hey Ashley,
ive been in the car bussiness for 5 years. now i know im not a F*$kin vetrin like you but you have know idea what your talking about. I have worked for seveal car manufactures and have seen alot of the manufactures in and out. The problem is that mazda has a problem with transmission and they know it. Just a tip to every one. when ever a can manufature ask to break down the transmission it means 3 things. They don't have anough transmions, They know they have a problem, and know mater what is inside they are still going to bill you for it. It comes down to the fact that mazda does not want to pay for it. Any transmission that has burnt trans fluid at 30k has a defect. Also there is no possible way that a mechanic(who by the way does not give 2 *****) can tell if it was missabuse or a deffect and if you USED to work as a warenty guy than you know that. I know what job you had. maybe theres a reason you dont have one anymore

I have had plenty of cars from 2nd gen rx7s to bmws to hondas.
I drove my bmw from day 1
and I downshifted every day
it 91 with over 200k on it.
It lasted because it was built right

So do me a favor and think befor you SH*t out of you mouth.

 

The use of the colon in my post merly is designed to introduce the following sentence, as the two are related. In the event you still think it was intended to quote moive lines allow me to illustrate further. After "Madison" I could have used a simple period; however, the two sentences are related. Thus, the use of the colon draws the two together in perfect harmony. If I wished to quote from the movie I would have written:

This thread reminds me of the movie, Billy Madison, in which was stated: ...

My use is in accordance with the rules of grammar, and is what could be considered "proper". I will be available to provide references if needed. Point and laugh if you will, but you are pointing and laughing at your own ignorance.

 

since when are australians a diffrent race? racism is the biggest crock of ****. people don;t even know what it is anymore. people love their sterotypes. They hide behind them to fling mud at others.

An australian could be black white or green. So could an american a jew or a african.

 

I'm very disappointed in your choice of blows. I suppose it was too much to ask for well thought out banter. Not to say I set the bar very high with my obvious copy-paste method, but standards went through the basement with that. I am feeling a bit nostalgic with such a post though, as I have not herd my name twisted in such a childish way since elementary school. Perhaps next time you won't write just the first thing that pops into your head -- you could at least give me the second. I even picked out some of the better jokes. I suppose you should get a point for effort, though. I offer in response the simple word: touche.

On a different subject though, the term: "orright". Are you attempting to input your accent into your writing? If this is the case why? Don't you feel it would be more clear if you used actual words? Also, what do the six periods mean?

 

Are you serious? He responded in a perfectly good natured way. He even included a smiley. If you are, get over yourself and get back to the thread topic. BTW you have a sentance fragment in your post.

 

Although, one could define race as, "a group of people united or classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographic distribution," this definition is only in use due to common usage. Even the term "human race" is not accurate. Humans are only considered to be a race due to common usage of terms such as these. This is why many intellectuals today even refuse to claim that humanity, as a whole, is a race. Even according to dictionary.com, from where the above quote came, "Many cultural anthropologists now consider race to be more a social or mental construct than an objective biological fact." I am even familiar with terms such as "Australoid"; this term does not mean all Australians, I should note. However, I digress form the topic at hand. The term "racism" has become way overused in our society today. I could cite examples all day including accusations of "racism" or even "reverse racism" (a peculiar topic indeed since that would be "not racism"). I grow tired of its use since it tends to be used only by those who are ignorant and hold a serious lack of knowledge to what true racism is. I think, with the exception of a few cases, this term should not be used at all. This is largely due to the extreme negative connotation that is associated with it. The problem with the word racism is that it can be used to describe such a great many different things. Since the word has such a negative connotation this can lead to many frivolous lawsuits, various administrative punishment, and a great deal of other things. This whole topic is both fascinating and disturbing. I noticed you were from California, so I must ask a few questions. Are you Australian? If not, do you feel the people from Australia are so helpless that they need a high school teenager to come to their rescue? Maybe you would feel better if I discussed California. I would not have trouble finding various examples of California hypocrisy --I may even begin a new thread called just that in the lounge area if you wish. On a final note: What is the ":/"? Please describe what this is supposed to represent. Is this the same thing as ":\"?

 

Yes, I am serious. I never even said he was not good natured. I think my reply was also in a good natured way. His post did not hurt me in any way; I don't think mine hurt him either. I even gave him a touche. I think that in it of itself says it all. As for the fragment, I thank you for pointing that out.

 

this is more pathitic than the thread it is based on. you guys are fighting about grammar on a thread that has nothing to do with it.

and the owner of the thread has let it go.

let it go. you guys might have fun on ;.com or grammar.pathatic.com. or **** into the wind, buy a vowel vana. spelling incorrect intentional.

thats got to hurt.

beers

 

die thread die

 

i concour, DIE DIE DIE.

it was easier before the emails came back.

beers

 

Yes.. Die thread..
Oh.. and it will..

And just an FYI: Flame warring isnt allowed on these forums, neither is trolling.

 

WAIT!!!! Don't let the thread die!! I was sitting in my car the other day while waiting for my girlfriend to get ready and was reading the manual. If I remeber correctly, the manual said to downshift to save the brakes, or maybe it was the other way around? I really don't care, but 1000 bucks is on the line. I'll go and get the manual NOW!!! LOL 1000 bucks MINES!!!! LOL



2004 RX-8 Manual Page 5-9:

Down Shifting:
"When you slow down in heavy traffic or on a steep upgrade, downshift before the engine starts to overwork. This reduces the chance of stalling and gives better acceleration when you need more speed.
On a steep downgrade, downshifting helps maintain safe speed and prolongs brake life."


There, I think I win. Possibly not, or possibly I was damn wrong. I am just damn bored.

 

Dead.