Michael,
Certainly fair criticism, and as you know, I respect you as a friend and valuable member of this forum.
The goal here is for us to act like reasonable gentleman in discussion and debate. At times, this requires measured and accurate criticism. For us to reserve comment and say that Freelander is "just fine" is a disservice to our fellow members. I feel strongly that the Freelander is not appropriate as any form of transportation. That is not brand bashing or model bashing, it is just a fact. They are well documented as being a disaster for their owners and the Land Rover brand.
IMO, there is a difference between being accepting of other peoples vehicle choices and supporting a vehicle that is not remotely appropriate for our type of travel. Sure, we can debate for years about if a Land Cruiser, Series III, Tacoma, Trooper, Discovery is the "best", but at the end of the day, they are ALL appropriate choices, just different and will suite each of us differently. I think there is a difference there - maybe you disagree.
Regarding Steve. It is much like the Freelander. I have spent a fair amount of time on the other LR boards, and have seen this battle ensue for years. I do not want it to happen here, but there are some well documented issues with Steve. I am willing to give Steve a chance here - maybe he has turned over a new leaf, or whatever. So far, his posts have been fair and accurate. As I requested above, we need to keep this from being a character assassination of Steve on this forum.
I think we have beat this dead horse enough - Onward. . .
This is an important issue. My point wasn't about brand-bashing (or model bashing), which is another issue. It's about attacking the man, rather than refuting his incorrect facts, or rebutting his opinion by evidence, experience or logic.
Much as I respect your opinion on the Freelander, I have read lots of positive reviews as well. Enough to at least reserve the right to listen to alternative viewpoints (or contribute my own, for that matter), without being told that it's spreading "misinformation", and without having my character attacked.
If Steve's facts were wrong, then let's hear the real facts. If people disagree with his judgment, let's hear cogent argument, illustrating why it's bad judgment. If it's as clearcut as you say, then there's
certainly no need to jeer at him. That's the only part I'm complaining about, not that the argument is too "one-sided" or negative.
Let me say that if I were a "noob" considering a Freelander, there are only half a dozen posts in this entire thread that would inform my decision - those that state an opinion, backed up by facts or experience. On that basis, I'd almost certainly steer clear of buying one. But the insults and vitriol add nothing valuable, and if anything, would actually call into question the judgment of those doing the insulting.
How long have you "known" Mr Young on ANY board? What other posts have you read of Mr Young's on Muddy Oval, DWEB, LRO, etc.? Those of us opposed to his "hi jinks", lies, and slander (yep, that to...), aren't making this stuff up. It's not a fraternity prank, Steve Young didn't lose a bet. The man has a history of lying and those of us who have been around the Rover "Web World" for a while know his history. Whether you or I like it, this is NOT a public forum where anything can be said or where anybody has a "right" to stay. The owners of this board (Scott), can at any time "boot" someone off. Scott can and will make decisions regarding his own board and those who frequent it - he knows Mr Young's history - let him deal with him how he sees fit.
I don't know him at all, as I said. But I do know that 10 people telling me he's an idiot doesn't make him an idiot. I'll just judge for myself, thank you, and try to keep my opinion of him to myself. Of course, I'll point it out if I know he's wrong on his facts, and I'll argue if I disagree with his conclusions.
But maybe it's just a difference in the way we were brought up.
