I wrote The Truth About Cars

[tama z71]

HYSTERICAL!!!

I wrote TTAC about their disgustingly poor journalism. Here's my letter and the immediate response.

Mr. Farago,

My name is James Conley. I'm heading into my first year of college

this weekend, and I am an aspiring author and admitted car nut.

As such, I have made a career of scouring the net for automotive news,

articles, reviews and anything else I can get my hands on. While it

isn't my aim to lash your work with name-calling and finger-pointing,

I will say that TTAC is undoubtedly the most self-fulfilling,

disconnected and irrelevant source of car news I have ever come across.

Reading the work of yourself and your co-workers leads me to believe

that each piece is meant only to contain more uselessly complex

vocabulary than the last, aiming more to bolster the writers' own

esteem rather than entertain or truthfully inform the reader.

There is much fuss from the enthusiast when a publication puts down

his beloved car (or brand), and this is probably why many of us

consider the automotive media biased. Some of it is warranted -- much

isn't. If there is any definitional moment of auto-media shenaniganry,

however, it must be your "GM Death Watch." The honest belief that one

of the largest corporations in the world will fold, be bought, or

otherwise diminish is ridiculous and the lonely result of having the

power to broadcast whatever pie-in-the-sky garbage you wish to publish

on your website.

Again, my aim isn't to insult you -- I'm here to offer you the same

flavor of "truthful" advice that you so readily offer General Motors,

and more recently, Ford. This is how I honestly feel about your

website and your work. And when I'm studying to enter the same field

that you can only longingly look in on from the outside, I'll continue

to read your work and understand what constitutes poor journalism.

Thank you.

Sincerely Disgusted,

James Conley

the response is funny as hell. exactly the type of professionalism you would expect from TTAC

Thank you for your email. I appreciate all the time and effort you've

put into arranging your thoughts on our behalf.

Perhaps you're right. Perhaps I and my writers have been too verbose

and obtuse. Let me begin to rectify that right now.

f@#k off.

RF

[capriceman]

wow he just lost more credibilty. I have written letters like that before and i usally get either no response or a somthing that says we will try to keep this in mind in the future. never got a go f@#k yourself response.

[Flybrian]

Yeah, that's...that's a pretty bad response regardless of what was written.

[tama z71]

I thought it was funny because it was written well and structured properly. Maybe the cut about him being on the outside of the auto media got to him. Either way, you can't help but laugh at $h! like that. Especially when it's supposed to be a credible news source and that guy is the editor in chief.

[pow]

ROTFLMAO

That was an awesome reply!

Kudos to Farago... I like their anti-PC 'tude.

[pow]

I thought it was funny because it was written well and structured properly. Maybe the cut about him being on the outside of the auto media got to him. Either way, you can't help but laugh at $h! like that. Especially when it's supposed to be a credible news source and that guy is the editor in chief.

183472[/snapback]

Last time I checked, TTAC was still a blog/editorial/column thing... the sort of thing where self-proclaimed smartasses rant. TTAC's a rather candid one. Lighten up.

Edited August 22, 2006 by empowah

[Cory Wolfe]

Hah... that is hilarious.

[regfootball]

kudos to tama. big time. your repsonse was well crafted and spot on. Farago is exposed as a whiny little pussy who can't take an opposite point of view, and thus, is not even close to being any sort of journalist.....just merely a blogger with an attitude.

Yep, TTAC has no cred, its just a prettier blog site.

This is something the journalist community must deal with now before it gets out of hand. If our next wave of journalists is resigned to not even addressing the other side of any issues, we are in serious trouble and will be held hostage in culture and media by these self appointed pricks.

So if I have this right, journalists today have no integrity and they are not teaching proper journalism in school.

or, this Farago is just a bad seed who's all pissed because he couldn't get a job reviewing records for Rolling Stone, Skateboard World or Video Game monthly or something.

Life must suck when daddy takes the checkbook away.

There is no place in any profession for that sort of response. Emp, you may see it as anti-PC but in the final analysis, its just some little boy Farago crying over spilled milk. Nothing happens in this world just simply telling people to flick off.

Edited August 23, 2006 by regfootball

[tama z71]

Last time I checked, TTAC was still a blog/editorial/column thing... the sort of thing where self-proclaimed smartasses rant. TTAC's a rather candid one. Lighten up.

183532[/snapback]

I don't know about that. They have a staff of about seven writers. They're bombastic enough to establish a weekly "GM Death Watch" segment, as pompous and inaccurate as that is anymore. Reading their work, you get the impression that they carry themselves with an air that says "f@#k you, im a journaliast, and a badass one at that."

C&G is a blog, too, but if Flybrian and Variance continually chanted of Toyota's imminent death and told those with differing opinions to f@#k off, then we would laugh at them too. But I guarantee you look to C&G for credible auto information, and expect the front page news to be accurate and somewhat balanced, much as I do. Blogs are as much a source of news for us yungin's today as CNN or ABC news, so if we don't hold self-important bastards like Farago accountable, then we are only breeding the next generation of journalists to be blameless, unaccountable self-important douche bags.

[regfootball]

I don't know about that. They have a staff of about seven writers. They're bombastic enough to establish a weekly "GM Death Watch" segment, as pompous and inaccurate as that is anymore. Reading their work, you get the impression that they carry themselves with an air that says "f@#k you, im a journaliast, and a badass one at that."

C&G is a blog, too, but if Flybrian and Variance continually chanted of Toyota's imminent death and told those with differing opinions to f@#k off, then we would laugh at them too. But I guarantee you look to C&G for credible auto information, and expect the front page news to be accurate and somewhat balanced, much as I do. Blogs are as much a source of news for us yungin's today as CNN or ABC news, so if we don't hold self-important bastards like Farago accountable, then we are only breeding the next generation of journalists to be blameless, unaccountable self-important douche bags.

184232[/snapback]

exactly. someone has to expose them as full fo sh1t when need be.

none of us here pretend to be journalists. that's the distinction.

Edited August 24, 2006 by regfootball

[Croc]

none of us here pretend to be journalists.  that's the distinction.

184279[/snapback]

Don't forget Josh...but then we kinda told him to f@#k off, huh?

[tama z71]

Don't forget Josh...but then we kinda told him to f@#k off, huh?

184283[/snapback]

what happened there?

[DenCo]

Yeah, it i exactly the kind of thing I would expect from them...

However, that still doesn't exactly make me want to laugh, at least not with him/them. I mean, what kind of a reply is that to anyone's e-mail? I would personally never EVER reply to ANYONE in such a way, regardless of what they told me. Sure, I might eloquently tell them to go fornicate themselves with a rusty fork, so to speak, but I would never actually insult a person or tell them to "f@#k off", when answering an e-mail about my site.

It's just not professional and lakcs pretty much any business ethics at all.

Maybe you should print out a few copies of that...

[chris]

"Cars are fun to drive."

^ there, I also wrote the truth about cars

*ducks*

[Sajeev Mehta]

LOL, that was hilarious. I wouldn't be that direct to you, Tama...but hey, we don't plan on changing our style because tens of thousands of readers like our work.

And you guys have been less than cordial with my work, we have to deal with $h! like this all the time. So quit yer whining.

Edited August 24, 2006 by Sajeev Mehta

[enzl]

TTAC is entertainment, plain & simple.

Do you really look to them for anything else?

Kudos to them for creating a buzz for themselves. Just because the Koolaiders here don't agree with them doesn't make them 'bad' journalists---opinions are like a-holes, boys...everyone's got one, most of 'em stink...that's life.

Perhaps a poster just heading into college (which, BTW, isn't the 'real' world) doesn't have the life experience or knowlege necessary to challenge someone who's actually DONE something tangible like Farago.

I don't agree with TTAC alot, but they certainly have the right to print whatever they'd like. (And send you a snide response to a baseless e-mail filled with pompous bluster and hyperbole).

This is America.

[Sajeev Mehta]

TTAC is entertainment, plain & simple.

Do you really look to them for anything else?

Kudos to them for creating a buzz for themselves. Just because the Koolaiders here don't agree with them doesn't make them 'bad' journalists---opinions are like a-holes, boys...everyone's got one, most of 'em stink...that's life.

Perhaps a poster just heading into college (which, BTW, isn't the 'real' world) doesn't have the life experience or knowlege necessary to challenge someone who's actually DONE something tangible like Farago.

I don't agree with TTAC alot, but they certainly have the right to print whatever they'd like. (And send you a snide response to a baseless e-mail filled with pompous bluster and hyperbole).

This is America.

184423[/snapback]

That was right on the money. I mean, damn that's good. Thanks for that.

[Drew Dowdell]

LOL, that was hilarious.  I wouldn't be that direct to you, Tama...but hey, we don't plan on changing our style because tens of thousands of readers like our work.

And you guys have been less than cordial with my work, we have to deal with $h! like this all the time. So quit yer whining.

184413[/snapback]

You should see if you can get a segment on

[Sajeev Mehta]

You should see if you can get a segment on

184449[/snapback]

You should get a sense of humor.

[tama z71]

Oh wow.

And enzl, if you're website is plain and simple humor, but has tens of thousands of readers (as Sajeev pointed out), then you better be responsible enough to tell them that a "GM Death Watch" is either humorous or don't print the $h! at all. Because I've read the segment a few times, and he sounds pretty sincere.

Edited August 24, 2006 by tama z71

[Sajeev Mehta]

Oh wow.

And enzl, if you're website is plain and simple humor, but has tens of thousands of readers (as Sajeev pointed out), then you better be responsible enough to tell them that a "GM Death Watch" is either humorous or don't print the $h! at all.

Enzl said entertainment, not humor, and there's a lot of that. There's also a lot of inflammatory opinions and analysis of financial reports, which you don't have to believe to enjoy reading it.

If something bad does happen to GM, you can bet the Death Watch chronicles will be a reference, much like this recent movie based on a book.

[Drew Dowdell]

Oh wow.

And enzl, if you're website is plain and simple humor, but has tens of thousands of readers (as Sajeev pointed out), then you better be responsible enough to tell them that a "GM Death Watch" is either humorous or don't print the $h! at all. Because I've read the segment a few times, and he sounds pretty sincere.

184469[/snapback]

seriously....

there are other auto makers that are closer to death right now <I can think of at least 3> than GM.

further more, GM is reawakening..... yea it was the sleeping giant, but now it's wiping the sand from it's eyes...

[enzl]

Oh wow.

And enzl, if you're website is plain and simple humor, but has tens of thousands of readers (as Sajeev pointed out), then you better be responsible enough to tell them that a "GM Death Watch" is either humorous or don't print the &#036;h&#33; at all. Because I've read the segment a few times, and he sounds pretty sincere.

184469[/snapback]

I don't doubt Mr. Farago (or Sajeev)'s sincerity. I have doubts about their true accuracy...but that doesn't stop me from reading or enjoying what their point of view is on things.

to me, its like a columnist in a newspaper...they're interpreting the normally dry arena of automotive journalism in a refreshing way that is clearly their opinion...now, if you told me Farago is shorting GM's stock on days he prints the 'Death Watch', then I'd unequivocally state he was doing something wrong.

As it stands, I think the average reader can see where opinion and fact are intertwined, but for those too stupid to take it for what it is, they clearly may be confused or disturbed. I'm assuming those who take the latter position here haven't really considered the ramifications of muzzling opinions in the 4th estate...

If you're that concerned about what TTAC has to say, e-mail GM and tell them to get new product out...that might help get a decent review or two.

[DenCo]

Mission

The Truth About Cars is dedicated to providing candid, unbiased automobile reviews and the latest in auto industry news.

Doesn't look like people who are providing their readers with "entertainement" more than anything...

[enzl]

Doesn't look like people who are providing their readers with "entertainement" more than anything...

184501[/snapback]

Is your life dependent upon the info they provide?

Newsflash: we read magazines, newspapers, watch TV for information. The ENTERTAINMENT is the way its provided....

...does Fox News say "We're conservative zealots spinning war stories?"

...does the NY Times say " We're a bunch of pillow biting libs?"

...do you tell your boss you're on the computer during work, while (lamely) trying to argue for suppression of opinions that don't align with yours?

Of course not. Their is NO such thing as truly objective journalism. I think you be better served complaining to GM about such embarassing disasters as the G5, LaCrosse or their CSV's...that's a bigger sin than some so-called e-journalists expressing, god forbid, an opinion.

This site loves GM's good press....all negativity MUST be bias, of course

Edited August 24, 2006 by enzl

[CARBIZ]

Well, Enzl, you act surprised. Of course this site loves GM's good press. Golly. Go figure: a GM fansite that loves good GM press.

C'mon. All the debates are lively on this site. Personally, I love seeing the gnashing of teeth when a rice humper tangles with a GM apologist. It makes for good entertaiment, for sure.

But in coverage of the Camaro announcement, the National Post went on and on about how the Camaro is a gas guzzler and how the Ontario Liberal government is encouraging corporate welfare and how the government is being two-faced about Kyoto, etc. when they subsidize (hand outs) GM's building of a "two seater" gas guzzler.

Okay, so I know the Post is a Tory (conservative) paper and I know they are taking a few jabs at the ruling Liberal Provincial government, but why slap GM for doing what Toyota has already done in Woodstock and Texas? It is the fault of the state and provincial governments for playing the game with the auto companies in the first place. If Ontario didn't offer hand outs, GM would have threatened to go elsewhere.

And the slant of the article is that GM builds gas guzzlers. Again, the double standard. The so-called enthusiasts bitch and whine that Ford and Chrysler both have RWD and GM is late to the party, then when GM does decided to build the car the other half of the media whines that GM is building more gas guzzlers.

I emailed Coynes at the Post and told him that I expected this behavior from the Toronto Star, but not the Post.

[enzl]

Well, Enzl, you act surprised.  Of course this site loves GM's good press.  Golly.  Go figure: a GM fansite that loves good GM press.

  C'mon. All the debates are lively on this site.  Personally, I love seeing the gnashing of teeth when a rice humper tangles with a GM apologist.  It makes for good entertaiment, for sure.

  But in coverage of the Camaro announcement, the National Post went on and on about how the Camaro is a gas guzzler and how the Ontario Liberal government is encouraging corporate welfare and how the government is being two-faced about Kyoto, etc. when they subsidize (hand outs) GM's building of a "two seater" gas guzzler.

  Okay, so I know the Post is a Tory (conservative) paper and I know they are taking a few jabs at the ruling Liberal Provincial government, but why slap GM for doing what Toyota has already done in Woodstock and Texas?  It is the fault of the state and provincial governments for playing the game with the auto companies in the first place.  If Ontario didn't offer hand outs, GM would have threatened to go elsewhere.

  And the slant of the article is that GM builds gas guzzlers.  Again, the double standard.  The so-called enthusiasts bitch and whine that Ford and Chrysler both have RWD and GM is late to the party, then when GM does decided to build the car the other half of the media whines that GM is building more gas guzzlers. 

  I emailed Coynes at the Post and told him that I expected this behavior from the Toronto Star, but not the Post.

184518[/snapback]

I can't comment on the articles your refering to, as I haven't read them, but, taking your version at face value, I can only say that the freedom of the press, expression and ideas is more important than GM. There's just no arguing that point.

As for the fansite's natural reactions to bad press--I understand and respect those opinions, but it's an excuse, plain and simple. GM has been putting out (with a few exceptions) mostly mediocre product since about 1970 or so. In the meanwhile, enterprising and crafty competitors have taken advantage of every angle to box GM into the corner they currently occupy. GM appears to have finally 'gotten' it....but in the meanwhile, the contempt GM showed its employees, customers and, yes, the press, has come home to roost.

No benefit of the doubt will be given until the last vestiges of the 'old' way are eradicated. GM has earned its turn in the barrel. Now its a fight to get out. Hopefully they're up to the task. I'm encouraged by the initial signs, but there's a long way to go to recreate a public image where a GM product was a default choice. Now, you've gotta bribe 'em just to get them to look at product.

Today, Toyota & Honda are the default choices. Hyundai has clearly shown that perseverance and decent product can turn an image around.

TTAC only reflects the reality on the ground in auto marketing & retailing (I should know, my employers sell over 20,000 cars/year.)

GM fansite, great. GM apologists, I just have no patience. My employees and their families deserve better than what GM has provided in recent history. That's why I get worked up over ignoramuses and their blind, ostrich-like loyalty. You're as bad as the boardroom 'yes' men that got GM to where it is.

Edited August 24, 2006 by enzl

[tama z71]

I can't comment on the articles your refering to, as I haven't read them, but, taking your version at face value, I can only say that the freedom of the press, expression and ideas is more important than GM. There's just no arguing that point.

As for the fansite's natural reactions to bad press--I understand and respect those opinions, but it's an excuse, plain and simple. GM has been putting out (with a few exceptions) mostly mediocre product since about 1970 or so. In the meanwhile, enterprising and crafty competitors have taken advantage of every angle to box GM into the corner they currently occupy. GM appears to have finally 'gotten' it....but in the meanwhile, the contempt GM showed its employees, customers and, yes, the press, has come home to roost.

No benefit of the doubt will be given until the last vestiges of the 'old' way are eradicated. GM has earned its turn in the barrel. Now its a fight to get out. Hopefully they're up to the task. I'm encouraged by the initial signs, but there's a long way to go to recreate a public image where a GM product was a default choice. Now, you've gotta bribe 'em just to get them to look at product.

Today, Toyota & Honda are the default choices. Hyundai has clearly shown that perseverance and decent product can turn an image around.

TTAC only reflects the reality on the ground in auto marketing & retailing (I should know, my employers sell over 20,000 cars/year.)

GM fansite, great. GM apologists, I just have no patience. My employees and their families deserve better than what GM has provided in recent history. That's why I get worked up over ignoramuses and their blind, ostrich-like loyalty. You're as bad as the boardroom 'yes' men that got GM to where it is.

184523[/snapback]

If you can point out one instance in this thread or in my initial letter, where I explicitly attacked Farago or TTAC for being unfair to or biased against GM alone, I will give you eleven dollars and consider myself defeated.

I didn't criticize him to defend GM. I did it because he's a poor writer who misleads his readers and is twofaced in his intent. If the site mission statement is "providing candid, unbiased automobile reviews and the latest in auto industry news," then you goddamn well better not write inflammatory and agenda-driven pieces, then duck under the shade of "but its just entertainment!" when somebody calls out your bull&#036;h&#33;!

He didn't even respond to my criticisms! I was told to f@#k off! That either means the man is too lazy to respond, found truth in my letter or simply holds himself above the views of others. Either way, the man is full of &#036;h&#33;!

And don't even begin to talk about freedom of speech. If you're not even responsible enough to tell your readers that what you do is humor-based and not to be taken seriously, then dont write at all. If it were truly a humor site, as you have argued, then the mission statement would be "providing laughible, detrimental automobile reviews and the latest in auto industry fake-news."

If you want to talk about your perceived lack of quality regarding GM products, start another thread. If you're going to continue to defend bull&#036;h&#33; with bull&#036;h&#33;, just stop now.

[enzl]

If you can point out one instance in this thread or in my initial letter, where I explicitly attacked Farago or TTAC for being unfair to or biased against GM alone, I will give you eleven dollars and consider myself defeated.

I didn't criticize him to defend GM. I did it because he's a poor writer who misleads his readers and is twofaced in his intent. If the site mission statement is "providing candid, unbiased automobile reviews and the latest in auto industry news," then you goddamn well better not write inflammatory and agenda-driven pieces, then duck under the shade of "but its just entertainment!" when somebody calls out your bull&#036;h&#33;!

He didn't even respond to my criticisms! I was told to f@#k off! That either means the man is too lazy to respond, found truth in my letter or simply holds himself above the views of others. Either way, the man is full of &#036;h&#33;!

And don't even begin to talk about freedom of speech. If you're not even responsible enough to tell your readers that what you do is humor-based and not to be taken seriously, then dont write at all. If it were truly a humor site, as you have argued, then the mission statement would be "providing laughible, detrimental automobile reviews and the latest in auto industry fake-news."

If you want to talk about your perceived lack of quality regarding GM products, start another thread. If you're going to continue to defend bull&#036;h&#33; with bull&#036;h&#33;, just stop now.

184534[/snapback]

It's a website....people use 'em to post pics of their dogs or whatever. It's not supposed to be a reputable source, just a source.

While your original scree did not specifically defend GM, the Death Watch pieces have clearly been the largest source of controversy within this site. So I figured you were just continuing that misguided trend.

Instead, I see that your tangent is even less coherent and, clearly, you have not read MY replies carefully. I never said TTAC was a humor site or humerous. You Said I said that....

I take issue with other things as well:

How exactly is Farago two faced? His heart appears to be on his sleeve as to his opinions on things automotive.

Who cares what their reviewers say? And what's so detrimental about them? It's an auto enthusiasts site with an opinion. And a set of balls to call it like THEY see it. If you don't agree, don't read it! Tell others as well.It's a simple solution to your worries and will clearly let you relax.

Otherwise, if you regard freedom of expression as 'Bull&#036;h&#33;', go live in a place that doesn't allow that for a while, then tell me how big a 'detriment' Mr. Farago & his little site is.

He didn't duck anything. You're just upset he told you to F off, in a funny, sarcastic, caustic manner that, guess what, gets people to read his stupid site!

When you become an adult, you'll understand that lots of people won;t agree with you, or ignore you or tell you to f off. That's life, Junior, get used to it. Noone's going to coddle you like Mommy or beat up a bully like your big bro Jimmy.

And finally, if everything in life came with a warning sticker, it would ruin all the fun. Take it for what it is and relax....or better yet, start your own site and let's see how your journalistic integrity stands up to the first press junket or freebie. (Forget that last line....people like you usually just tear things down---some of us actually build things...)

[tama z71]

It's a website....people use 'em to post pics of their dogs or whatever. It's not supposed to be a reputable source, just a source.

While your original scree did not specifically defend GM, the Death Watch pieces have clearly been the largest source of controversy within this site. So I figured you were just continuing that misguided trend.

Instead, I see that your tangent is even less coherent and, clearly, you have not read MY replies carefully. I never said TTAC was a humor site or humerous. You Said I said that....

I take issue with other things as well:

How exactly is Farago two faced? His heart appears to be on his sleeve as to his opinions on things automotive.

Who cares what their reviewers say? And what's so detrimental about them? It's an auto enthusiasts site with an opinion. And a set of balls to call it like THEY see it. If you don't agree, don't read it! Tell others as well.It's a simple solution to your worries and will clearly let you relax.

Otherwise, if you regard freedom of expression as 'Bull&#036;h&#33;', go live in a place that doesn't allow that for a while, then tell me how big a 'detriment' Mr. Farago & his little site is.

He didn't duck anything. You're just upset he told you to F off, in a funny, sarcastic, caustic manner that, guess what, gets people to read his stupid site!

When you become an adult, you'll understand that lots of people won;t agree with you, or ignore you or tell you to f off. That's life, Junior, get used to it. Noone's going to coddle you like Mommy or beat up a bully like your big bro Jimmy.

And finally, if everything in life came with a warning sticker, it would ruin all the fun. Take it for what it is and relax....or better yet, start your own site and let's see how your journalistic integrity stands up to the first press junket or freebie. (Forget that last line....people like you usually just tear things down---some of us actually build things...)

184543[/snapback]

I think it's funny how you can so precisely use my comments regarding one author to accurately paint the picture of my life and my thought-processes. Good call on that one.

Okay, so let's say that TTAC can print whatever they want and regardless of my sheltered, uninformed and incoherent rants, they are justified in calling things as they see them. Let's say they aren't trying to be accurate, or truthful. Let's say they are being true to their opinions, and dashing some humor in there for the hell of it.

1. they aren't funny. as far as i can tell, farago wants to be the american jeremy clarkson and that type of deadpan humor falls deaf on most american ears. so even if a few think he's funny, to most he comes off as a writer who's portraying his personal views in a bombastic and uninformed way while thinking that he is truthful. but thats just one theory.

2. i think its great that TTAC can print whatever they want, and i think its great that we both have the opportunity to call each other an uninformed asshole in a public forum. but there is such a thing as responsibility of speech. the daily show has millions of loyal viewers as compared to the few thousand that TTAC has. The Daily Show is far more ridiculous, opinionated and outspoken than TTAC. But guess what? The Daily Show advertises their fakeness. They tell people that they are a joke. People understand that watching the Daily Show entails laughter. TTAC? When your broadcasted-to-the-public mission statement uses the phrase "unbiased" and carries the air of something you would expect from a respected automotive news source, guess what, most readers are going to take you seriously!

Now I'll respond to your personal assumptions of my character. Warning sticker? My favorite TV show is Mind of Mencia, I wrote an article in the school newspaper that predicted 6 of my close friends would end up drunk or dead in the next ten years and Im in the process of writing a satirical accoustic album that sings songs of "the abortion clinic", "my first blowjob" and "the ballad of tibbles the cat (dad hit him with the lawnmower when i was five)."

So no, I'm not the teflon-helmeted sheltered pussy that you seem to think i am. I have one hell of a sense of humor. I've been working in a warehouse and family business since I was 9, perhaps even longer than you've been talking down on people from the comfortable safety of your computer monitor. I'm mature enough to tell you that condescending to people via internet does not make you a real adult, and I share enough of Farago's no-nonsense persona to tell you to f@#k off.

With that, someone lock this damn thread. It's dead now.

[cmattson]

While a tad humorous, I find the reply offensive and in poor taste (much like the rest of his work -> go figure). While Mr. Farago has no problem tearing into GM (and others), it seems he himself can't take the criticsm of others.

Side note to Farago: you don't want opnions? Don't publish an e-mail address. By publishing an e-mail address, you are ASKING for comments. He brought this upon himself. What a shallow, thin-skinned s-pile.