The Inquirer Blasted

[rmannstaedt]

Thanks, nihongaeri, for your sober and informative post. No, I had not read your translation of the article - it is the first link I have seen. But I have read it now.

Yes, it is true that the translated text makes no claim to "insider information", and if that was what the Inquirer referred to, it would indeed be a fabrication. And fabrications, as opposed to rumours and unverified/unverifiable information, are worse than useless - they are misdirecting.

However, not all of the article has been translated, and the Inquirer has posted an at least partial reply to your mail here (http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=5327) where they point out that, (quote): "The information we referred to was in a graphic of a roadmap."

The graphic - including, I note, the comment box to the NV30 launch - is still untranslated, so I cannot verify the truth of this (and no, I do not read Japanese, unfortunately). But I would very much like to know what it says.

However, even with the untranslated graphic, I still think that the thrust of the article is correct. If you move back a step and just look at the Japanese article linked to in the Inquirer, it seems to me that the graphics (the time-table) is the actual item that the Inquirer refers to. At least that is how I understood the piece in the Inquirer when I read it first. The graphic table in the Japanese article contains verified and unverified nVidia GPU schedules, and the unverified bits could certainly be drawn from "insiders" - indeed, that would usually be the case with such. And the information it contains concerning the NV30 certainly does seem to indicate that the launch may - for all practical purposes (which is the purpose of actually getting it to the consumers in time) - miss the yule-tide. It is hovering right there at the very end of 2002, and that does makes it look improbable that we will be able to see it in actual graphics boards in time. So seen in this light, yes, then the Japanese article does indeed contain "insider information" that indicates that I may not be able to buy a graphics board with the new chip until january.

Personally I would have preferred the Inquirer to refer to a "late december" launch rather than a "first quarter 2003 launch". That bit I do find misleading - unless the note in the graphic clears this up. This could all very well depend on how you read and understand the schedule graphic however. There is a significant difference between launching a technology and launching finished board products. And they do state - in the very next paragraph - that (quote):

"But we still think the company is on target for the margins of Q4 and believe Nvidia will show off the NV30 at the Comdex jamboree in the US this year, to a massive roll of publicity."

Now, having said all that, I still think it is disappointing that they seem to have made no effort to point this out to you. I would have expected them to do that. So in this respect, yes, I agree with you. They did, however, respond to a correspondance they had with a Mr. Craig, saying that the information they referred to was in the graphics not in the text.

[rmannstaedt]

Hi Matt. I am sorry you ran into abuse that way (the quote you give at the end of your post). Still, whenever someone go public with an opinion, we see this kind of response, no matter the subject or the person. Some people have culture and brains... and some don't - and show it. An unfortunate but inevitable consequence of the Net being open for all. Still, I do understand why you don't exactly go out of your way to invite such comments; I wouldn't, either.

I have made a search at the Inquirer, looking for references to 3DGPU. I found exactly two occurrences, one with and one without a link. And looking at your site, I find that you are actually linking to the Inquirer far more often than not. So yes, I owe you an apology. :) My mistake.

By the way, the link at the end of your post does not work but returns a fatal error.

I do stand by the rest of my post, however. And there is a significant difference between humour, factual information, rumour/indications based information, and misinformation. With a site like the Inquirer, those small words like "may" or "indicates" or "perhaps" are immensely important. I doubt very much you could write an intelligible article about budding trends and indicators without them. And you certainly can't remove them from an article and then criticize it for its lack of accuracy. Yes, I guess articles like that may have an impact on the stock markets. But then, any kind of article - factual based or expressing personal views - may impact the stock markets. This does not mean that we should refrain from writing them.

[Solomon]

WoW! This thread has turned... Hehe.

It's amusing to read the posts defending the Inquirer. I'll just give you a couple of reasons why the inquirer is a joke.

If what you defendants say in regards that it's just "humour". Then tell your good friends at The Inquirer that they better stop using the words, "True, Fact, Release Dates, etc..." Using those words apply that what they saying is legit and true to a "T"...

Once they lose those words, then we can all rest assure that the dong they spew is just that, dong and not hopes and prayers that their news post end up being true.

Besides the wonderfull feature of "Editing" allows them to re-word any of their news posts if they realized that it's false.

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com

[rmannstaedt]

I think you are missing the point. Like I said (quote):

"... there is a significant difference between humour, factual information, rumour/indications based information, and misinformation. With a site like the Inquirer, those small words like 'may' or 'indicates' or 'perhaps' are immensely important."

Using words like "may" does not constitute humour. It constitutes speculation. Using sentences like (quote from Inquirer article http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=5327):

"... the highly respectable and hugely talented D. Solomon Jr., who loves us to bits."

That constitutes humour. Reading your post I gather you are interested in neither the humour nor the speculations, so I honestly don't know why you are reading the Inquirer. Go read a benchmark somewhere instead.

[Solomon]

<--- Looking at Benchmarks

[Solomon]

I don't know if I want to cry our laugh, but this is truly sad. I guess if you don't agree with what The Inquirer posts you are automatically included in a news post. What is funny is that there are alot of people that hate *********.com and you know what? They are entitle to that opinion. I'm not going to try to win over ever single individual to get them to dedicate their life to my website.

People have their own opinions and attitudes. My philosphy is that if you don't like what I have to say? Don't read it. Is this really that hard of a concept to grasp? Apparently it is with the Inquirer. I will continue on with my controversial posting of what I think about the certain product, company or what not.

Apparently Matt Burris and I are public enemy #1 when it comes to us voicing our opinions on various subject matters. Neither I or Mr. Burris is going to back down on what is on our minds about a particular subject matter. Thanks to the link from the previous poster we can conclude that they go as far as sending their henchmen into forums and then reporting back to camp. This is truly sad.

We have fans and we have enemies. It's all apart of being in the spotlight of running a website. If you can't hack the negativity toward your site, you shouldn't be running one. It's as simple as that.

So to all Inquirer's henchmen and Mr. Paul Hales, if you don't like what I have to say.............. What is that popular saying hear in the states? Lifes a bitch...

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com

[nihongaeri]

Well I for one am glad that we can be civilized about this discourse without being at each others throats.

Anyhow, thank you for pointing out the Monday Inquirer article where they actually refer (or rather mis-refer as Bob Craig is my dad) to me. I had not realized until then that the Inquirer’s previous statement was based purely on an interpretation of the graph contained in the PC Watch article. In retrospect I suppose that would have been the natural assumption knowing now that Mr. Magee does not speak any Japanese. Nonetheless, there is no indication in the original Inquirer article that would lead one think that their statements were based on a graph, and I personally would suggest that the wording of the article would actually infer that the said statement was based also on the article and not purely on the graph. I truly wish Mr. Magee would have cared to clarify the source of his interpretation in the email correspondence that we have shared since then. I do however question whether it was wise for the Inquirer to make the statement that they did based on nothing more than a graph surrounded by characters that they couldn’t read. For all Mr. Magee knew, the title of the graph could have been “Nvidia graph which I pulled out of my ass”. I believe that without knowledge of the context of the graph, statements such as the one the Inquirer made can be described as little more than premature, perhaps even ‘just plain stupid’ if you wish to be critical.

I suppose a discussion of the graph is in order though. Assuming that the only graph in question is the first, I would like to quickly point out that the NV30 box is still placed partially within the year 2002. I appoligize for not translating the graph text in addition to the article, however, I felt it to be outside of the scope of my translation as well as just not relevant to the issue. Plus it’s a bitch to edit graphics in the first place. I will, however, lay down a short translation here.

In my translation I titled the graph as “Nvidia’s Projected Roadmap”, although the title “Projected Nvidia [GPU] Roadmap” may be more accurate, as Nvidia did not create this roadmap in particular. As for the text boxes of the graph, I will translate now going top to bottom, with horizontal position having no relevance.

Box pointing to NV31 – “Die-shrunk derivitive part?”
Box pointing to NV35 – “New generation core”
Box pointing to NV3x – “Even further shrunk die value aimed design?”
Box pointing to NV28/18 – “AGP 8x support”
Box pointing to NV31/31M - “Mainstream and mobile [parts] are the same core”
Box pointing to GeForce4 MX/GO / nForce2 - “Mainstream, mobile, and integrated [parts] are the same core”
Box pointing to NV3x / ?? - “These 2 cores the same?”

The title at the top of the actual graph graphic was of course the same as the text title in the article. I hope that you are able to come to the same conclusion that I have now that you have the same knowledge of the PC Watch article as I do. I suppose that I will leave now with a copy of an email which I just sent the inquirer this morning after reading their most recent article in relation to this issue.

##########################################
Well, I seem to have at least caught your attention with what I did over the weekend. I would ask that we try to avoid any kind of personal war from this point on, if that is possible. Is it?

At any rate, I would have treated you much differently, and probably think of you differently now, if you would have simply told me that your interpretation of the PC Watch article was based on its graphs. However, even with this insight, it does not change the fact that your interpretation of the article, or rather its graph, was incorrect. If you would look closely at the graph that you based your statement on, you will notice that the box representing the NV30 is placed such that it is still partially inside the year 2002. Likewise, if you have read my translation of the article (http://home.attbi.com/~bobcraig4/kaigai01_-_translation.htm), I am sure you have been made even more clear that your paraphrasing of the article is not correct.

I can see how someone could take the graph as indicating the presence of 'inside information', however I do not believe that the graph in and of itself is sufficient to say that PC Watch 'claims to have inside information'. That came off on me as being a fabrication when I read it. I can also see how someone, particularly if that someone were to have poor eyesight (not that you do), could misinterpret the said graph as being one that "indicates Nvidia will introduce its next graphics chip technology in the first quarter of new year", however, in light of what I have told you it should be apparent that this interpretation is incorrect.

Lastly, as you seem to have felt it necessary to bring it up in a Monday article, I will admit that perhaps my first email to you was a bit over the top. I suppose the only excuse I can make is that I was prompted by the "flame editor" hyperlink that clicked before sending it. But surely you must be used to things like that by now?

Oh, and just for the record, my name is Nick Craig, not Bob Craig, who happens to be my dad. Hopefully misunderstandings like that won't occur anymore once I'm able to amass enough money to move into an apartment of my own this term, but, as I'm sure you can imagine, college student isn't exactly the most profitable existences to hold on this planet.

Truly,

Nick Craig
##########################################

And that’s that. I very much so hope that I receive a competent response from Mr. Magee, although to be frank, I’m not expecting all that much.
Nick Craig

[Solomon]

WoW! Do you feel threaten that you have to make personal attacks now?

Making the assumption amercians = dumbf&cks... Well you won't be gaining any kind of ground of acceptance off of that one. And you call me acting 12 years old?

You still don't get it. Taking something as a chart or an excerpt and turning it around into a news post that sounds something more when it's not is called, MISLEADING and not humour as what you put it.

Please explain then when companies such as Briefing.com take excerpts from the so called, humorous posts which the Inquirer is doing according to you and uses them to inform their investors, business clients of what may come out of it ? ? You find that humorous? I find that sad and very damaging to business's.

Are these the type of people that The Inquirer's viewers are based off of? Ouch... But it's o.k. we American are dumbf&cks. I forgot...

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com

[saturnotaku]

Someone ought to take that article and the translation to NVIDIA and let them lay the smack down on the Inq. That might shut 'em up for a while.

[Solomon]

Where is Hampshire, IL. ? Is that up north or something by Gurnee ?

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com

[rmannstaedt]

Nick, thanks again for your posts. They are a pleasure to read. I much prefer an intelligent discourse to a flame war, and you are clearing things up masterfully.

Yes, with the information you supply I definitely concur: the Inquirer article was misinformed and misleading in parts. There is no reference to an "insider source" in the Japanese text, and (as I also pointed out) the box does lie within (the very last part of) 2002 and not at the start of 2003.

The Inquirer does qualify their statement in the next paragraph however. Which, taken together with Nvidia's official reply to the story as referred in the updated article, means that I don't think the article as such is misleading. But the PCWatch reference is wrong.

I do hope you receive a competent reply from Mr. Magee.

With respect,
r.

[Solomon]

rmannstaedt.

I remember reading the "unedited" version and it was nothing near what is up their now. Alot has been changed from the previous post which "sparked" the whole name calling and pointing fingers. I wish someone had the original un-edited version to compare to the one that is up there now to show how much has changed...

:confused:

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com

[saturnotaku]

Originally posted by Solomon
Where is Hampshire, IL. ? Is that up north or something by Gurnee ?


Am I guessing you know Gurnee because that's where Visiontek is based? :)

Hampshire is much further southwest, about halfway between Rockford and the Northwest suburbs of Chicago (Schaumburg, Arlington Heights, etc). It's a bit south of I-90 and US 20.

You from the Chicago area, Solomon?

[Solomon]

Yep, I live in a scrungee part called, Hanover Park. I live like 2 blocks from Schaumburg, so I say I'm from there because it's a better neighborhood... Hehe.

I have a few friends that live up by Lake In The Hills and Huntley.

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com

[saturnotaku]

Originally posted by Solomon
Yep, I live in a scrungee part called, Hanover Park. I live like 2 blocks from Schaumburg, so I say I'm from there because it's a better neighborhood... Hehe.

Ahh, Hangover Park. I drive through there every day to and from work. I also work for the newspaper that puts out the Roselle/Itasca/Bartlett/Hanover Park/Streamwood Press. I grew up in Bloomingdale so I know the area extremely well. :)

[nihongaeri]

Here is the message that I sent to Mr. Magee last Friday. While I will admit to perhaps being too harsh with this first email, understand that Mr. Magee hardly seems to discourage this type of inquiry (no joke intended) as his email address is contained in a hyperlink marked “flame editor”.

*******************************
-----Original Message-----
From: Craig
Sent: 07 September 2002 02:27
To: mike.magee@theinquirer.net
Subject: If you can't read Japanese, then don't act like you do!

"A JAPANESE WEB SITE claims to have inside information that indicates Nvidia will introduce its next graphics chip technology in the first quarter of new year, so missing the hectic Yuletide selling season."

This was quoted from one of your articles, and I assume that "a Japanese web site" refers to PCWatch as linked to later in the article. The problem is that this quoted statement in COMPLETELY inaccurate. I read through the linked Japanese article (I have been studying Japanese for 8 years now and have spent 2 and a half of those in Japan) and the part where the author talks of the NV30 becoming available in February in completely SPECULATIVE. At no point does he claim "to have inside information that indicates Nvidia will introduce its next graphics chip technology in the first quarter of new year".

I cannot tell you how displeased I am with this article. If you are going to be reporting rumors, that is one thing, but at LEAST you should be quoting your sources correctly and not be putting words in their mouth. If you read this and are able to acknowledge that you have made a mistake, I expect you to issue a correction and apology to your reading public as soon as possible, as you have reported completely inaccurate information. If you would so need, I would be willing to translate select portions of the Japanese article in order to show your mistake to you, however I would require an amount of time, as things don't just translate themselves.

Nicholas Craig
*******************************

To this email, Mr. Magee replies as follows.

*******************************
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Magee
Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 10:24 PM
To: bobcraig4@attbi.com
Cc: paul.hales@theinquirer.net
Subject: RE: If you can't read Japanese, then don't act like you do!


I really don't know what you're driving at. All the necessary sources are there for you to sort. Including Mr Nvidia himself.

Mike Magee
*******************************

I think it’s interesting to note that a Cc of this mail got fired off to another member of the Inquirer. I obviously solicited some kind of interest in Mr. Magee, although it doesn’t quite appear to be journalistic interest.

At any rate, I don’t see how I had not made it sufficiently clear what I was “driving at”, nor do I see why the quote from “Mr. Nvidia” is relevant to the problem that I had pointed out, however I did have to admit a marginal lack of observation on my part. As such, I sent the next email off.

*******************************
-----Original Message-----
From: Craig
Sent: 07 September 2002 06:54
To: Mike Magee
Subject: One apology and one big question


I must apologize, as I did not read you article carefully enough. I did not clearly understand that your translation source was not you yourself, nor can I, even now, tell with any degree of accuracy what the "Japanese web site" you refer to actually is (see quote written below taken the article in question). I would like to state that I am still running under the assumption that the "Japanese web site" is indeed "PC Watch" a.k.a. Impress. Furthermore, if my assumption is correct (I must assume as you to not state explicitly what this 'Japanese web site' is) the fact still remains that the quote in question is completely inaccurate. If it is not to much, would you please confirm or deny my assumption? The content of my potential future emails will vary greatly based upon this your confirmation or denial.
*******************************

Not to toot my own horn, but I do think this is a fairly levelheaded response. I have in this email, as can clearly be seen, laid out a very clear, not to mention simple, question for Mr. Magee to answer for me. I certainly expected for him to answer it, but...

*******************************
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Magee
Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 4:18 PM
To: bobcraig4@attbi.com
Subject: RE: One apology and one big question


The article was based on three other articles which were complete speculation and indeed it was kind of obvious from the contents we didn't
think much of the rumours either...

In other words, no hard evidence to suggest they were right

Mike
*******************************

Make no mistake, I have no problem admitting that the just of the Inquirer article was more or less where it should have been. It did seem to come to the conclusion that the articles on the linked sites were speculation. However, that much I felt to be obvious. There were “three other articles” linked to in the said Inquirer article. The German one, I cannot read, and thus cannot comment on. The sited information on VR Zone was, in actuality, misinterpreted information from PC Watch. And lastly, the PC Watch article was, as the author functionally professes to it, obviously speculation, as anybody who can read it can see clearly (translation: home.attbi.com/~bobcraig4/kaigai01_-_translation.htm). To be quite straight, I don’t need someone like the Inquirer to tell me that the said linked sites contain speculation.

MUCH more importantly, Mr. Magee seems to have missed the whole point as to why I sent him an email in the first place. It was because of one simple quote, one simple sentence. I thought I had made that clear by starting out my first email with the quote, but appeartlly it didn’t quite fulfill the requirements of Inquirer-level obvious. Here is a reproduction of the quote still yet once again for another time (how’s that for redundancy?).

"A JAPANESE WEB SITE claims to have inside information that indicates Nvidia will introduce its next graphics chip technology in the first quarter of new year, so missing the hectic Yuletide selling season."

I take issue with this quote, and nothing else. Nonetheless, Mr. Magee seems it necessary to defend nothing but the just of the article, nothing but the conclusion. It boggles my mind as to why Mr. Magee would not understand such a seemingly simple problem.

At any rate, I sent this next email in reply.

*******************************
-----Original Message-----
From: Craig
Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 4:45 PM
To: Mike Magee
Subject: Follow-up pertaining to PC Watch NV30 article


While you seem to have chosen not to respond to my previous email, I am sending you this email to make you aware that I have finished my translation of the PC Watch article which you reported on yesterday. It can be viewed at http://home.attbi.com/~bobcraig4/kaigai01_-_translation.htm. Note that your browser will have to be set to SHIFT-JIS Japanese text encoding in order to properly view this translation. I you read through the translation carefully though, I am sure that you will easily see the mistakes of your article published yesterday.
*******************************

I received no reply that day or the next. There was however, an article written by a Paul Hales posted yesterday which touched on the issue, an article called “Rednecks, lies and hardware fakes”, nonetheless. I wonder if any of those three ‘insults’ were directed at me...

Anyhow, here the quote which pertains to me...

*******************************
Some guy called Bob Craig wrote to us to say his Japanese was better than ours. Not hard that one. He objected to the story here and particularly to the phrase "inside information". The information we referred to was in a graphic of a roadmap. We replied to his email, entitled, by the way, "If you can't read Japanese, then don't act like you do!" pointing at the sources quoted in the piece. But in the meantime Mr Craig fired off his missive to anyone who'd listen, it seems, and a right handsome gang of fellows lined up to take a pop at us...
*******************************

So what can I say? The Inquirer has obviously skirted around the issue that I posed to them in the first place, and feels it more important to take jabs at me than to investigate the accuracy of their articles. Go figure.

I still, nonetheless, sent them this reply in response to their article, trying my best not to lose my cool.

*******************************
-----Original Message-----
From: Craig
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 8:10 AM
To: mike.magee@theinquirer.net
Subject: Pertaining to the incorrect paraphrasing of the PC Watch
article...


Well, I seem to have at least caught your attention with what I did over the weekend. I would ask that we try to avoid any kind of personal war from this point on, if that is possible. Is it?

At any rate, I would have treated you much differently, and probably think of you differently now, if you would have simply told me that your interpretation of the PC Watch article was based on its graphs. However, even with this insight, it does not change the fact that your interpretation of the article, or rather its graph, was incorrect. If you would look closely at the graph that you based your statement on, you will notice that the box representing the NV30 is placed such that it is still partially inside the year 2002. Likewise, if you have read my translation of the article (http://home.attbi.com/~bobcraig4/kaigai01_-_translation.htm), I am sure you have been made even more clear that your paraphrasing of the article is not correct.

I can see how someone could take the graph as indicating the presence of 'inside information', however I do not believe that the graph in and of itself is sufficient to say that PC Watch 'claims to have inside information'. That came off on me as being a fabrication when I read it. I can also see how someone, particularly if that someone were to have poor eyesight (not that you do), could misinterpret the said graph as being one that "indicates Nvidia will introduce its next graphics chip technology in the first quarter of new year", however, in light of what I have told you it should be apparent that this interpretation is incorrect.

Lastly, as you seem to have felt it necessary to bring it up in a Monday article, I will admit that perhaps my first email to you was a bit over the top. I suppose the only excuse I can make is that I was prompted by the "flame editor" hyperlink that clicked before sending it. But surely you must be used to things like that by now?

Oh, and just for the record, my name is Nick Craig, not Bob Craig, who happens to be my dad. Hopefully misunderstandings like that won't occur anymore once I'm able to amass enough money to move into an apartment of my own this term, but, as I'm sure you can imagine, college student isn't exactly the most profitable existences to hold on this planet.

Truly,

Nick Craig
*******************************

So, do I expect them to respond to my email? Not really. If they are so ignorant as to not be able to understand the problem I presented in the first place, I suppose they have already labeled me as a ‘loony’ in their minds. If they have noticed their mistake, then, outside of completely ignoring the issue, they have no other path to take than to concede to my case, thus humiliating themselves to some degree in the process.

I personally am not one to gloat though. If they are willing to swallow their pride and admit some kind of fault on their end, I am more than willing to forgive them, and give them the respect they would deserve for doing so, as truly admitting to fault can one of the hardest things a human can do.

But personally, based on what I know of the Inquirer and Mr. Magee, I suspect that pride will get the best of them. Quite a shame really.

[Solomon]

What a joke his response is. As always they take NO RESPONSIBILITY OF THEIR ACTIONS. Just simply re-edit and stick with the new story. Sad...

The article was based on three other articles which were complete speculation and indeed it was kind of obvious from the contents we didn't

Like I said, I would LOVE to see the original post, because they made no statement that this was rather, "opinionated and rumor based" at all. If they did, Then Briefing.com would have never quoted such a thing.

I guess that is just a typical response from Mr. Magoo. Don't you love the power of "EDIT!". I guess that's typical in the world of the grocery store check out line news.

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com

[nihongaeri]

I likewise find respect in anyone who is honestly willing to see another persons point of view. Cheers to you

I seem to concur with you fully. I make no issue of the Inquirer’s overall conclusion in the said article. I only take issue with one sentence. I would also note, that the reason that I got drawn into this thing in the first place was because Nvnews had reported that briefing.com (I believe) had reported that the Inquirer had “reported” that PC Watched “claimed” something. Mind you, the only thing that was reported on briefing.com was the content of the sentence that I took issue with. At any rate, I analyzed the situation, found fault, and determined that that fault lied with the Inquirer. I’m not sure yet to what effect my efforts have actually been.

I guess this is just a lesson to us all of how rumors can get started.

Anyway, but of luck to you,

Nick

[StealthHawk]

the people who run the Inquirer are all egomaniacs who can't take criticism or admit they're wrong. whenever someone calls them out(on the reliability of their reporting) they always blow a fuse and insult said critics...in a new article!?

pulling stunts like that is nothing but childish, especially on a "news site."

[volt]

smartasses that's all...

[volt]

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=5343

go to the middle of the page.

[Solomon]

LOL!! Yeah all 2 of their reader base that came here to report back to their camp to say we don't like their pathetic attempts at making news post.

The InQuirer is truly one of the biggest Egotistic sites out there. This Paul Hales needs to be taken out back and shot. (I'm waiting for them to quote this so they think I'm serious about the last statement)

:D

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com

[volt]

Originally posted by Solomon
LOL!! Yeah all 2 of their reader base that came here to report back to their camp to say we don't like their pathetic attempts at making news post.

The InQuirer is truly one of the biggest Egotistic sites out there. This Paul Hales needs to be taken out back and shot. (I'm waiting for them to quote this so they think I'm serious about the last statement)

:D

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com

Hahah...I wonder how many trolls registered just to post/report back hahah.

Inq: is there any chance you can mention me in your article? Or should I reveal more truth about your "news posting process" :o

[Solomon]

Hahahaha... Good one man! Mention me too Inq! LOl

Regards,
D. Solomon Jr.
*********.com

[Kruno]

The Inquirer are a bunch of right wing extremists.