Letter To Elon Musk Regarding P85D Horsepower – Discussion Thread

[vgrinshpun]

So again, whose to say that it was Tesla that spoke to David Noland?

You seem to be having great difficulty grasping the point that it did not have to be an official Tesla press release that Noland wrote his article based on. Any number of people working for Tesla could have spoken to Noland, but we've been over this already. Perhaps you thought others hadn't noticed.

"any number of people" working for Tesla could not have possibly known detailed information about specifications of just released P85D. The information had to come from corporate engineering directly involved in working on these specifications.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't understand how much clearer than the following I can be.

Using your example...

Someone in corporate engineering spoke to Noland. At the time, he, and everyone else thought there was going to be an explanation clearing up any confusion. AFTER the source spoke to Noland, someone at Tesla--a manager in sales, a high level person in marketing--perhaps Elon Musk for all we know--decided to put the brakes on the idea of clearing things up with an explanation on the website. That is the moment it became a conspiracy. It was not a conspiracy before that. Noland's source--wherever it came from--would not have had any reason to not speak to Noland, as that source honestly believed the information was going to be hitting the website soon. The source was not part of the conspiracy because it did not exist yet!

Good sign of clear point would be absence of urge to clarify it again...

Your mentioning of Elon Musk's name in this context could be considered a libel...

I think that I have nothing else to add here.

 

[Andyw2100]

Good sign of clear point would be absence of urge to clarify it again...

That may be. Sometimes the problem is on the receiving end.

Your mentioning of Elon Musk's name in this context could be considered a libel...

I'm sorry, but that is incorrect.

This is the definition of libel:

noun-a published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation; a written defamation.
verb-defame (someone) by publishing a libel.



The scenario I spelled out was hypothetical, and I said that. The sentence you refer to as potentially libelous is:
"AFTER the source spoke to Noland, someone at Tesla--a manager in sales, a high level person in marketing--perhaps Elon Musk for all we know--decided to put the brakes on the idea of clearing things up with an explanation on the website."

That makes it pretty clear that I'm saying (in my hypothetical situation that I'm not suggesting actually existed, so I've got that going for me anyway) that it could have been any number of people. "Could have been." That is different from "is" or "was", though that really doesn't matter, since the example was a hypothetical example.

 

[dsm363]

Misleading maybe not, obfuscated definitely.

One "good" thing to come out of this is I suspect many people now typing in "P85D power" into Google will come to threads like this now, read these sort of analysis and likely order an 85D instead. With the relatively small performance difference, but big moeny savings, they could decide to spend the difference on PV panels instead

I agree. It's certainly not plainly clear like "P85D produces 500hp at wheels with 90% charge at sea level with ambient temp of 70 degrees.....etc". I wish all companies were that straightforward but we know that just isn't how the world works.

 

[Andyw2100]

I agree. It's certainly now plainly clear like "P85D produces 500hp at wheels with 90% charge at sea level with ambient temp of 70 degrees.....etc". I wish all companies were that straightforward but we know that just isn't how the world works.

I thought Musk and Tesla wanted to change the world.

 

[supratachophobia]

I thought Musk and Tesla wanted to change the world.

If there are shareholders involved, you have to make money doing it. Not wrong or right, just is.

 

[stopcrazypp]

I thought Musk and Tesla wanted to change the world.

Tesla does use some new marketing strategies, but it may not err on the side of matching existing customer expectations (which is where it can become misleading, unintentionally or otherwise). One such example is the deduction of gas savings from the purchase price. That is a step beyond deduction of the tax credit.

 

[smac]

Honest question to all, and simply looking for an honest answer...

If a family member asked you to recommend a car from the Tesla line up right now, on the assumption it wasn't for cash, and they were liable for 4 years finance. Which car would you recommend?

 

[dsm363]

That may be. Sometimes the problem is on the receiving end.



I'm sorry, but that is incorrect.

This is the definition of libel:

noun-a published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation; a written defamation.
verb-defame (someone) by publishing a libel.



The scenario I spelled out was hypothetical, and I said that. The sentence you refer to as potentially libelous is:
"AFTER the source spoke to Noland, someone at Tesla--a manager in sales, a high level person in marketing--perhaps Elon Musk for all we know--decided to put the brakes on the idea of clearing things up with an explanation on the website."

That makes it pretty clear that I'm saying (in my hypothetical situation that I'm not suggesting actually existed, so I've got that going for me anyway) that it could have been any number of people. "Could have been." That is different from "is" or "was", though that really doesn't matter, since the example was a hypothetical example.

So if a crime happened, you would be fine posting "for all we know person X did it...hypothetically"? Makes a ton of sense.

 

[JER]

If a family member asked you to recommend a car from the Tesla line up right now, on the assumption it wasn't for cash, and they were liable for 4 years finance. Which car would you recommend?

90D. 19" wheels.

 

[dsm363]

I thought Musk and Tesla wanted to change the world.

So because there is a communication issue and a poorly explained hp number on their marketing information, the company has failed at all its missions? It's amazing for someone who is actually happy with the car's performance that this issue has impacted you so deeply.

 

[Andyw2100]

So if a crime happened, you would be fine posting "for all we know person X did it...hypothetically"? Makes a ton of sense.

Your example isn't anything like the example in question.

I was using a hypothetical example, and making the point, in that hypothetical example, that the source could have been anyone who worked for Tesla.

The more analagous example between mine and yours would be saying a crime was committed in Washington, DC, and that it could have been anyone in the DC area at the time--for all we know, even President Obama. That is not libeling President Obama. It is making a factual statement that he is part of the same group of people who could have committed the crime, by virtue of his being in Washington DC at the time the crime took place.

In my example I was making a factual statement that the source could have been someone in sales or someone in marketing or anyone at the company--even Musk.

A true statement can't be libelous.

 

[dsm363]

Wow. First of all, you don't know if anything you said is fact. All you know is the number that was posted on the website. All of your hypothetical gymnastics are just that.

 

[ecarfan]

Honest question to all, and simply looking for an honest answer...

If a family member asked you to recommend a car from the Tesla line up right now, on the assumption it wasn't for cash, and they were liable for 4 years finance. Which car would you recommend?

I am not clear on how your post relates to this thread, but then this thread is so long that maybe I've missed something. My answer to your question is "It depends on the individuals vehicle usage pattern, their previous car ownership history (high performance cars or more mundane daily drivers) and their budget". No simple answer, really.

 

[smac]

I am not clear on how your post relates to this thread, but then this thread is so long that maybe I've missed something. My answer to your question is "It depends on the individuals vehicle usage pattern, their previous car ownership history (high performance cars or more mundane daily drivers) and their budget". No simple answer, really.

I'm struggling to see how an S90D is a mundane daily driver

 

[Andyw2100]

Wow. First of all, you don't know if anything you said is fact. All you know is the number that was posted on the website. All of your hypothetical gymnastics are just that.

We're not talking about the validity of the hypothetical example, which was only made to attempt to explain to vgrinshpun, for the second or third time, why the source did not have to be an actual Tesla press release. I wasn't suggesting anything actually happened that way. Have you followed the whole discussion?

And the only fact that matters in the most recent discussion is that you set up a ridiculous example that was not analogous to the one I used. I then used an example that would be analogous. Just to clarify, I don't think President Obama has committed any crimes in Washington, DC.

 

[supratachophobia]

Honest question to all, and simply looking for an honest answer...

If a family member asked you to recommend a car from the Tesla line up right now, on the assumption it wasn't for cash, and they were liable for 4 years finance. Which car would you recommend?

90D, 19" wheels, full tech/convenience package, sunroof, TEXTILE SEATS, any color but black

 

[Vas Deferens]

Your example isn't anything like the example in question.

I was using a hypothetical example, and making the point, in that hypothetical example, that the source could have been anyone who worked for Tesla.

The more analagous example between mine and yours would be saying a crime was committed in Washington, DC, and that it could have been anyone in the DC area at the time--for all we know, even President Obama. That is not libeling President Obama. It is making a factual statement that he is part of the same group of people who could have committed the crime, by virtue of his being in Washington DC at the time the crime took place.

In my example I was making a factual statement that the source could have been someone in sales or someone in marketing or anyone at the company--even Musk.

A true statement can't be libelous.

No, it can't

But implicating someone before you know the all of the facts can get you in trouble for libel.

A sexual assault is committed in a neighborhood.

A gentleman named Bob lives in the neighborhood.

You know Bob.

Someone ask you, "Bob has applied for a job with us, and we know that you know him. What can you tell us about Bob?"

You reply; "well, there was a sexual assault committed in Bob's neighborhood, and hypothetically, it could have been Bob, but I'll answer any specific questions you have about him."

 

[Andyw2100]

No, it can't

But implicating someone before you know the all of the facts can get you in trouble for libel.

A sexual assault is committed in a neighborhood.

A gentleman named Bob lives in the neighborhood.

You know Bob.

Someone ask you, "Bob has applied for a job with us, and we know that you know him. What can you tell us about Bob?"

You reply; "well, there was a sexual assault committed in Bob's neighborhood, and hypothetically, it could have been Bob, but I'll answer any specific questions you have about him."

Well, if anything that would be slander, not libel. For something to be libelous, it has to be published.

 

[dsm363]

We're not talking about the validity of the hypothetical example, which was only made to attempt to explain to vgrinshpun, for the second or third time, why the source did not have to be an actual Tesla press release. I wasn't suggesting anything actually happened that way. Have you followed the whole discussion?

And the only fact that matters in the most recent discussion is that you set up a ridiculous example that was not analogous to the one I used. I then used an example that would be analogous. Just to clarify, I don't think President Obama has committed any crimes in Washington, DC.

I have. You're saying a blogger (David Noland) posted something he says he got from Tesla. You're saying this proves a larger conspiracy.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, if anything that would be slander, not libel. For something to be libelous, it has to be published.

Slander is spoken so he was correct in it being libel.

 

[Andyw2100]

I have. You're saying a blogger (David Noland) posted something he says he got from Tesla. You're saying this proves a larger conspiracy.

I never said it proved a larger conspiracy. My first response on that was this, in response to vgrinshpun saying "no conspiracy whatsoever."

A misunderstanding that Tesla anticipated, started to do something about it to prevent it, and then decided not to. That sounds like there may be some conspiracy involved after all.

- -

Slander is spoken so he was correct in it being libel.

Was he? I think not.

Below is the post I had quoted that I said if anything would be slander and not libel, with bold added.

No, it can't

But implicating someone before you know the all of the facts can get you in trouble for libel.

A sexual assault is committed in a neighborhood.

A gentleman named Bob lives in the neighborhood.

You know Bob.

Someone ask you, "Bob has applied for a job with us, and we know that you know him. What can you tell us about Bob?"

You reply; "well, there was a sexual assault committed in Bob's neighborhood, and hypothetically, it could have been Bob, but I'll answer any specific questions you have about him."