View Single Post
Old 11-01-2007, 07:01 PM   #18
NatCh
Gizmologist
NatCh ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.NatCh ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.NatCh ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.NatCh ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.NatCh ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.NatCh ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.NatCh ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.NatCh ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.NatCh ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.NatCh ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.NatCh ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
NatCh's Avatar
 
Posts: 11,605
Karma: 926300
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Republic of Texas Embassy at Jackson, TN
Device: Nook STGR
Quote:
Originally Posted by bowerbird View Post
i don't think _you_ are showing much "respect" for my deep belief that what is being done is causing serious damage to the cause of e-books.
Well, no one is belittling it, for one thing, that's not exactly disrespectful. No one is even arguing the point, we're just asking that you tone down your rhetoric. Your points are getting lost in your aggressive tone.

This is not teleread, and handing out verbal flayings here will not affect anything over there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bowerbird View Post
at least have the decency to _acknowledge_ it _could_ be a bad thing.
Sure, if that's what's bugging you: absolutely, it could be a bad thing. It could even be a bad thing in spite of the fact that most marketing types consider word of mouth to be the best advertising available.

Could this particular line of discussion (the theory that Amazon is trying to disinform the public by not saying anything at all) be counter to their aims and interests? Yeah, it probably is. I even agree that it's rather a silly notion that someone could disinform by doing their best to avoid letting out any information whatsoever in the first place. If you'd just said something along the lines of "hey, how can they be doing a dis-information campaign when they're doing their best to not allow any information out?" you'd have gotten your point across a lot more clearly with a lot less energy spent. Your points are being lost in the heat of your rhetoric.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bowerbird View Post
or _something_ other than a crude accusation that i'm not being "respectful". because that's just ad hominem.
It's not ad hominem, it's an observation -- it's not an attack and it's not even an argument, it's an observation that the discussion is getting heated and a request to calm things down a bit.

No one is suggesting that you stop making your point. In fact, this is my second explicit statement to that effect.

Perhaps some time for everyone to take deep breaths and settle down might be a good thing. And then we can resume the discussion of the best way to avoid being trapped by rumors and speculation with a bit more calm, so that more good points don't get lost in the heat.
NatCh is offline   Reply With Quote
 
http://www.mobileread.com/forums/showpost.php?p=111585&postcount=18
www.mobileread.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2015-18
13756
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:5A2HBLZUZ772UFFSO76TLYLSTSM7TPL4
<urn:uuid:ee348f74-674d-49f2-a2f0-0144d1d3ed59>
2015-04-21T08:45:17Z
66.55.128.228
sha1:KVJLBMT7WN5B6SIQOYGCL74URUGVR7LF
<urn:uuid:737cfe03-e523-4cdd-b7c6-b79dde4c4db5>
http://www.mobileread.com/forums/showpost.php?p=111585&postcount=18
length
response
<urn:uuid:6f0e24d0-0dfc-44c7-a7cd-8ee464e7fbb5>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-235-10-82.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2015-18
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for April 2015
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf