FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[sagi58]

And, here I thought that if it was on Twitter, it must be true!!
Go figure, eh?

[CookinFlat6]

If you read it carefully Sagi no one actually says it's true that anything is happening

It's just one journos opinion of Ron's sentiment in the interview he read about

There is no news there at all it's one guys opinion about another guys possible opinion

If Bernie says he wouldn't mind having a race each weekend - it dies not mean Bernie has confirmed there will be 52 races a year, if an article focussed on the possibility of this it doesn't mean it's likely because it's an opinion about an opinion

The trick is to think it thru yourself and assesse it's significance because journos do sensationalise to get clicks

[sagi58]

uh-huh... so, basically, you can't trust what you read in the media, eh?
Well, you can, if you agree with what the opinion du jour is!

For the record, I didn't say I agreed with it. What I usually do is post
something I've read and allow people to make up their own minds. If
it seems that I'm posting the "other side" of any discussion, that's
because most of the discussions become very one-sided.

[CookinFlat6]

It's not about trusting what you read, it's about understanding what was reported, Ron says anything can happen, Lewis could end up at McLaren. The journo reads the interview and interpreted it and wrote a headline designed to get clicks. No one says there is anything at all beyond Ron's opinion. There is no hint of talks or contracts or anything beyond Ron not ruling out Alonso Seb or Lewis turning up

What did you think Ron meant that is not common sense wishful thinking?

If you want to stir the pot by posting the other side of what you say is a one sided discussion, it might be best to find something factual that you have an opinion about then it's easier to stick to one side

[sagi58]

...The journo reads the interview and interpreted it and wrote a headline designed to get clicks...

Isn't that what a reporter/journalist/poster intends when they comment?

...What did you think Ron meant that is not common sense wishful thinking?

Again, I wasn't reading anything into it. I read it. Noticed that no one else has posted anything similar.
Thought it might add a different dimension to the discussion. Thus, I posted it.

Don't you regularly comment on the "freedom of speech" to post opinions, even if they aren't shared?

[CookinFlat6]

But sagi, you just said you post things just to take the other side of a discussion without believing in it yourself - 2 posts above. So if you post things that you have no opinion about, but just to alert people to it and at the same time join the otherside of a discussion then surely you are just posting meaningless stuff intended to cause an argument

[sagi58]

But sagi, you just said you post things just to take the other side of a discussion without believing in it yourself - 2 posts above. So if you post things that you have no opinion about, but just to alert people to it and at the same time join the otherside of a discussion then surely you are just posting meaningless stuff intended to cause an argument

There goes that lack of reading comprehension, again!

I did NOT say that I was taking any side, nor that I believed/disbelieved it.
Those are assumptions YOU are making.

I did NOT post the "other side" to cause an argument. That, again, is an
assumption that YOU are making.

You seem to have taken making assumptions onto a different level. Almost
an art form. Surely, you don't do that to intentionally cause an argument?

[sagi58]

I fell into the "trap" again!!
Sigh...

Luckily, we have you to keep an eye on things!!
Thanks, WB!!

[sagi58]

I would suggest that a support thread is about encouraging a driver or team.

If posting constructive criticism, one offers valid/well-reasoned opinions (which involve
BOTH positive and negative comments) and does so in a friendly manner, that's supportive.

Post that attack the character or reputation of a driver or team, are NOT supportive.

[sagi58]

It's BS because Cookin wasn't talking about the last five years.
He was talking about the next two and where he thinks Alonso would do better.

Yup... always respectful... never calls anyone names...
accepts people have differing opinions...
NOT!!

differing opinions??? You have differing opinions with yourself

So the last 5 years is all about the car, but the next 2 years isnt???

Oh... so the next two years is about the car, so it's not about the driver?
I see... I guess whomever wins the WDC this year isn't really the best driver, then?
They just happen to have the best car. Thanks for clearing that up for little old me!!

[CookinFlat6]

did you not hear what RC said, your last 2 posts were not supporting Ferrari, more like doing something rhyming with teaching

Please follow the guidelines and post about F1 not other members

Do you have an opinion on the chances of the high attrition rate in Singapore being good for Ferrari?

[sagi58]

Timing is everything!!

[sagi58]

... monte-ze-dodo ...

Allow me to spell it .s.l.o.w.l.y. for you...
.d.i. .M.o.n.t.e.z.e.m.o.l.o.

[CookinFlat6]

In the first place your spelling is wrong anyway because his name is either "Cordero di Montezemolo" or just Montezemolo, di Montezemolo is wrong and meaningless according to Italian aristocratic form, so perhaps you should study harder before tutoring others, but thanks for the thought

anyway he appears to have gone the same way as the dodo in F1, hence the small, admittedly slightly lame joke

[sagi58]

No one can accuse you of being a "dodo", since you do know how to use google and wiki...

By the way, if this is the reference you chose to use, beware of the glaring error!!

The author cautions:

 wrote:">Luca Cordero di Montezemolo

...His surname is actually "Cordero di Montezemolo" and the correct usage is either the full surname or just Montezemolo (omitting the "di").[3]

Then promptly writes (and repeats throughout the "article"):

Career

Di Montezemolo's sporting career

Trustworthy site? Not so much!