Because I am the one who originally made the 'business model' argument.Date: 7/3/2008 11:10:31 AM
Author: Isabelle
I think my post makes clear that the 'jealous girls' I referred to are the ones who made an extra effort to log on to LM's website and give CR's gorgeous ring a lowball rating. No doubt you are not one of the ones who did that, so I can't really see how this connects to you at all. Maybe I am missing something. But in any case, the fact is that there was clearly some strange coordinated effort to lowball her ring. It received well over 100 ratings which seems a bit odd in itself. Even BEFORE Lostsapphire suggested some people go on there to rate her ring more fairly, it had received an inordinately high number of ratings. My observation about what could have motivated the pettiness seems to speak for itself since her ring is magnificent, by any standards.Date: 7/3/2008 10:28:23 AM
Author: Harriet
Is an argument ad hominem sophistry? I made the 'business purpose' argument. I am neither jealous of CrookedRock's ring, nor do I have reason to be.Date: 7/3/2008 10:13:59 AM
Author: Isabelle
And in fact, all those complaints about the 5 star reviews skewing the 'business model' of LM's reviews are sophistry: the only reason the ring got a low review to begin with is due to jealous girls going on there and low balling it out of envy.
P.S. I'm hungry, so I'll have a slice of pie, please.