Not a clue...
Something about how you're going to keep writing to me to tell me how much you don't care?
My new crack head ghetto saw
- Thread starter gregz
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
- Status
Not a clue...
Something about how you're going to keep writing to me to tell me how much you don't care?
2000ssm6
Stihl User
discounthunter
Addicted to ArboristSite
what about the ladies who sell(giveaway) all their husbands stuff, to get back at them or are going thru a divorce.
Idk one of them has my 032. Idk what to do.
THALL10326
The Champ
Uhhhhhhhhhhhh Ed if you go back and look you call me out by name, I never mentioned you now did I. Your following me, not me following you.
You don't have a clue, I tend to agree with ya on that. Fact is the only person that should be saying that saw is stolen is the guy it was stolen from. Did you recently have a 660 stolen from you Ed?, if not put that finger away,hehe
gregz
ArboristSite Guru
You go Tommy
Like I said earlier...it's a reading comprehension problem. I'd suggest you read my posts again, but I'm sure your lips are already tired from the reading you've had to do already.
I'll give you credit for sticking to your guns, but you have to stop making up imaginary targets to point them at.
THALL10326
The Champ
No there is no problem. Did you go back and look?, you called me by name. So of course I'm going to reply back to you. Now instead of you dancing like you got a pants full of bumble bees how bout you answer the question, have you had a 660 stolen from you lately?
See what I mean? Reading comprehension.
I was talking about the question. Let's try it again:
The issue is not whether the saw was stolen or not, the issue occurred later when the OP stated he didn't have any qualms about buying stolen property.
Saying I shouldn't say the saw is stolen is a moot point, because I didn't say it was. That's the imaginary target I was referring to...the one you keep pointing your finger at while telling others that pointing is not polite.
As for the rest...I ignored it because I don't care. I guess I should have replied to tell you how much I didn't care...but that would seem like caring, wouldn't it?
Zero Gravity
ArboristSite Operative
THALL10326
The Champ
Well cuse me Ed, I mean I would have never replied to you at all if you hadn't called me out by name, you pointed at me ya might say in your imaginary way,LOL
So he said he didn't care one way or the other, fair enuff. You don't like his views on how he feels about whether its hot or not, fair enuff, guess you will have to live with it won't ya. I don't think you and others ganging up on him is going to change his view.
As for me here's my honest take on all it Ed. I see the high moral majority spouting off over the mans charactor like they wouldn't have grabbed the saw off Craiglist themselves had they gotton the chance. Course they may have thought it was stolen but they wouldn't had come out and said it. I say he got a helluva deal and its not his job to run it to the police to see if its stolen. I myself find it very odd a person would steal a high dollar saw like that and then advertise it on Craiglist for the orginial owner or police to come buy.
Last edited:
THALL10326
The Champ
Nope...I pointed at you in a very real way. I just thought it was cute how you kept replying to tell me you didn't care. Reminded me of my little cousin following me around saying "I'm not talking to you!" for 20 min. Like you said, it's just entertainment.
I don't think it will either and said as much. I wasn't ganging up on him, I was trying to focus the issue.
This is where the non sequiters and contradictions begin to pile up.
One does NOT have to presume that this particular saw was stolen to object to the attitude that buying stolen saws is OK, which seems to be a component of all the counter arguments. They are separate issues, and the concern of the "moral majority" seems to be the latter.
The second common component of the counter argument is "you would have done it too." Put the 2 components together, and the argument basically becomes: "YOU can't know that, just because the seller never ran a saw, cut a tree etc., and lived at a ghetto dope house with a steady foot traffic of America's most wanted, that the saw was stolen, but I KNOW, with no information about you whatsoever, that you would have bought that saw."
So who is on the highest horse? The ones who say they would avoid buying something that might be stolen because they think creating a market for stolen goods makes theft more likely (or simply because they think it sucks to have something stolen from you), or those that are calling them liars? My vote is for the latter. If you are looking down on someone who is on their high horse, you have to be sitting on something pretty tall yourself.
I'd like to think that Greg's claim to be indifferent to the source of the deal was the result of feeling like he'd been backed into a corner and vilified, and not because he actually doesn't care whether his gain was someone else's loss, and creates a market for further losses. Unfortunately, I won't know unless he tells me, because I don't have the THALL superpower that allows me to know another man's mind.
THALL10326
The Champ
Dayummm Ed wasn't it you that told me I keep coming back, hmmmm, seems you have the same problem doncha,haha
Looking at that long post there seems your trying harder to get your point across to me. No need to for like you, I have an opinion too and like you no matter what you say isn't gonna change it. What you would like to think and what you actually think I already told you I don't give a hoot in hell about. I do however, like I already told you, get a kick out of this thread. I already made it clear what I think when I said Jimmy Swaggart runs all through this thread in many forms. Whats that ole saying, he without sin can cast the first stone, is that how it goes Ed, surely you know more about Greg than me. I only know he bought a saw off Craiglist. He said he didn't care if it was hot or not and thats causing all the stone throwing, I seriously doubt it. Course that would give all the Jimmy's ammo but we know how Jimmy was don't we. I'll await your next reply, take ya time, I got all day,hehe
I do have the same problem...but I'm not trying to convince you that my point is right, I'm just trying to corral you as you go whizzing back and forth past my point.
Next time you highlight something in one of my posts, please take the time to read it first. What I said was I don't know what Greg thinks, except for what he tells me. The only info I have is that he stated he doesn't care if the saw was stolen or not, but I'm still giving him the benefit of the doubt. People say stupid things when they get their feelings hurt or they feel attacked. So no, I don't know more about Greg than you do, and said as much.
In typical Tommy fashion, you build a straw man and then tear it down, and contradict yourself in the process.
Rather than risk making the same mistake that you did, here's what I think you are trying to say (please correct me if I'm mistaken).
1. Your beef with me is that you think I'm claiming to know Greg's motivation/morality beyond what he said in his posts, in spite of of the fact that I stated the opposite.
2. You seriously doubt that the "stone throwing" is because Greg flat out said he doesn't care if the saw was hot or not. This would require you to make assumptions about the motivation/morality of the respondents beyond what they said in their posts.
Do you see the contradiction Jimmy? Is that a stone in your hand?
THALL10326
The Champ
Sorry Ed no I don't see the contradiction. I highlighted what I do see, do you see it Ed, in bold black, your giving him and just who are you Ed, thanks for making my point Jimmy. This is getting too easy Ed. Ok fire back...
gink595
Addicted to ArboristSite
Come on Tom, Fast Eddy knows everything there is to know about anything there ever was...Just ask him, he'll have a answer and sometimes a picture
Smartest man I ever knew.Shooting 3-pointers would seem easy too if you just ignore the fact that the ball really should go through the hoop.
I see it, and I saw it when I wrote it. Here's what it means...please pay attention this time.
Would I knowingly buy something that had been stolen? No.
Would I pass up a deal if i had reason to suspect something might have been stolen? Yes.
Did Greg state that it would not phase him to buy stolen property? Yes.
Do I think that makes me better than Greg? No. But I do think that, logically, if you buy stolen property, you lose the right to complain if someone steals something from you.
Am I convinced that Greg would knowingly buy stolen property? No. In spite of what he said, he was dodging a lot of bullets. That's what I meant by benefit of the doubt. I don't know Greg well enough to condemn him as a fence for stolen property.
Do you think you know those who posted well enough to condemn them as liars? Apparently so.
The contradiction is that you are the only one demonstrably taking a 'holier than thou' attitude, along with all the assumptions you have to make about others to have that attitude.
My point is a simple one. If you don't care whether the property you buy is stolen, you shouldn't care about people stealing your stuff. That's it.
Your point is, as usual, lost or nonexistent. Why don't you lay it out for me?
THALL10326
The Champ
Lay it out for ya, why, your doing that yourself Ed. Your posts are getting longer man, why I've never seen you like this,LOL
Uhhh Ed its you that said quote, "I'm giving him the bennifit of the doubt". That says it all, proves my point, your in judgement of him, mymymy. The more you write the more you expose what your really thinking. Why I bet if we keep at it here we'll find out all sorts of things about you, mymymymy, what will Greg say,LOLOL
THALL10326
The Champ
Come on Tom, Fast Eddy knows everything there is to know about anything there ever was...Just ask him, he'll have a answer and sometimes a picture
Really, well I didn't know that. I guess I'm not a know it all like him, I feel terrible,
:greenchainsaw:- Status
Similar threads
