Godaddy survey answers

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 09:59:16AM -0700, Razer wrote:
> 
> 
> On 09/11/2017 08:29 PM, !@#$%^&*()_+ wrote:
> >>>> The ShitSturmer got bounced for claiming
> >>> Oh?
> >> Not "Oh". The link to GoDaddy's complete statement regarding it appeared
> >> on this list. Look it up. The CEO said
> > Oh, OK, it's not you saying it, --- it's, wait for it, the CEO of
> > Godaddy!!! --- OMFG bow to the assertions of a CEO of some corporate
> > for profit entity existing on "US Govt 'Statute' welfare".
> >
> > Why am I not surprised Razer that you've backed up your assertion
> > with the assertion of someone else - a corporate CEO and nothing less
> > (!) ?
> >
> >
> 
> I just wanted to put this clip up here for posterity.
> 
> Paraphrasing the CEO when the discussion is about his company is claimed
> not to be germane,

Feel free to continue to be obtuse, but you know that's got nothing
to do with calling you out on your lack of facts.

Paraphrase away - but why should your fact-less opinions be given any
more credence just because you end up paraphrasing the opinion of
someone else - even if it is a CEO? And even if it is the CEO of the
company at issue?

Why the F is his opinion any more of a fact than your opinion?

Remember what you said:

> >>>> The ShitSturmer got bounced for claiming

I said "that's a baseless, factless, opinion and nothing more",
or words to that effect.

You can back saying "oh well, you might be right - hey look here,
actually it's not just my opinion, the CEO of the company at issue
has this opinion also".

And so, why are you surprised when I turn around and say "Razer,
Razer, Razer, whatever are you smoking? The CEO's opininion is no
more a fact than your opinion - how can continue to mistake opinions
for facts?"


> or the fact he's CEO somehow 'sullies' me.

Not at all, Razer - presenting the opinion of another as a fact and
as "not just an opinion", when it's nothing more than an opinion, and
when you were directly challenged on your own (identical) opinion
earlier expressed, does not sully you whatsoever.

All it does is point out that you have a high opinion of opinions,
including your own, and apparently adopt the opinions of CEO's as
though they're facts, and then try to pass them off not only as
facts, but as your own opinionated "facts" (scare quotes
intentional).


> Sort of
> like being Good German who heard a Jew speak on the radio,
> makes the crypto-nazi suspect.

Victim consciousness more?


> Just sayin'. Your Grandfather's propaganda doesn't work anymore.
> Besides Corporate Media Back the Fascists
> <https://crimethinc.com/2017/08/29/not-your-grandfathers-antifascism-anti-fascism-has-arrived-heres-where-it-needs-to-go>
> anyway.
> 
> Your shitrag is just so much masturbatory material. Like Eldridge
> Cleaver said about White Radicals putting pics of molotovs on their
> walls and jerking off to them.
> Rr

Whatever your favourite targets for ad-homs are, they are.

That STILL doesn't make your opinion about them a fact.

And NEITHER does it make Godaddy's CEO's apparently identical opinion
about them, a fact.

And finally whether you are sullied by quoting Godaddy's CEO's
opinion, as a supposed fact to back up your own opinion, is a matter
for you and others - why should I care who you're smokin'?

Just sayin'