OT Court lets Automaker sue Consumer Reports

A lane change, simulating a child running out, or a car pulling out. Yeah, when's the last time that ever happened?

Unless JDP or any other such group puts a gun to people's heads and forces them to respond, all such surveys are from people who've selected to answer them.

1. No Caprice is going to run something like a BMW, Audi, Mercedes, Saab, etc., off the road.
2. The way Detroit has traditionally improved handling is to make the ride rock-hard.

So your arguement is that CR is ok because someone else might use the same bad methods.

BTW, in the latest issue of CR, CR ranks the Focus SVT as among their top-rated sporty cars, and CR says the Focus reliability has improved to an average level recently.

(snip)

(snip)

I don't think you can libel a car, or a toaster, or any thing. I think only a person can be libeled. See:

(snip)

Given Suzuki's ongoing series of defeats in US courts, doubtful.

Neil, you need to learn to attribute your quotes properly. You're quoting something written by Joseph Oberlander, yet you've included the names of previous contributors to the thread without including any of their text. This is improper and confusing, so please stop doing it. Proper protocol is to include ONLY the names of those whose text you are including in your quote, and to include ONLY the text sufficient to make your point.

DS

Lane changes and rapid maneuvers didn't do it either. They had to re-invent a harder test until it reliably failed. This was well beyond what you would expect in anything other than a serious emergency(where you roll the dice anyways).

A name brand is considered a "person" for such purposes. Coke can't say Pepsi is made out of cow's piss on TV for instance.

My argument is there is no such thing as a survey that's not to some extent "self-selected", so to single out CR's survey as bad for that reason makes no sense.

The CR test is a swerve into the lane to the left followed by a swerve back into the original lane. That is known as a "lane change."

I didn't single out CR's survey. I believe polls and surveys are all hopelessly flawed and in some cases manipulated to produce a desired result.

My recent favorite was a poll take in Iraq. It asked people what nations government structure they wanted the new government of Iraq to emulate. There were several less than desirable choices, like siria, and lastly the USA. Of course most people picked the USA. there were no choices like the UK, germany, etc. It was a loaded question.

So I didn't single out CR's survey, I believe it to be about as valuable as most surveys, worth less than the paper it's printed on. But I am glad you agree that it is similiar to other surveys that are worthless.

Which is still beside the point. Read the above carefully and understand its impact. While the US is founded on Judeo-Christian morality, the legal system has of necessity evolved into a separate thing. The necessity comes of inconsistencies in the moral *codes* underlying it. Were the moral code solely Judaism, we would logically have prohibited the raising and consumption of pork, wouldn't we? Were it solely Christian, Christmas would be unquestioned as a religious holiday. But it's not, in either case. Law and justice in the US is clearly *not* a system of determining right and wrong, but merely one of determining 'allowed' or 'not allowed' *at the time*. If you doubt that, think about abortion laws.

Then I will amend that to 'You seem to have a problem *accepting* what our system of justice is and how it functions.' You're not alone.

The 'If' was *disjunctive*. I meant *if* I'm selling BS, I want an ignorant jury. Usually, I'm not. Make sense now?

To our mutual regret, I am sure. ;^)

-- C.R. Krieger (Been there; done that)

anything

(where you roll the

Consumer Reports test results help you roll a 7 instead of craps.

Of course? You're making an unwarranted assumption. That poll was intended to distinguish between Western democratic systems and a few other choices, not among the Western democratic systems. Note that the "obviously" less-than-desirable choice of totalitarian monarchy Saudia Arabia came in second, 28% to the US's 37%.

Given the choices, the expected result is the USA. Whatever you want to claim the motivation behind the carefully crafted question is, it remains carefully crafted with an expected result.

Here are the choices:

USA Egypt Syria Iran Saudi Arabia

This isn't much of a choice, nor is it representive of the various governments to model one after on the planet. If the choice was between forms why is their not a communist form mentioned? If it was supposed to be western style democracy vs. these regional systems why not use Israel as regional example instead of the USA? Bet there'd be a much different result with that swap. And that's the point I am trying to make, questions can be crafted to get a result.

VILLAGER: We have found a witch. May we burn her? ALL: A Witch! Burn her! BEDEVERE: How do you know she is a witch? ALL: She looks like one. Yes, she does. BEDEVERE: Why do you think she is a witch? VILLAGER: She turned me into a newt. BEDEVERE: A newt? VILLAGER: (After looking at himself for some time) I got better. ALL: Burn her anyway.

Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Scene 5.

What's even stupider is that most likely just about all poll respondents have never actually experienced US-style democracy so how anyone could assume they were making any kind of informed choice is beyond me.

Ted

Except right-wingers are the first to complain about frivolous lawsuits and demand that judges throw out suits that don't have compelling evidence to back them up. The judge here did exactly that.