Comments on: Daily Podcast: Sex and the Motor City

By: Riz

Riz — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 19:47:13 +0000

I’d personally prefer the caustic and zinging wit without the excessive vulgarity. I read the post in my RSS reader, and was a bit put off. Not enough to turn elsewhere for my dose of car biz honesty, though.

By: jurisb

jurisb — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 06:35:53 +0000

Robert , isn`t that a challenge, that “me thinks“ and passive voice are taboos at the same time? :)

By: lprocter1982

lprocter1982 — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 13:46:58 +0000

I’d say this site versus, say, C&D, is that TTAC is the truth according to someone like me or you, while C&D is the truth according to the manufacturer… which is often not terribly accurate (eg, electric only range of 200 miles for the Tesla!)

By: Nemphre

Nemphre — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 07:29:19 +0000

or pointing out that the words “I think” completely undermine a car reviewer’s credibility.

I actually like it when a reviewer acknowledges that their review is an opinion. It annoys me when they try to pass it off as some kind of universal truth. This site is called The Truth About Cars, but the reviews don’t express a truth that is real for every person. They’re someone’s truthful opinion. No pulled punches or manufacturer sway.

By: Robstar

Robstar — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 05:44:01 +0000

I did not see the article but from the description in this article, I’m glad the article was pulled.

The last thing I want to see is this blog turn into something that can be defended as “boys will be boys”. Isn’t that so 30+ years ago’ish ?

I am saddened by some of the comments here giving props to what seems like a sexist, male only viewpoint/article.

By: garythepowers

garythepowers — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 05:22:01 +0000

Make sure you check out the photo comments, especially on this site, there is a usually a little comic “gem” there for the readers. This time that “gem” could cut glass.

By: Buickman

Buickman — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 00:05:04 +0000

written a few editorials myself at GeneralWatch while “in a mood”. found yours a surprise and have no problem, actually it was rather cool. but for the better that you cleaned it up.

By: Richard Chen

Richard Chen — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 22:37:53 +0000

There ought to be a car blog done under the influence – you have to flunk a breathalyzer test before setting hands on the keyboard.

In the meantime, Jezebel.com has Pot Psychology.

By: geggamoya

geggamoya — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 21:27:10 +0000

lprocter1982 –> Yes, titbags, i can see it now..

By: Jeff Puthuff

Jeff Puthuff — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 21:11:49 +0000

“It’s just one more reason TTAC will never be the autoblogosphere’s “newspaper of record.”

I’m going to borrow a phrase that a man of great influence recently wrote: Grow a set already.

TTAC has ruined for me the buff books and other blogs that exist solely to attract auto manufacturer attention and money_-_for the better.

By: lprocter1982

lprocter1982 — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 21:02:37 +0000

They should make Pamela Anderson special editions of cars. No airbags required.

By: alexeck

alexeck — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 20:24:15 +0000

Ah, come on, that post was AWESOME! It hit my RSS feed so I saw it. But I see today it’s gone.

That Boxter review over at WhiteBreadAutomotiveReviews.com was, as you stated, dorky.

And Pamela, they should show more than just her car. I think.