Anyone else thinking of ditching their Oakleys?

124

Comments

  • neeb
    neeb Posts: 4,473
    Bozman wrote:
    MattC59 wrote:
    Just seen this, my take; get a grip and don't be so f*cking stupid !

    Spot on
    Great minds think alike.
  • MattC59
    MattC59 Posts: 5,408
    neeb wrote:
    MattC59 wrote:
    Just seen this, my take; get a grip and don't be so f*cking stupid !
    Thank you for your useful and well argued contribution.

    Sorry, you've misunderstood, my mistake, let me explain: It wasn't supposed to be useful or well argued, just a bit of common sense.
    Science adjusts it’s beliefs based on what’s observed.
    Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved
  • neeb
    neeb Posts: 4,473
    MattC59 wrote:
    neeb wrote:
    MattC59 wrote:
    Just seen this, my take; get a grip and don't be so f*cking stupid !
    Thank you for your useful and well argued contribution.

    Sorry, you've misunderstood, my mistake, let me explain: It wasn't supposed to be useful or well argued, just a bit of common sense.
    Strange, just comes across as pointless and offensive shouting from the sidelines to me.
  • MattC59
    MattC59 Posts: 5,408
    neeb wrote:
    MattC59 wrote:
    neeb wrote:
    MattC59 wrote:
    Just seen this, my take; get a grip and don't be so f*cking stupid !
    Thank you for your useful and well argued contribution.

    Sorry, you've misunderstood, my mistake, let me explain: It wasn't supposed to be useful or well argued, just a bit of common sense.
    Strange, just comes across as pointless and offensive shouting from the sidelines to me.

    And to that I could repeat my original comment.
    Science adjusts it’s beliefs based on what’s observed.
    Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved
  • neeb
    neeb Posts: 4,473
    MattC59 wrote:
    neeb wrote:
    MattC59 wrote:
    neeb wrote:
    MattC59 wrote:
    Just seen this, my take; get a grip and don't be so f*cking stupid !
    Thank you for your useful and well argued contribution.

    Sorry, you've misunderstood, my mistake, let me explain: It wasn't supposed to be useful or well argued, just a bit of common sense.
    Strange, just comes across as pointless and offensive shouting from the sidelines to me.

    And to that I could repeat my original comment.
    You can repeat it as often as you like, it won't start to magically acquire interest and relevance.
  • shipley
    shipley Posts: 549
    neeb wrote:
    Shipley wrote:
    b*lox to those who think otherwise :)
    Oh yes I see, I didn't think of that. Clearly you have a point.

    I think it's time for your medication old chap.....
  • stickman
    stickman Posts: 791
    If a company gets scammed by a drug cheat why would people boycott the victim?
    Bikes, saddles and stuff

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/21720915@N03/
    More stuff:
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/65587945@N00/

    Gears - Obscuring the goodness of singlespeed
  • Paul 8v
    Paul 8v Posts: 5,458
    I use Oakleys because they (In my opinion) make very good sunglasses and I've never had an issue with them.

    If I applied this logic to all companies I'd not watch Sky TV, never drink in Starbucks, etc etc. I can understand why people are annoyed at Oakley for staying with Armstrong but I'm not sure how much of a protest ditching the glasses you've already bought is? It's not like Oakley would find out and if they did it wouldn't affect them in any way.

    Not buying any more makes more sense.
    Road
    MTB
    NEW Cross
    Track/Grass Track/Winter bike
  • EdgarAllenPoe
    EdgarAllenPoe Posts: 48
    Lol, I love Britain's culture of competitive outrage. Hilarious. It's not enough to be outraged but you have to be more outraged than the next man.

    I've got 2 pairs of Oakleys and love them, will continue to wear them. My worth as a person is not judged by my eyewear. I'd still wear them if Robert Mugabe was spotted wearing a pair.
  • desweller
    desweller Posts: 5,175
    You're ALL wrong.
    - - - - - - - - - -
    On Strava.{/url}
  • MattC59
    MattC59 Posts: 5,408
    I'm never going to buy a Vauxhall car again, because Fred West drove one.
    Science adjusts it’s beliefs based on what’s observed.
    Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved
  • desweller
    desweller Posts: 5,175
    MattC59 wrote:
    I'm never going to buy a Vauxhall car again, because Fred West drove one.

    Fred West was sponsored by Vauxhall? Not an immediately obvious association, I suppose those marketing bods at GM know what they're doing...
    - - - - - - - - - -
    On Strava.{/url}
  • MattC59
    MattC59 Posts: 5,408
    DesWeller wrote:
    MattC59 wrote:
    I'm never going to buy a Vauxhall car again, because Fred West drove one.

    Fred West was sponsored by Vauxhall? Not an immediately obvious association, I suppose those marketing bods at GM know what they're doing...

    Nope, just drove one; but I'd assumed from the original post that this thread was about making daft comments, so I thought I'd join in.
    Science adjusts it’s beliefs based on what’s observed.
    Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved
  • cornerblock
    cornerblock Posts: 3,228
    The fake ones are fine though. :wink:
  • desweller
    desweller Posts: 5,175
    Cornerblock wrote:
    The fake ones are fine though. :wink:

    Fake Vauxhalls?
    - - - - - - - - - -
    On Strava.{/url}
  • MattC59
    MattC59 Posts: 5,408
    DesWeller wrote:
    Cornerblock wrote:
    The fake ones are fine though. :wink:

    Fake Vauxhalls?

    Saabs :D
    Science adjusts it’s beliefs based on what’s observed.
    Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved
  • cornerblock
    cornerblock Posts: 3,228
    Most models available.

    why-car-sunglasses-are-better-than-car-lashes-44675-7.jpg
  • murf1480
    murf1480 Posts: 117
    Gaspode wrote:
    Bozman wrote:
    This is turning pathetic, i can't believe that anyone would ditch a product because of the Armstrong connection, i am finding it hilarious that foik are feeling that way, it's a comical side show that's attached to the serious side of the issue.
    +1[/quote


    +2
  • hipshot
    hipshot Posts: 371
    I'm thinking of ditching my Oakleys because of this thread.
  • neeb
    neeb Posts: 4,473
    murf1480 wrote:
    Gaspode wrote:
    Bozman wrote:
    This is turning pathetic, i can't believe that anyone would ditch a product because of the Armstrong connection, i am finding it hilarious that foik are feeling that way, it's a comical side show that's attached to the serious side of the issue.
    +1[/quote


    +2
    I've explained several times how that's not what I said. If people are too fraking stupid or lazy to read it but nonetheless feel the urge to come on here and take pot shots at a straw man, so be it - bizarre and (genuinely) pathetic, but whatever keeps you happy.

    Just for the record, I don't have any major problems with Oakley's stance since they announced two days ago that they are continuing to support Armstrong mainly for contractual reasons, stated publicly that the evidence against him is convincing, and effectively said that they will dump him when the UCI ratify the USADA decision (expected on Monday). That's not how it looked when I started the thread however, when it seemed that Oakley might continue to support Armstrong indefinitely, effectively denying that he doped. That to my mind would have been sufficient reason to kick up a fuss, although in retrospect I can't see how they would have been able to sustain such a position for very long.

    It's pretty tragic the way this thread developed, and how it seems to be impossible now on this forum to have a proper discussion about an issue like this. I think the thread in its entirety speaks for itself and that some of you should be thoroughly ashamed of yourselves. Just don't expect me to spend any time helping you out next time you don't know what size frame to buy or your bottom bracket is creaking.
  • MattC59
    MattC59 Posts: 5,408
    Well, if you make stupid comments, you have to expect stupid responses.
    Science adjusts it’s beliefs based on what’s observed.
    Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved
  • Mikey23
    Mikey23 Posts: 5,306
    I'm not going to buy oakleys in the forseeable future because I ain't going to spend large amounts of dosh on a pair of sunglasses. Lovely lance has no bearing on my decision
  • cornerblock
    cornerblock Posts: 3,228
    neeb wrote:
    Just don't expect me to spend any time helping you out next time you don't know what size frame to buy or your bottom bracket is creaking.

    Oakley dokey.
  • MattC59
    MattC59 Posts: 5,408
    Cornerblock wrote:
    neeb wrote:
    Just don't expect me to spend any time helping you out next time you don't know what size frame to buy or your bottom bracket is creaking.

    Oakley dokey.

    :lol:
    Science adjusts it’s beliefs based on what’s observed.
    Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved
  • vfast1
    vfast1 Posts: 98
    This is Wiggles fault!
    Winter Road - 2014 Boardman Sport
    MTB - 2012 Canyon Nerve XC 7
    Summer Road - 2012 Cannondale Supersix 105 Liquigas Colours
  • ai_1
    ai_1 Posts: 3,060
    Wow, this thread has gone horribly wrong.

    Neeb - While I disagreed with your position earlier in the thread I could see your rationale and appreciate your willingness to consider whether a principle was at stake. However, given some of the ignorance displayed in some recent posts by others I'd say you're best to just leave the thread alone. It seems to me there are plenty people, probably the majority, who just don't understand the concept of taking a personal stance on grounds of principle. Everything ends up getting boiled down to personal gains and losses. These are the same people responsible for the politicians we tend to end up with.....but that's another topic.
    I'll say no more...well not unless I get a sensible response which seems unlikley!
  • neeb
    neeb Posts: 4,473
    Hi Al_1, Thanks for having the courage to stick your head above the parapet... :wink:

    Yeah, I'd come the the same conclusion myself. Not sure how many people haven't understood or haven't bothered to read and how many just enjoy laying in when they smell blood on a internet forum... The latter is an ugly business that really pisses me off whether it's me or someone else at the receiving end - fortunately I'm old enough and thick skinned enough not to be unduly bothered by it and (unfortunately?) stubborn enough keep flogging a dead horse... But enough is enough, I'm going to unsubscribe from the thread and leave it at that.
  • cornerblock
    cornerblock Posts: 3,228
    Ai_1 wrote:
    Wow, this thread has gone horribly wrong.

    Neeb - While I disagreed with your position earlier in the thread I could see your rationale and appreciate your willingness to consider whether a principle was at stake. However, given some of the ignorance displayed in some recent posts by others I'd say you're best to just leave the thread alone. It seems to me there are plenty people, probably the majority, who just don't understand the concept of taking a personal stance on grounds of principle. Everything ends up getting boiled down to personal gains and losses. These are the same people responsible for the politicians we tend to end up with.....but that's another topic.
    I'll say no more...well not unless I get a sensible response which seems unlikley!

    Rationale, ignorance, politicians? We are talking about wearing a pair of sunglasses here!

    "These are the same people responsible for the politicians we tend to end up with" !!!!!!! You need to be careful, you're in danger of sounding a bit pompous and humourless.

    128905902935048544.jpg

    How apt.
  • bianchimoon
    bianchimoon Posts: 3,942
    I agree al_1 a lot more people than normal are winding up for winding ups sake , unusually the normal sane rational people who you wouldn't expect to be so contrary. Neeb you've done nothing wrong just expressed an opinion don't worry and please carry on posting as normal.
    All lies and jest..still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest....
  • DF33
    DF33 Posts: 732
    I can't understand it either.

    OP has his opinion, either agree or disagree with it. Personally I can't see the point of selling the glasses now but that's by the by.

    He has, however, a reasond responce in that;
    As Oakley has stated why they are still with LA due to contract and not wanting other athletes to worry they will be dropped before being proven guilty,
    also stating that they will drop him on Monday once the announcement is confirmed,

    OP has agreed that the situation is now understandable and therefore Oakley are not blindly worshipping LA for an income stream.

    So seems the OP is thinking reasonably imo. So why the negative 'attacks' against him?

    Imo Oakley are to be applauded in upholding innocent until proven guilty, in this case the nearest to guilty will be the announcement coming soon.
    Peter

Categories