Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Wiki Model S Delivery Update

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
I refrained from entering the side banter but man at some point someone needs to say it out loud and I am that kind of guy. 🤷‍♂️
The funny thing is that @TSLA Pilot Pilot’s message may or may not be right, but no one will listen to his stupidity and arrogance. It’s like he makes me want to drive a diesel truck with his approach.
Oh, and I got solar in 2009, so take that you sky polluter @TSLA Pilot!
 
The funny thing is that @TSLA Pilot Pilot’s message may or may not be right, but no one will listen to his stupidity and arrogance. It’s like he makes me want to drive a diesel truck with his approach.
Oh, and I got solar in 2009, so take that you sky polluter @TSLA Pilot!
You nailed it bro. He even busted out the logical fallacy piece just a bit ago. I laughed looking at that. Using a logical fallacy argument as a logical fallacy. Missing the point entirely that we are all guilty and sanctimony is neither effective nor justified. (which has nothing to do with the whole global warming discussion)

No one is disagreeing with the dude other than for his approach. So he doubles down on his approach.

Classic bully that feels he is on a righteous path.
 

tu quoque​

You avoided having to engage with criticism by turning it back on the accuser - you answered criticism with criticism.​

Pronounced too-kwo-kweh. Literally translating as 'you too' this fallacy is also known as the appeal to hypocrisy. It is commonly employed as an effective red herring because it takes the heat off someone having to defend their argument, and instead shifts the focus back on to the person making the criticism.

Example: Nicole identified that Hannah had committed a logical fallacy, but instead of addressing the substance of her claim, Hannah accused Nicole of committing a fallacy earlier on in the conversation.

Or perhaps:


no true scotsman​

You made what could be called an appeal to purity as a way to dismiss relevant criticisms or flaws of your argument.​

In this form of faulty reasoning one's belief is rendered unfalsifiable because no matter how compelling the evidence is, one simply shifts the goalposts so that it wouldn't apply to a supposedly 'true' example. This kind of post-rationalization is a way of avoiding valid criticisms of one's argument.

Example: Angus declares that Scotsmen do not put sugar on their porridge, to which Lachlan points out that he is a Scotsman and puts sugar on his porridge. Furious, like a true Scot, Angus yells that no true Scotsman sugars his porridge.
Nice one bro. Does this really address what you are being called out for? Read the responses.

You used logical fallacy twice in a false way. Not one person said your main thesis is incorrect. (not one) Go back and check. Not one person is trying to avoid criticism. Not one person is trying to dismiss anything other than your method.

To be clear, your method is aggressive sanctimony. It is off-putting and obnoxious. You are free to continue on that path. You are even free to pretend it is effective in conversation.

Please try to read for intent and content rather than to affirm what you already know. Read several times if necessary. In the last few pages, you will see a good deal of wisdom from many people that are trying to help you with your delivery.

Again, that has nothing to do with global warming and everything to do with trying to avoid being a knob.

Cheers
 
Last edited:
Okay, so I am ordering some aftermarket 20” wheels in anticipation of getting the car sometime before I lose my mind!

question - the 20s will allow both the 255front / 285rear AND the 265front / 295rear config.

assuming I’m losing around 10lbs weight per corner, how much real range do I lose with the wider ones?
My car should be here shortly and I will be test fitting the 20x9 TSWs off my P90D. I'll likely go to 265s or 275s all the way around to keep the ability to rotate and have my spare usable on all four corners. Atlanta is not that far if you want to come down and take a look.

As for range, no clue.
 
VIN!!!!!!
 

Attachments

  • 373C9762-13F0-4CD8-BFB4-FC58737BDFC8.jpeg
    373C9762-13F0-4CD8-BFB4-FC58737BDFC8.jpeg
    159.3 KB · Views: 75

tu quoque​

You avoided having to engage with criticism by turning it back on the accuser - you answered criticism with criticism.​

Pronounced too-kwo-kweh. Literally translating as 'you too' this fallacy is also known as the appeal to hypocrisy. It is commonly employed as an effective red herring because it takes the heat off someone having to defend their argument, and instead shifts the focus back on to the person making the criticism.

Example: Nicole identified that Hannah had committed a logical fallacy, but instead of addressing the substance of her claim, Hannah accused Nicole of committing a fallacy earlier on in the conversation.

Or perhaps:


no true scotsman​

You made what could be called an appeal to purity as a way to dismiss relevant criticisms or flaws of your argument.​

In this form of faulty reasoning one's belief is rendered unfalsifiable because no matter how compelling the evidence is, one simply shifts the goalposts so that it wouldn't apply to a supposedly 'true' example. This kind of post-rationalization is a way of avoiding valid criticisms of one's argument.

Example: Angus declares that Scotsmen do not put sugar on their porridge, to which Lachlan points out that he is a Scotsman and puts sugar on his porridge. Furious, like a true Scot, Angus yells that no true Scotsman sugars his porridge.
Ok, I am really old enough to know better than to step into this as its going to take a while to clean off my shoes but here we go.

Perhaps people could agree with your assertions on climate but your presentation prevents them from engaging in the conversation at best or fires up their human instinct to play Devil's Advocate at the worst just to mess with you.

What I'm saying is that it does not matter if you are correct if your approach has the opposite affect of that which you say you are trying to accomplish. Now, if you are just trying to alienate people, you are on the right track. Please continue.
 
My car should be here shortly and I will be test fitting the 20x9 TSWs off my P90D. I'll likely go to 265s or 275s all the way around to keep the ability to rotate and have my spare usable on all four corners. Atlanta is not that far if you want to come down and take a look.

As for range, no clue.
I totally forgot about that spare! I’ve lugged around a fully functional wheel on my current one on long trips. Going stagerred means I’ll be at the mercy of luck.

please post pics of your setup when you get it. I’m really going for improved handling. I’ve got an S and a 3 and I’m hoping with the extra light wheels that I get some of that 3 “nimbleness” on the new Plaid
 
  • Like
Reactions: EndlessPlaid
Things that make me go hmm … another 10lbs off each corner!