"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
Dyyc.86123$Ly.38150@attbi_s01...
