*** post for FREE via your newsreader at post.newsfeed.com ***

Steve Grauman wrote:
>> Why does FWD have an advantage "only in bad weather"?
>
> Did anyone actually bother to read the three links I provided? Do a
> google search and see for yourself, the artciels are all very clear
> on the advantages and disadvantages of FWD. I'm not even asking you
> people to take my word for things, simply read over the expert
> sources I provided for you.
>
>> You complain about being tasked with backing things up, but
>> you've yet to back up this claim despite my repeated requests that
>> you do so.
>
> I provided THREE links with analysis of FWD Vs. RWD, did you read
> them? Everything I'm "claiming" was in black and white!

No, I didn't read them. I'd hoped that you would incorporate their
important points into your own argument. Yes, it was lazy of me. Post them
again, and I'll read them.

- Greg Reed

--
1976 Cadillac Fleetwood 75 9-Pass sedan
(FS: http://www.dataspire.com/caddy)
1989 Audi 200 Turbo Quattro 5-Speed sedan
2000 Oldsmobile Intrigue
2001 Chevy Astro AWD (wife's)




-----= Posted via Newsfeed.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeed.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== 100,000 Groups! - 19 Servers! - Unlimited Download! =-----

 

"Greg Reed" <inet_user@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<403372af@post.newsfeed.com>...
> *** post for FREE via your newsreader at post.newsfeed.com ***
>
> Steve Grauman wrote:
> >> Why does FWD have an advantage "only in bad weather"?
> >
> > Did anyone actually bother to read the three links I provided? Do a
> > google search and see for yourself, the artciels are all very clear
> > on the advantages and disadvantages of FWD. I'm not even asking you
> > people to take my word for things, simply read over the expert
> > sources I provided for you.
> >
> >> You complain about being tasked with backing things up, but
> >> you've yet to back up this claim despite my repeated requests that
> >> you do so.
> >
> > I provided THREE links with analysis of FWD Vs. RWD, did you read
> > them? Everything I'm "claiming" was in black and white!
>
> No, I didn't read them. I'd hoped that you would incorporate their
> important points into your own argument. Yes, it was lazy of me. Post them
> again, and I'll read them.

Greg, he *did* incorporate them.

If you want to look up the article where he posted the links, use
groups.google.com. Works great.
--
Jonesy

 

>Yes, it was lazy of me. Post them
>again, and I'll read them.

No, now I want to be the lazy one. Google them up and read them.

 

*** post for FREE via your newsreader at post.newsfeed.com ***

Jonesy wrote:
>
> Greg, he *did* incorporate them.

If he wrote them here, then I've already refuted them, making the reading of
the articles a waste of my time. If you're referring to arguments along the
lines of "_FWD Car Quarterly_ writes that FWD is superior to RWD" then I'm
not going to bother refuting them, because they're not arguments, they're
opinions.

Perhaps we should clarify exactly what I mean when I use the word
"argument." MS Bookshelf 2000 has several definitions for the word.

The first two are as follows:

1. a. A discussion in which disagreement is expressed; a debate. b. A
quarrel; a dispute. c. Archaic. A reason or matter for dispute or
contention: "sheath'd their swords for lack of argument" (Shakespeare).

2. a. A course of reasoning aimed at demonstrating truth or falsehood:
/presented a careful argument for extraterrestrial life./ b. A fact or
statement put forth as proof or evidence; a reason: /The current low
mortgage
rates are an argument for buying a house now./

I'm using the second definition.

- Greg Reed




-----= Posted via Newsfeed.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeed.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== 100,000 Groups! - 19 Servers! - Unlimited Download! =-----

 

"Greg Reed" <inet_user@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<4034e5b0$1@post.newsfeed.com>...
> *** post for FREE via your newsreader at post.newsfeed.com ***
>
> Jonesy wrote:
> >
> > Greg, he *did* incorporate them.
>
> If he wrote them here, then I've already refuted them, making the reading of
> the articles a waste of my time.

Restating your opinion is not sufficient to claim refutation. An
authoritative source to back up your claims is also needed. Unless
you are claiming authority (a logical fallacy anyway.)

He's providing links to other sources to back up his claims. Just
because you don't want to bother looking at them does not in any way
give your opinion validity (other than being your opinion, that is.)

> If you're referring to arguments along the
> lines of "_FWD Car Quarterly_ writes that FWD is superior to RWD" then I'm
> not going to bother refuting them, because they're not arguments, they're
> opinions.

And if all you have is opinion, then you're on equal ground.

[snip definition]

We are both using the same definition of the word "argument." Now,
Google up those links he provided, and you're golden.

And now for the real question: why are we discussing drivetrain
layouts not found in very many North American Audis? (alt.autos.audi)
--
Jonesy

 

For an article on the FWD RWD from a police use perspective can be found at:
http://www.cbupub.com/pao/issue14/fwd.html

 

> And now for the real question: why are we discussing drivetrain
> layouts not found in very many North American Audis? (alt.autos.audi)

Implying alt.autos.audi is primarily for the use of North American Audi
drivers? I've just refreshed my newsgroup list, which now contains well
over 30,000 newsgroups (probably a fair few more - I can't see a total now)
and this seems to be the only newsgroup with audi in the title, so surely
it's relevant to audi drivers (or people with an interest in audis) all over
the world?

Ok, I don't think there are any RWD Audis being produced at the moment
(unless you count the Quattros, but some of the earlier Audis were, AFAIK.

Peter

 

>I've just refreshed my newsgroup list, which now contains well
>over 30,000 newsgroups (probably a fair few more - I can't see a total now)

Good God, how do you keep track of threads in 30,000 Newsgroups? I participate
on and off in disucssions in about 20 of them and I often get tired of running
through all the posts.

 

> >I've just refreshed my newsgroup list, which now contains well
> >over 30,000 newsgroups (probably a fair few more - I can't see a total
now)
>
> Good God, how do you keep track of threads in 30,000 Newsgroups? I
participate
> on and off in disucssions in about 20 of them and I often get tired of
running
> through all the posts.

Heh! Maybe I should have made that clearer - I updated the newsgroup list
from my news server,which contains around 30,000 newsgroups - I only read
about 15-20 of them, and only 5 or so very regularly.

Peter

 

>Heh! Maybe I should have made that clearer - I updated the newsgroup list
>from my news server,which contains around 30,000 newsgroups - I only read
>about 15-20 of them, and only 5 or so very regularly.

Phew! I thought you were the bionic man for a second there.