Subject:
|
Re: Lego Direct (was Re: Georgia LEGO Outlet is Cool!)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.dear-lego
|
Date:
|
Mon, 27 Mar 2000 11:46:48 GMT
|
Highlighted:
|
!
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
3879 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.dear-lego, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> I'm gonna skip most of the rest of your drivel and just focus on a few points.
This is getting to be exactly what I think of much of what you post, Larry --
or did you think you had a corner on this market too? The difference is that
I am not quite as self-serving or puffed up as yourself, apparently. My ideas
are a little more "Lego-egalitarian" than your own I think.
People may or may not agree with either one of us, but do you actually think
they care anymore about your platitudes than they do my own? Whats funny is
that you actually think that your assertions and nonsense are "FACTS,"
whereas I am at least self-aware enough to realize that I have an agenda
constituted by my own views and opinions. The facts concerning the nature of
our disagreement are not in evidence. TLC exhibits some clearly contradictory
information by the manner in which they do business and I see nothing and no
one to clear up the confusion.
> You did, by implication.>
I don't imply things Larry, I state them explicitly.
This is "Dear-Lego," and not "Dear-Larry." I actually don't care if you read
it or not, I was hoping TLC might read it and see what some of their customers
think of their practices. That's it. I even changed the subject line so as
to separate it from the other related thread. I just wanted to pick out a
small part and kick it around a bit.
> Let's repeat, see if you can keep up this time...
I can keep up -- I just disagree. Or isn't that allowed in LarryWorld? You can
disparage my intelligence if it pleases you, but it doesn't make you right or
myself wrong. It just reveals you to be an inflated jerk. [But do keep it
up! We did actually laugh about it earlier in the evening in my household.]
Sadly, I have come to realize that you are a wildly narrow-minded person who
must insist that he has the right of an issue. I see no evidence to suggest
that you have the right of it. I see other costs to TLC in terms of good will
to longtime fans. We are looking at two different bottom lines, that's all.
I just happen to think that my bottom line becomes your bottom line when TLC
implements enough of the right things as regards adult fans.
> Rant all you want, but TLC makes more money selling to me than to you. So it's
> in their interest to do so. If you don't like it, tough.
I think these statements are false.
Why and how do they make more money selling to you than to me and everyone
else? I thought S@H was 24/7 -- that they are there regardless of whether
anyone is calling or not. Isn't it the same weight to ship, and even if it
weren't, couldn't they set the price to cover for that expense? Again, you
are spouting empty nonsense like it is some sort of "fact" that you magically
pulled out of your behind.
And no, its not tough. I can complain about it here. Although, that's not
actually what I was doing, and certainly not to you. If you don't like that
yourself, then you can complain about it too. I think its called
an "argument," or sometimes a "disagreement." Perhaps you have heard of this
phenomenon before?
In RichardWorld, not everyone has to agree but everyone has the right to be
heard. But whatever...
I am trying to have a conversation with persons absent, I don't really care
what you think. I think TLC would make more money long-term by being a little
fairer to others across the board. They have been fomenting a lot of ill will
for a long time because of their refusal to cater to or to communicate with an
adult market. I think its called "blowing us off." I don't happen to care
for that treatment even if they do let you have a few perks, Larry. You are
not yourself the adult market.
> I am judging you *purely* by what you say and nothing else. That's enough for
> me. Are you claiming that you're not to be taken at face value? That actually,
> you're somehow different than what you put forth here? I'm willing to be
> judged by what I say here, no more and no less.
I would actually tend to think that neither one of us is nearly as abrasive as
this here in real life. And I am perfectly willing to be judged by what I
write here. Then again, who cares? Did you think this mattered in some
enormous way that remains a mystery to me? Who would judge me? You think I
care what you think?
I like to say what I mean, and I am not opposed to flourishes of venom! Get
in my way and here's some spunk in your eye...
> What I read from what you say is this: You want the world to be a "fairer"
> place, that is, better for you, and worse for me because you're going to
> redistribute my wealth away by restricting my ability to trade freely so
> everyone gets a "fair share". That's not an unsupported assertion, that's
> what you said, and what it implies.
Money, money, money! OMG, Larry -- get a life!!! I am talking about toys. I
am talking about good will towards fans. You think and act like you own TLC --
and you don't. It probably bears repeating -- You, Larry, are not TLC!
And can you actually believe what you stated up there? That I am trying to
redistribute your wealth? I would just like to see other fans get a fair
shake at things too. If that is perceived by you as a direct attack upon your
wealth, then so be it. Fairer for everyone else at your expense suits me
fine, Larry.
And I think it should stop here, because you are really revealing yourself to
be such a self-absorbed, self-obsessed ass as to defy future apology.
> The last time this debate came up I swore I'd not get dragged into it again
> but you are posting such cockamamie stuff it's hard not to.
You mean that your insanely inflated ego wouldn't allow you to avoid it,
Larry. Funny thing is [reads "reality check"]: I was not addressing you at
all...
This is the very thing that makes me think that you do ACTUALLY care about
what I and others think. I think you guiltily understand that you are on thin
ice with some of what you assert and claim AND that you are indeed
uncomfortable with that.
But if you would really rather not respond, then don't. I don't care. What's
important to me is the "meta-message" to TLC and not this banter with you.
-- Richard (The Forestman redistributor of Larry's wealth that others
call "plastic bricks")
P.S. I may have to whine some more later regardless of what Larry P. does, or
does not do...
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Lego Direct (was Re: Georgia LEGO Outlet is Cool!)
|
| (...) Richard, you still don't get it. This is in fact what S@H does, and in fact because of their pricing scheme, they make more of the person who orders 10 of set X than 10 people who order 1 each of set X. Why? Well first, the shipping cost isn't (...) (24 years ago, 27-Mar-00, to lugnet.dear-lego) !
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Lego Direct (was Re: Georgia LEGO Outlet is Cool!)
|
| Methinks he doth protest too much! A tad touchy about this subject aren't you, Larry? I label myself the "lego curmudgeon" which is intended to suggest that my incendiary mode of expression is half jest/whole earnest -- but not to be taken too (...) (24 years ago, 27-Mar-00, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
146 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
