Many thanks for the reply. Point taken. My apologies to you and any others i may have offended by including them with the likes of me. I like that "Note" you mentioned. I'm going to add it to my prev. posts as soon as i finish this one. I forget, did i fail to say my two cents in either or both of mine? I'll have to check. Maybe, the second one? I'll check in a minute.
FYI, "we" is often used in certain types of writing to avoid using "i" which in those cases would be somewhat improper - even when not speaking for the masses. In some cases, that's my use of "we" here. In others, when the pronoun's antecedent is plural (e.g. "Forum participants") then i'm speaking for both myself and others (please don't misunderstand me - NOT ALL others, but i have read in some cases where the opinions of others just happen to coincide with mine - those are the "we" - in at least one case, this type of use of "we" accurately reflects that Forum Participants will give bad marks to BMW gear. To use "i" in such cases, would perhaps be misconstrued as claiming to be the almighty reviewer and possessor of the only valid opinion - NOTHING could be further from the truth. Perhaps this Post was not one of those cases where i should have used "we"? I can certainly see that such was not clear here and that it appears that i seem to be acting as the almighty mouthpiece. NOTHING could be further from the truth.
None of this changes the fact that some of the opinions of "snail land" (i'm still not quite sure if Robert places himself in that group or not - mostly i thought after his first Post that he was merely reporting something he read on another B.P.website) are quite illogical. They simply make no sense - "A house divided against itself cannot stand" as someone said long ago. Hence, my weak attempts at humor to try to make this lack of logic clear. I'm thinking, now, that this may have been interpreted as being cynical since i wasn't speaking and my tone of voice (which would have communicated no cynicism) couldn't be heard. I'll try to be more careful in the future. However, IMHO, none of this changes the fact that, as stated in another post, not my own, there is a decided lack of logic on at least one point "snail land" is holding to - at least if i read it correctly. I felt humor might be a better way of communicating this than bluntly saying "that comment is totally illogical." Boy...might i have really drawn fire if i had been that blunt? Don't know. Please know that, in my own mind at least, i make a distinction b/t what was said and the person who said/wrote it; this meaning: the statement as reported was illogical; NOT the person reporting it -have no idea if he holds to it or not; my initial comments were directed at things and in some cases, perhaps, a group, not so much an individual. I'm going to go back and re-read carefully to make sure that i didn't inadvertently target "Robert" with a direct statement using his name in my first two posts. EDIT: Looks like i did use "you" 2 or 3 times. In more innocuous instances, not calling him illogical or error. Please, if you are so inclined, re-read my first two posts, and see if this is not so.]
Thanks for reminding me in diff words, what my father (brought up on a farm - plenty of famer wisdom, had he) once told me, "Son, opinions are like armpits, everyone has 'em and they usually stink." Those were his words and since most people has have multiple opinions, i like his wording. Besides, i heard it long before i was old enough to hear the more common phrasing.
Thanks again for taking the time to set me straight. Appreciate it. Take care, Roger.
The previous opinion is PJ‘s and PJ’s alone (???) and does not necessarily represent that of either Roger, BPL, the Forum participants, Reviewers, God (who/how ever you conceive God to be) or Franco-the-Roo. Also, please remember that for my $0.02 you get what you pay for AND usually far less!! Opinions are like armpits and mine usually stink - especially after a day on the trail.