Flybrian

What fevered dream is this that bids to tear this company in twain?

Guys... Employee Discount is the topic.

My observations tell me we do not have a problem with the real nasty stuff, but more the overuse of 'f@#k' and '$h!.' Again, in non-Lounge topics this makes a larger impact because its what the casual non-member browser sees.

I'll have to check to see if that is user-configurable. Good suggestion, though!

Ann Coulter is a sweetheart. Very calm, always rational, and stunningly attractive. Do I really need this? [/sarcasm]?

Croc, this topic is not about school censorship or the morality of cursing. Please keep that for some other discussion. Since its been brought up, I'm looking for real feedback from as many members as possible on what (if any) filtering we should have, and where it should be done.

This is a different concern and one I do agree with. The language may or may not be a byproduct of that attitude, but the attitude exists nonetheless. I have noticed alot of oneupsmanship lately around here that's not desireable. I'm not referring to someone saying, "Ha! Told you so!" in a jesting manner, but something a bit more caustic. If you have specific incidents you (or anyone) feel like reporting, please feel free to. And to all, keep in mind that we have to walk a thin line between freedom and control and when you're dealing with individual statements that may/may not contain a certain attitude, you're looking at it over the internet and its hard to determine. Let's again all realize that words have a different impact when written as opposed to being spoken and keep that in mind when we respond to each other. Remember, we're all here for fun.

I think a reasonable 'compromise' would be to exercise greater restraint in choice of language in the non-Lounge topics. As Lounge is a membership privilege, it can be reasoned it has a less official nature and therefore can be more relaxed and liberal. Thoughts from all? And I'd like to hear from anyone who has an opinion on this matter...

:rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:

I would like to point out that the thread was about an hour and change old at the time, so...

Well, my father's SSEi is faster off the line than my car, but I give him a very good run at mid-RPM mid-speeds (35-75mph). I'm sure I'm not aided by my 3995lbs curb weight...well...not me...the car. Even with its iron block, the Bonneville is a good ~200lbs lighter for some reason. The 4.0l Aurora is far and away more smooth and silkier, but the s/c 3800II is alot more tire-squealing fun. I can chirp my car, but to do more would be gauche of this fine sedan.

I think you for the second one. And damn, the real thing looks so much better!

The headlights are too blobby. Though, I'm very happy its not another mediocre brick like the 300.

Meaning what exactly?

Uh, didn't Saturn do this first? And while Saturn's policy 30-day/3,000 miles was in keeping with their image, Chrysler doing it is pure desperation.

I find it ironic how you hate technology at the same time you're photographing the RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER. Can't wait!

If Mercedes were intent on doing a true hardtop sedan, they would've done it with the CLS, not this.

I would bet Evok's statement is pretty close. At Chrysler, for example, minivans outsold V8/RWD/coupes nearly 2-to-1. In fact, I would bet that only GM, Ford, and Nissan would've sold more of those cars than minivans. And even if RWD cars, V8 cars, and coupes did outsell minivans in 2005 (which I actually think was the case if you break down all the numbers), they did so by such a slim margin that the message is clear. Also look at the sales trends of the big players in that segment - mostly down.

0% got us to trade up into the Bonneville from a Regal GS. We did the math and ended up getting a better car for the same 'price.' It does work and its a great deal.

The hood strakes are needless and horrible, the fauz windowline is needless, and the rear is just plain bad. Let's have hope for the Avenger...

Okay. How about this - its a good economy car wrapped in a disjointed, discolored wrapper with no trunk space? And I'm serious about the color. Toyota could not have chosen a worse 'exclusive' paint scheme for this car. It really reminds me of that "Metallic Pea" wagon from Vacation in person. I also don't understand why the infinitely more appealing Aloe Green and Sky Blue aren't even available on the hybrid, much less black. Its like you're rewarded with fuel economy, but cursed with a horribly bland selection of paint. What the heck?

I think Bobthebuilder is referring to prolonged, continued towing, though the JGC's structure in relation to towing makes for an interesting example.

I don't understand the comparison between luxury coupes and much smaller sport coupes; two seperate markets. Also, Toyota did rather poorly with the 1999 Celica and Mitsibishi's progress with the Eclipse has been so-so as of late.

The Raider's real problem is it offers no unique features over the Dakota and buying one means sacrificing variety, a wider range of Dodge purchasing options, and living with a limited and questionable dealer network. At least the Ascender has a cheaper price than the Trailblazer. If anything, pick one up on the cheap when they stop being made and just sit on the lots.