If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
I dont want to leave the wrong impression. This site's entertaining, you guys crack me up. And there's some great info and build threads on the site.
But Ive noticed theres a select handful of guys who give tech advice based off of what they've read on the internet, instead of what theyve experienced hands on. IMO, this has resulted in a whole crapload of misinformation on the site. Sometimes when I search for things I want a second opinion on, cant figure out, or need certain specs, 90% of the time I have to skim through four pages of garbage to pick and choose what I think the accurate post is.
In other words, know wtf you're talking about before you post. Remember that game you played in elementary school where everyone sat in a 1/2 circle? The teacher whispered a secret to the first student, everyone was instructed to whisper the same thing to the next person? By the time the message gets to the last person, its a completely different story?
If you noobs keep it up, thats what this will turn into.
Yes, and furthermore: A long time forum member, owner of a BMW or two and a high post count does not make you a Tech.
I have been a BMW Technician for close to 30 years and have seen some things in in forums that have made me alternately laugh out loud and cringe.
I'm Not Right in the Head | Random Rants and other Nonsense1st Order Logic Failure: Association fallacy, this type of fallacy can be expressed as (∃x ∈ S : φ(x)) → (∀x ∈ S : φ(x)), meaning "if there exists any x in the set S so that a property φ is true for x, then for all x in S the property φ must be true".
I is tech be the correcter term, damnit Danny get it right.
I'm Not Right in the Head | Random Rants and other Nonsense1st Order Logic Failure: Association fallacy, this type of fallacy can be expressed as (∃x ∈ S : φ(x)) → (∀x ∈ S : φ(x)), meaning "if there exists any x in the set S so that a property φ is true for x, then for all x in S the property φ must be true".
(I did feel called out on the "million posts" quip)
If you ever do get a million posts I'm calling the boy scouts to pull you out of the basement and take you to a mental hospital.
I'm Not Right in the Head | Random Rants and other Nonsense1st Order Logic Failure: Association fallacy, this type of fallacy can be expressed as (∃x ∈ S : φ(x)) → (∀x ∈ S : φ(x)), meaning "if there exists any x in the set S so that a property φ is true for x, then for all x in S the property φ must be true".
Comment