Typical greenie

"The reality is the evidence supports my view"

Nothing supports your view. Based on the limited information provided, any charge of "hypocrisy" is completely unfounded.
 
Because she probably had to tell him which plywood to use. I know you are used to your omniscience, but not everyone has that gift. Us mere mortals have to use language and other methods of communication to convey our thoughts to others.

The reality is that the evidence just as likely fits my scenario as yours but mine doesn't permit a bunch of stodgy old-timers to beat the hobby-horse of the so-called hypocrisy of greenies.
Again, a hardwood floor is NOT made of plywood. He described two different experiences with one customer. And the reality is the evidence does not support your scenario at all. She wasn't getting a plywood floor installed.
 
The subfloor could have been ply.
LOL. Any port in a storm, right?

Read the first post. It is very clearly two different episodes with a regular customer.

As I said before. Had a D posted this, and said "typical republican" instead the reaction by your side would be vastly different.
 
Again, a hardwood floor is NOT made of plywood. He described two different experiences with one customer. And the reality is the evidence does not support your scenario at all. She wasn't getting a plywood floor installed.


Subfloor. Say it with me now, Damo: subfloor. S-U-B-F-L-O-O-R. Subfloor.
Come on, junior, you can do it: subfloor.

Moron.
 
Subfloor. Say it with me now, Damo: subfloor. S-U-B-F-L-O-O-R. Subfloor.
Come on, junior, you can do it: subfloor.

Moron.
1. Ad hominem only shows you already know your position is weak.

2. There is no indication that the subfloor was being replaced. The wood he speaks of is the hardwood being installed.

We'll let tinfoil come back and restate, but it is clear to me that there is two instances with one regular customer, and you people are making some serious assumption that is not evident with the post.

He was making a point on how she thought she was "green" because she told them so, and how she acted differently when principle became inconvenient.
 
"and you people are making some serious assumption that is not evident with the post"

Oh, yeah - we sure are. Like saying she's preaching, and saying that the wood will likely be discarded now...that kind of stuff....
 
"and you people are making some serious assumption that is not evident with the post"

Oh, yeah - we sure are. Like saying she's preaching, and saying that the wood will likely be discarded now...that kind of stuff....
Point out the post where I said "preaching". You'll find that it isn't there because I realized that it was not evident that she tried to get others to be green. It is evident that she was proud of her "green" as she contacted tin to get the manufacturer's number for the plywood and made a point of how "green" she was by doing it.

True it is only my opinion, but it is based on what is evident in the post.

1. Tin used one story to point out how "green" she thought she was. (plywood story)

2. Tin then stated a second story to point out how she reacted "not so green" when presented with an inconvenience.
 
"It is evident that she was proud of her "green" as she contacted tin to get the manufacturer's number for the plywood and made a point of how "green" she was by doing it."

Where did she make a point of saying how "green" she was?

Can you give me the verbiage on that?
 
"It is evident that she was proud of her "green" as she contacted tin to get the manufacturer's number for the plywood and made a point of how "green" she was by doing it."

Where did she make a point of saying how "green" she was?

Can you give me the verbiage on that?
In the first post. Tin, IMO, made it clear that she informed them of how she was "green" and that she contacted the plywood manufacturer for that reason.
 
Point out the post where I said "preaching". You'll find that it isn't there because I realized that it was not evident that she tried to get others to be green. It is evident that she was proud of her "green" as she contacted tin to get the manufacturer's number for the plywood and made a point of how "green" she was by doing it.

True it is only my opinion, but it is based on what is evident in the post.

1. Tin used one story to point out how "green" she thought she was. (plywood story)

2. Tin then stated a second story to point out how she reacted "not so green" when presented with an inconvenience.




Damo - You are correct that there is no indication that the subfloor was being replaced (or installed for the first time in new construction) but there is also no evidence that subfloor was not being installed. We do have evidence of plywood being used on a flooring installation though. What the fuck else do you need to use plywood for on a flooring installation?

And even if the plywood wasn't being used for the floor, how does that change the possibility that the customer's concern with the glue used in the plywood was an indoor air quality concern not a global environmental concern?
 
Damo - You are correct that there is no indication that the subfloor was being replaced (or installed for the first time in new construction) but there is also no evidence that subfloor was not being installed. We do have evidence of plywood being used on a flooring installation though. What the fuck else do you need to use plywood for on a flooring installation?

And even if the plywood wasn't being used for the floor, how does that change the possibility that the customer's concern with the glue used in the plywood was an indoor air quality concern not a global environmental concern?
In the first post, it is evident to me that the first was a story to point out how green she was, the second paragraph was a second story showing how she didn't act it when it came down to it.

I don't think that plywood story had anything to do with the flooring. That is your assumption.

As for the "indoor air quality", the point of the first story was establishing that he had a relationship with this customer, who was proud of her status as "green".
 
No, he didn't. Bad assumption....
I don't think it is an assumption. It is how people make points like this.

First you establish why you think they are green.

In this case he used a story about plywood and how she had contacted the manufacturer to make sure it wouldn't hurt the environment if she discarded some. He used the story to establish a regular relationship with a person who is proud of their 'greenness'.

Then you go into why they acted differently than they presented.

In this case the second story about discarding wood....

I used experience with the people involved as posters that I have known for years. In this case tinfoil/stirfry, to extrapolate what they originally posted about. It wasn't based in psychic ability, just familiarity.
 
Here is what stirfry wrote:

"One of our customers is so green she called plywood manufacturers to ask about details of the glue they used in making the plywood. Got be green you know!

So when this lady saw her wood floors delivered and saw all the little boards, she demanded we get extra wood and discard all the small boards since she wanted only long boards. Real green!!"

She asked about the glue. In no way imaginable can it be extrapolated that she made a point of "being green" and was so very proud of "her greenness".

In short, you're an idiot.
 
Back
Top