ThomasM[PuristS]
14331
If someone doesn't agree with you, "there is no hope."
Jun 11, 2013,09:05 AM
Dear georgeb,
1. Your posts and this thread are still up. 'nuf said.
2. If someone disagrees with you, your reply is you are "attacked" ...sorry, that just ain't so (granted, there are some posts here that have turned ad hominem, but given how you presented the OP, with conclusions so conclusively drawn, I can understand why if there is a history with you. Regardless, I hope discussions here can stay above the ad hominem level as long as possible...)
If you want the courtesy of expressing your opinion, please allow others to express theirs too...
3. From your OP -
" the 'coincidences' are just too precise and many. Down to the smallest details"
In the spirit of (2) above, I simply disagree, and others have given other examples besides the original example I gave of the Calatrava, and the points they raise are valid defenses against your conclusion, even if they don't necessarily prove there was no intent to copy. In the interest of intellectual rigour, I will allow that the creator of an original design can still later on become a copy of another design, even if that later design was a copy (or inspired by) the original design...
You conveniently ignore, for example, Amanico's point that the Longines Legend Diver was released BEFORE the JLC Polaris (and of course, from that period, there were many other examples remarkably similar...)
You conveniently ignore the historical lineage of the Weems (so why don't you claim the Cartier Astrotourbillon copied the original Weems?)
You conveniently ignore the Type A-7 history, which has been pointed out to you by others in this thread.
The stepped bezel and the bracelet details of the La Dolce Vita are different enough from the various Tank models that I just don't see the problem. But obviously you do, so good on you, and why, so far, your OP and thread are still up.
To your follow up post -
"I've heard the arguments in defense of Longines. Most are along the lines of
- Vehement emotional response. "are you kidding?", "get over it!". "Blasphemy!""
These responses are no more egregious than your original conclusion skewering Longines. So far, none of these responses were ad hominem against you.
You have (so far) been allowed to present your case, with clearly drawn conclusions (in your mind) which were presented with equal vigour.
So let me get this right - you feel you should be allowed to present your ideas and conclusions, but others are not allowed to respond or disagree?
hmmmm...
"- Citation of Longines long history. And that obviously means Longines can never do wrong."
In absolu, I agree this is not a proper defense against the accusation you raise originally, but it is no weaker than some of the dubious (and in a couple cases, factually and historically wrong) arguments you originally presented.
for example, you state, "Longines has no previous model in its history with this rotated dial and crown at 45degs. "
yet that statement is clearly wrong.
"- Conspiratory attacks. "he must have ulterior motives". "he's evil!"'
I personally don't like how quickly this thread deteriorated, but if there is a history elsewhere, I can understand it. However, for the standards of THIS site and community, I'd prefer that threads and points raised locally, are addressed locally, to the extent reasonably possible.
Whether or not you or any poster have an agenda, if the fundamental points raised have any intellectual merit, they should be allowed to be examined and discussed, separately, to the extent possible.
That has always been a principle here, and I hope that will remain a principle here as long as the site exists.
That does NOT mean one's conduct and character elsewhere have no bearing here, just that I hope we can also see beyond that if there are substantive issues and points to be considered.
"- Pure coincidence"
This is a reasonable (if true) though weak, counterpoint. But I don't see who or which post uses "pure coincidence" as a counterpoint to yours?
"Honestly, it sounds like I am speaking against the Church, bureaucrats, or some established institution. The methods of attack are oddly similar.
I understand the watch industry is both a hobby and a business. Longines is part of the Swatch group after all. And frankly this forum and others rely on advertising business from these vendors and it is in everybody's interest to squash any controversy. Then there are the Longines owners and the ones who blindly believe. How different is this from an authoritarian government or cult, where any dissent is attacked? Where the leaders are the ones with true ulterior motives (in this case profits), and the followers are fools?
Go ahead, keep living in that perfect fantasy world, where Longines can do no wrong. Where time keeps perfectly and every movement is perfectly polished and beveled. Where egos and business interests are immaculately safeguarded.
Cartier Tank, and Longines DolceVita. If you can't see the same bracelet, dial, and details, I'm sorry - there is no hope for you."
This last is where you really have shown yourself - see above
This thread remains up and open for discussion, so far. 'nuf said.
Cheers,
TM
"