is how the reviewer gets out of his
responsibilites.You do this because you are basically a
coward and do not want to stand by anything you say - not
that you ever say much in any event.
I only mentioned the components factor as compared to the
weight factor as an instance of what a reviewer might weigh
when it comes to evauluating the value of a bike. I am not
saying that you do that, but that it does tie into your
statements about how there are so many other things to
consider besides weight and price, like those other things
are the equal of weight and price. They aren't , and we both
know that.
> >> Maybe if you thought about what I've said, and tried
> >> to see if you agreed with me or not, that might help.
> >> So let's hear it: do you agree, or disagree, that
> >> there are many criteria involved in buying things,
> >> and that different people weigh those criteria
> >> differently? Yes or no, Dolan. Or do you need me to
> >> make it even simpler?
> >
> >
> > I disagree with what you have said above. You have made
> > it way too subjective. There are always objective
> > criteria which have nothing to do with what any
> > individuals might think because individuals can think
wrongly
> > due to ignorance or just plain lack of knowledge. I
> > believe that is what Lorenzo is saying is that Bigha
> > will not market to recumbent shops and
to
> > sophisticated recumbent buyers. Instead they are
> > catering to
ignoramuses -
> > and you are supporting this fiasco by defending Bigha
> > the way you do.
But
> > you are not fooling me or anyone else here who knows
> > anything about recumbents. We know that a recumbent is
> > mainly a frame and wheels and
that
> > weight and price are important and everything else is
> > Mickey Mouse no
matter
> > what some "individuals" might think is important.
> >
> Nonsense. There are no "objective" criteria - and I'll
> take just one to illustrate it. How about price? Just
> what specific dollar figure is too high? If it were
> objective, there would be just one number, right? But
> there isn't - it's all relative.
I believe there is a RANGE of prices which are objective
with respect to any product, and if the price falls outside
that range, then it needs special attention to see what
might justify the price. Bigha clearly falls outside the
range of prices for a recumbent and so it requires special
attention to see what might justify that price. The fact
that the bike is heavier than most others presents a real
conundrum. You have not confronted this conundrum. Why is
that? All this business about other things being important
besides weight and price is a total cop out. Lorenzo has got
your number and until you answer his question I will not
regard you as a reviewer worth reading.
[...]
> > But are you not a reviewer for Bike Rider Online? It is
> > your duty to
advise
> > the less knowledgeable if a bike is a good buy or not.
> > If you do not
doing
> > this very elementary thing, then you are failing in your
> > duty as a
reviewer.
> > If I were Ball, I would fire you for dereliction
> > of duty.
> >
> My duty? To advise people about whether or not a bike
> is a good buy, *when I have already explained that I
> haven't ridden it*? Only fools, morons, idiots and the
> ignorant do that, Dolan - you should know that. And no,
> I am not a reviewer for Bike Rider Online. But if I
> were, and if I had reviewed the BiGHA, I would give my
> opinions as to how it rode, what it weighed, all of the
> things that I noticed about it. But "derelliction of
> duty" for not giving my evaluation of a bike I've never
> ridden - keep it up, Dolan, we all need a good laugh,
> even at the expense of the truly stupid.
I thought you were a reviewer for Bike Rider Online and that
you had reviewed the Bigha and had more or less recommended
it with some reservations. Apparently I am mistaken about
that. But then I never read Bike Rider Online (except for
your Florida safari), so I stand corrected.
> >> You and Love should be able to figure it all by now,
> >> Dolan. It's not a difficult conclusion to come to.
> >> But, just in case you really do need for me to tell
> >> you what to think and what to conclude, here it is:
> >> The value of anything, including the BiGHA, is
> >> determined by each individual. Each individual should
> >> be able to come to a decision as to whether or not
> >> it's worth the asking price. This goes for bikes,
> >> trikes, horses, cars, hamburgers, you name it.
Most individuals do not know squat about the values of the
stuff they buy. They depend on others for information that
will guide them in their purchases. That is why the consumer
organizations are as big and as important as they are. Most
specialist publications are just full of reviews of
products. The reason for this is that the consumers don't
know squat about how to spend their money wisely.
> > No, we have fundamental disagreement here. There are
> > always universal criteria for determining the value for
> > price for any product. I spent
many
> > hours as a youth reading Consumer's Reports and
> > Consumer's Digest
reviews of
> > various products. It is not up to the individual to
> > decide these things.
It
> > is up to honest reviewers who are expert to give the
> > rest of us a clue
as
> > to what is good value and what is not good value.What
> > does the average consumer know about anything when you
> > get right down to it?
> >
> >
> Again, nonsense. It is always up to the individual,
> because it is the individual who pays the money and
> uses the product. You may be more than willing to put
> your brain in neutral and let other people do your
> thinking for you, but the rest of us are not.
See my comment immediately preceding the above two
paragraphs.
--
Ed Dolan - Minnesota
