AmpedRealtor
Well-Known Member
I didn't call anyone a liar so don't use hyperbole to make it seem more malicious than it was. I only stated that the information they were presenting wasn't entirely accurate. I even went on to specify on one of these inaccuracies. There's no reason to make this something it's not via passive aggressiveness.
In an effort to "help" there is a TON of misinformation being presented as fact on these forums. This happens frequently enough unchecked and nobody remembers what the original source was for the "facts" which maybe aren't even accurate. This happened a while back when Tesla did away with FUSC on new cars being manufactured and it was crazy how fast people assumed this applied to ALL cars and parroted that info as fact. They couldn't change this agreement retroactively w/o BOTH parties consenting to the new terms of the agreement which dozens of people on this very forum swore was the case because they "heard" it.
There was another recent instance where someone misread a 3rd party article (read: not an actual document or statement BY Tesla) about how Tesla was removing this from used car that TESLA sold. They took it to mean that it applied it to all 3rd party dealerships & were presenting that as fact to someone trying to get information that had no idea. The article linked to didn't even mention the word dealership once. The person presenting "facts" told the new car shopper that the used cars offered by Tesla had FUSC and that the ones sold at 3rd party dealers didn't... both of these "facts" by someone "just helping" were inaccurate.
This appears to be happening again in Point #1 above. Now, suddenly and w/o any sort of supporting proof, we're expected to just believe that it applies to cars that are sold by 3rd party dealers who got the car at auction? That's in clear violation of the terms of the original sale of that vehicle and I have yet to see a single official document from Tesla that back that claim that FUSC is removed from used cars that had been sold used by 3rd party dealers.
All I'm asking is for actual sources for that person's information. You seemed to think it was acceptable to require it of me for merely questioning the legitimacy of the information but why not the person who actually posted the information in the first place?
I used lots of words so that makes me mad? Excellent assumption because I'm SOOO mad! Grrrrrr
lol
This is a great bit of misdirection to try to distract from the real issue here and paint the picture of me being some pissed of crazy person which couldn't be further from reality. Nice try though. How 'bout for future interactions you just don't go at people's personal traits and stick to the topic?
It doesn't matter if you bought one, seven or zero... if you're on here spouting misinformation as fact you're not "helping" anyone so stop breaking your arm patting yourself on the back for the wonderful work you did. Simply posting nothing at all would have been more helpful than taking the time to offer misinformation to someone who may already be confused by all of this.
You're so proud of yourself for being part of the problem by your own admission. This stuff would be hilarious if it wasn't so annoying.
IOW the person complaining about lack of facts (you) has none of his own to offer. Love the internet.