Another General Lee Wannabe

[cudaken]

 Boy this is Great!

A Verbal Food Fight with Grammer Lesson thrown into the mix!  

Duck, here comes a adverb plate!

[ws23rt]

When this thread started I expected to get into the pros and cons of the coronet body style vs the charger. (I didn't forget this is a charger forum)
My interest goes back to the year it was made. A friends parents bought one and we had some fun times with it that the parents never knew about
The next year I bought my first new car --- A 69Bee--- I was 18

When the 68/69 charger is next to a 68/69 coronet there is much they have in common.

I am not so much a fan of chevys but it is sorta like an impala and a chevelle

It is a shame the thread got messed up so early all about correctness that did not apply to the coronet.

To me the coronet is more muscular in shape where the charger is sleeker/smother.

[MaximRecoil]

To me the coronet is more muscular in shape where the charger is sleeker/smother.

The second-generation Charger is the most "muscular" looking car ever in my opinion. The massive C-pillars look incredibly strong (unlike the Coronet's, which taper to a smaller and weaker looking size toward the bottom). The tunneled rear window brings to mind the tensed, protruding shoulder blades, and the wide bulging rear quarters, the haunches, of a big cat, crouched and ready to pounce. The intersecting body lines at the top of the thick, strong-looking doors bring to mind tensed muscle striation.

The Dodge Coronet (along with the similar looking Plymouth Belvedere/Satellite/Road Runner/GTX) looks like a mild-mannered family car in comparison, though the body lines and simulated waste gates in the rear quarters of the Coronet put it a step above its Plymouth cousins on the "muscular looking" scale.  

[ws23rt]

To me the coronet is more muscular in shape where the charger is sleeker/smother.

The second-generation Charger is the most "muscular" looking car ever in my opinion. The massive C-pillars look incredibly strong (unlike the Coronet's, which taper to a smaller and weaker looking size toward the bottom). The tunneled rear window brings to mind the tensed, protruding shoulder blades, and the wide bulging rear quarters, the haunches, of a big cat, crouched and ready to pounce. The intersecting body lines at the top of the door bring to mind tensed muscle striation.

The Dodge Coronet (along with the similar looking Plymouth Belvedere/Satellite/Road Runner/GTX) looks like a mild-mannered family car in comparison, though the body lines and simulated waste gates in the rear quarters of the Coronet put it a step above its Plymouth cousins on the "muscular looking" scale.  

Hey Maxim
Odd that you would reply to me on this thread.  

You have taught me much about communicating in the last few weeks and I have learned from it.

The most relevant learning I have is we don't speak the same language.  It is pointless to have a conversation about something when all that happens is a bickering of the meaning of the language we use.

I like to talk about stuff like--  Cars--how they work---how they look---etc.  "You know what I'm saying"

When you turn this into a classroom it reminds me of why I quit high school in the 12th grade.

So I will not reply to your reply.  It will only lead to something that makes the eyes roll for whoever is reading this.

[MaximRecoil]

So I will not reply to your reply.

You just did, and it was from deep in left field, as usual.

[ws23rt]

So I will not reply to your reply.

You just did, and it was from deep in left field, as usual.

You are right again---I was just about to amend my post.  My bad teach

[JB400]

If this is turning into a school lecture, can we start studying the cheerleaders?  

[CairnsGeneral]

Is Maximumrecoil the local troll?  He's pretty good at it.

"Ha ha. Maximumrecoil ? It should be Maximumreflux 

Go back to the beginning and you are simply stating the obvious (women are well known for this too), followed by a barrage of linguistic nonsense in an attempt to save face.
Go back to the beginning and read what stroker400 wedge says , something along the lines of " Maybe he/they were just having some fun" 

Chill out broseph !

[6spd68]

OMG! and it starts again...   

[Ghoste]

Yeah, unfortunately it seems doomed.

[djcarguy]

If this is turning into a school lecture, can we start studying the cheerleaders?  


[






DIS TRACTION   ,, HOT GALS     KEEP THE PEACE  ...  WARNING MAY BEE BAD FOR YOUR HEALTH AN FINANCES   /quote]

[richRTSE]

Well, "correct" or not, probably 99%* of "car guys" and I dare guess a majority**  of the population*** see that orange car in the first picture of this thread and think "General Lee"....it seems his**** attempt at least partially worked...  



*- this is not an actual percentage, I just made it up...hence the "probably" before it
**-for this instance I mean a simple majority of 51 % or more
***-population of United States of America only... I don't imagine many natives of Djibouti or Lesotho are familiar with the Dukes of Hazzard or the General Lee
****-assumption on my part that a male would do this to his car. I do not actually know the owner, but I assume him to be male

[6spd68]

Yeah, unfortunately it seems doomed.

Prior to joining here, I've not been on a forum in 12 + years.  I see not much has changed lol

[Ghoste]

No, overall this forum is great.  I belong to a couple of other ones and there are some I've dropped because of the childish crap but this one only sees the occasional flareup.

[Dino]

It was real bad several years ago.  Many members, me included, were tired of the constant flare ups so yes it is much better.  Unfortunately, hot heads will always be present.

[MaximRecoil]

"Ha ha. Maximumrecoil ? It should be Maximumreflux  

In reality (as opposed to you and some others' reading disability-fueled version of "reality"), there is no "maximum" about it.

Go back to the beginning and you are simply stating the obvious

No, it is not obvious to most people, given that more often than not, the door numbers on homemade "General Lees" are way off. It is only somewhat recently with the availability of premade "General Lee" graphics from places like Phoenix Graphics, that accurate graphics have become more common.

(women are well known for this too),

Negated by your false premise (see above). By the way, women are well known for meandering, irrelevant, emotional editorials (as opposed to true arguments), you know, like you just posted.

followed by a barrage of linguistic nonsense in an attempt to save face.

Your baseless assertion is dismissed, and you clearly don't know what the term "save face" means. One has to first make an error in order to be in a position to "save face".

Go back to the beginning and read what stroker400 wedge says , something along the lines of " Maybe he/they were just having some fun"  

I already read what he said, obviously, given that I quoted and replied to it.

Chill out broseph !

Irony alert.

[JB400]

Is it just me, or does it seem that once a members' statement is broken down into "segments", the context of their statement is lost; but if left together as posted, it makes sense as to what they're saying?

[Fred]

Is it just me, or does it seem that once a members' statement is broken down into "segments", the context of their statement is lost; but if left together as posted, it makes sense as to what they're saying?

You're quite right stroker. I for one am inclined to agree with you.  It can also be taken out of context.

[MaximRecoil]

Is it just me, or does it seem that once a members' statement is broken down into "segments", the context of their statement is lost; but if left together as posted, it makes sense as to what they're saying?

In order for something to be "out of context" there has to be missing context that if included would alter the meaning of the quotation. For example:

"This was the greatest pile of crap movie I've seen in a long time." - John Q. Critic

Printed on movie's video box:

"This was the greatest ... movie I've seen in a long time." - John Q. Critic

Or the movie critic writes about how terrible the movie is, giving a long list of problems with it, followed by a sarcastic comment like:

"But other than that, this movie was perfect."

And "... this movie was perfect" gets printed on the video box.

So yes, it is just you, along with others that don't understand what "out of context" means. Far from losing context, quoting the excerpt to which you are replying is the easiest and clearest method of providing proper context to the reply, which is why this format has been commonly used in emails, bulletin board systems, newsgroups, and forums for as long as they have been around, and why printed "FAQs" have used this format for ages.

[JB400]

Get a different example.  The examples you have posted are in a different category than what I'm talking about.  That is itemization.  That is a way to find facts or figures in a hurry for those that are looking for a particular piece of information instead of reading the whole text.

My question relates more to political fact checking, which appears to be what you enjoy doing.  Instead of listening to what the person is saying as a whole, you disassemble their quotation and base your own assessment on each segment.  While this comes in handy for identifying possible white lies, you're missing the "point" of the quotation.

Would you like to give a different answer to my question?

[Fred]

I may not understand what "out of context" means but hey, I'm happy!!  
After all...........ignorance is bliss.  



Actually I do know what "out of context" means but I also understand what stroker is getting at.

[MaximRecoil]

Get a different example.

No thanks, my examples are fine.

The examples you have posted are in a different category than what I'm talking about.

No, they are examples of "out of context". If the examples confuse you, then simply focus on the explanation of what "out of context" actually means. Once again:

In order for something to be "out of context" there has to be missing context that if included would alter the meaning of the quotation.

In order for you to support an "out of context" accusation, you must supply the missing context which alters the meaning of the quotation. You haven't done so, because there is no missing context.

That is itemization.  That is a way to find facts or figures in a hurry for those that are looking for a particular piece of information instead of reading the whole text.

It also provides proper context; providing proper context is the entire point of itemization. If all the questions were written as a big paragraph, and then all the answers were written as a big paragraph, context would be unclear, requiring a lot of back and forth reading. Context could be made more clear by prefacing every answer in the answers paragraph with "With regard to the question of ...", but that is cumbersome, and is still not as clear as quoting and replying.  

My question relates more to political fact checking, which appears to be what you enjoy doing.  Instead of listening to what the person is saying as a whole, you disassemble their quotation and base your own assessment on each segment.  While this comes in handy for identifying possible white lies, you're missing the "point" of the quotation.

Say what? With regard to the responses, mine are structurally no different than how you have replied here; you've simply skipped the quoting part, which makes your reply less clear with regard to context. For example, your reply that starts with "That is itemization ..." would have been more clear if you'd done it the following way:

Far from losing context, quoting the excerpt to which you are replying is the easiest and clearest method of providing proper context to the reply, which is why this format has been commonly used in emails, bulletin board systems, newsgroups, and forums for as long as they have been around, and why printed "FAQs" have used this format for ages.

That is itemization.  That is a way to find facts or figures in a hurry for those that are looking for a particular piece of information instead of reading the whole text.

You're replying to a segment of my post whether you bother to copy & paste the quote or not. When multiple different claims are made, there is no way to fully reply to the post without "segmenting".

Would you like to give a different answer to my question?

If I'd wanted to give a different answer to the question, I would have given a different answer in the first place. The idea that you can teach me anything on this particular topic is laughable. Your knowledge in this area is sorely lacking.

[A383Wing]

as are your "people" skills

[MaximRecoil]

as are your "people" skills

Go ahead and provide an example of me attempting to employ so-called "people skills" and being unable to do so.

[A383Wing]

as are your "people" skills

Go ahead and provide an example of me attempting to employ so-called "people skills" and being unable to do so.

I don't have to show examples, you already have with your post count. Just click on your profile and scroll down to see all your past posts, all examples are there.