1. zeze22's Avatar
    "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." Mahatma Ghandi.
    08-01-2007 12:06 PM
  2. braj's Avatar
    "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." Mahatma Ghandi.
    So you are saying iPhone users or the iPhone are akin to a revered sadhu saving his country from tyranny? Alrighty then
    08-01-2007 01:14 PM
  3. mikec#IM's Avatar
    "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." Mahatma Ghandi.
    Actually, if you anything about him, you would realize he would be against the iPhone.

    That quote can be applied to Microsoft, Dell, Starbucks, KFC, and dozens of companies.

    Dig a little deeper and you'd see the iPhone in it's current form is quite the antithesis to Ghandi.
    08-01-2007 01:17 PM
  4. surur's Avatar
    Archie, is that you?

    Surur
    08-01-2007 01:40 PM
  5. GreenHex's Avatar
    I recently saw one of his cars (a 1926 Studebaker Open Tourer), and I don't think he would have been against the iPhone.

    Gandhi was featured in the Apple "Think Different" ad campaign, right?
    08-01-2007 01:54 PM
  6. braj's Avatar
    I recently saw one of his cars (a 1926 Studebaker Open Tourer), and I don't think he would have been against the iPhone.

    Gandhi was featured in the Apple "Think Different" ad campaign, right?
    I don't think he would be against it, I just think trying to equate Gandhi with a telephone is a bit offensive.

    Regarding the quote itself:
    1. who ignored the iPhone? Apparently from the forums since it was announced no one here is.
    2. Who is laughing at it (beyond surur that is)? Critiques and comments isn't laughter.
    3. Who is fighting it (again surur doesn't count, he's unstable ) , everyone else I see seems to be debating specific points but generally don't have anything fundamentally against the iPhone. Wackos on the other side of the debate perceive some to be attacking but they don't count either.)
    4. And as far as winning, it already is a winner from day 1. It isn't an underdog that needs to struggle to survive, but in one fell swoop made underdogs out of many that previously were leaders in the industry.
    08-01-2007 02:35 PM
  7. Malatesta's Avatar
    I don't think he would be against it, I just think trying to equate Ghandi with a telephone is a bit offensive.
    That's it exactly. (Plus as you point out, even as an analogy it fails. Wins for hyperbole though...)

    Why not just use MLK too and bring other historical characters down to such petty levels. :cry:
    08-01-2007 03:28 PM
  8. Dieter Bohn's Avatar
    How long until the iPhone debate reaches Godwin's Law?

    http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/6/30/33339/3949

    Ah, Kuro5hin, a blast from the past.
    08-01-2007 04:03 PM
  9. braj's Avatar
    How long until the iPhone debate reaches Godwin's Law?

    http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/6/30/33339/3949

    Ah, Kuro5hin, a blast from the past.
    It seems people are going the opposite from expectations, calling to saviors andstead of demons. Is that a positive sign?
    08-01-2007 04:10 PM
  10. CountBuggula's Avatar
    Couldn't this just as easily sway the other way around? I've seen plenty of iPhone supporters (fanboys) doing the ignore you, laugh at you, then they fight you thing. How many posts in the 10 things that suck about the iPhone thread (and in every other iPhone forum) are iPhone users bashing Treos and other smartphones?
    08-01-2007 05:11 PM
  11. mobileman's Avatar
    Abraham Lincoln would have loved the iPhone.
    08-01-2007 05:26 PM
  12. stroths's Avatar
    Abraham Lincoln would have loved the iPhone.
    He would until John Wilkes Booth crashed the party with his WM phone.
    08-01-2007 06:55 PM
  13. surur's Avatar
    Abraham Lincoln would have loved the iPhone.
    "Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves; and, under a just God, can not long retain it."

    Considering how locked the iPhone is, somehow I think not.

    Surur
    08-01-2007 07:06 PM
  14. braj's Avatar
    "Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves; and, under a just God, can not long retain it."

    Considering how locked the iPhone is, somehow I think not.

    Surur
    Keen observation there surur
    08-01-2007 07:32 PM
  15. zeze22's Avatar
    This has been interesting. Judging by the numbers of posts you guys have made, you all seem to spend most of your free time reading and posting to this board, and also thinking about and using gadgets.

    I like gadgets too, which is why I spend some time here and on other boards.

    Yet, you are all so quick to debase as petty, wordly and inconsequential the subject you all devote so much attention to when the words of Ghandi are applied to the subject.

    I would hope you are all posting to politcs, human rights and philosophy threads in numbers proportional to the level at which you find those subjects more material than gadgets, no?
    08-01-2007 07:40 PM
  16. zeze22's Avatar
    How long until the iPhone debate reaches Godwin's Law?

    http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/6/30/33339/3949

    Ah, Kuro5hin, a blast from the past.
    .hmmm- from Ghandi to the Third Reich. For me, at least, that's quite a stretch.
    08-01-2007 07:42 PM
  17. zeze22's Avatar
    I recently saw one of his cars (a 1926 Studebaker Open Tourer), and I don't think he would have been against the iPhone.

    Gandhi was featured in the Apple "Think Different" ad campaign, right?
    This is true. Ghandi wasn't against material wealth per se, as judged by his early life, as well as the lives of his family. He only used his own deprivation, with incredible courage, to create an example that the British government and the Indian congress could not ignore. I think he also did it in protest of British rule in S Africa.
    08-01-2007 07:51 PM
  18. Malatesta's Avatar
    Yet, you are all so quick to debase as petty, wordly and inconsequential the subject you all devote so much attention to when the words of Ghandi are applied to the subject.

    I would hope you are all posting to politcs, human rights and philosophy threads in numbers proportional to the level at which you find those subjects more material than gadgets, no?
    Of course this (TC & posting) is petty and inconsequential. What social monster would think otherwise?

    This is all distractions/entertainment which is why your OP is so senseless off base.

    As far as what we do with our free time and whether it meets your standards just set is also inconsequential. Don't turn this into some profound judgment about the posters at TC instead of your silly post.
    08-01-2007 08:49 PM
  19. zeze22's Avatar
    Of course this (TC & posting) is petty and inconsequential. What social monster would think otherwise?

    This is all distractions/entertainment which is why your OP is so senseless off base.

    As far as what we do with our free time and whether it meets your standards just set is also inconsequential. Don't turn this into some profound judgment about the posters at TC instead of your silly post.
    I didn't; you did:


    "Why not just use MLK too and bring other historical characters down to such petty levels."
    08-01-2007 10:12 PM
  20. Malatesta's Avatar
    I didn't; you did:
    Didn't/did what? You need to complete that ellipsis.

    Quit dancing around: what is your point to this thread/your OP?
    08-01-2007 10:32 PM
  21. zeze22's Avatar
    Didn't/did what? You need to complete that ellipsis.

    Quit dancing around: what is your point to this thread/your OP?
    OK.

    I didn't "turn this into some profound judgment about the poster sat TC instead of (my) silly post." I did the opposite.

    You (and some others) got morally indignant at my bringing Ghandi into a discussion about a phone. That was YOU making the "profound judgment".

    My response about whether you guys spend any time discussing politics, etc. was simply to point out that YOU were being judgmental and hypocritical in expressing reverence about a subject that you seem (based on your time on this site) to care little about. By contrast, most of your leisure seems devoted to discussing gadgets.

    I didn't think I was being "elliptical." But now at least I have spelled it out for you.

    As for the point of the OP, it speaks for itself, as much as you pretend not to understand.

    But to humor you, just read the "10 Things..." post. You people have been ridiculing and tearing each other to shreds since the phone was released.

    You're right about one thing; maybe you guys did skip the "silence" stage.
    08-01-2007 11:40 PM
  22. Malatesta's Avatar
    I didn't "turn this into some profound judgment about the poster sat TC instead of (my) silly post." I did the opposite.

    You (and some others) got morally indignant at my bringing Ghandi into a discussion about a phone. That was YOU making the "profound judgment".
    The opposite? You didn't have the courage or capacity to form your own thoughts on the matter so you created a thread and threw in Ghandi's quote as proxy to serve what, to ridicule people? This is a good use of Ghandi?

    And yes a bunch of us judged what you inferred (but we abstained from personal attacks) based on your thread title and post. That's what you get for starting a thread that served no purpose but to criticize individuals and flame (or a poor attempt at humor). Get over it.

    Don't like negative reactions to things you post? Then don't start such a silly thread.
    My response about whether you guys spend any time discussing politics, etc. was simply to point out that YOU were being judgmental and hypocritical in expressing reverence about a subject that you seem (based on your time on this site) to care little about. By contrast, most of your leisure seems devoted to discussing gadgets.
    Wow. You actually think that makes sense?

    So quick to judge the lives and interests of those you don't know, aren't you?

    So whereas we critiqued just your analogy (if you can even call it that), you judged everything about us based on what you want to be true (a personal attack).

    (a) How do you know what we do in our leisure time?
    (b) How do you know what we do/don't "care little about"?
    (c) How do you know some of us aren't native to India, part of the Sindhi diaspora?

    Simple. You don't. Or maybe...

    (d)
    Maybe we just find your "point" poorly made?

    This is all a straw man: presume we don't care about Ghandi enough, therefore our critiquing of your post is not valid. As if one logically entails the other!
    As for the point of the OP, it speaks for itself, as much as you pretend not to understand.

    But to humor you, just read the "10 Things..." post. You people have been ridiculing and tearing each other to shreds since the phone was released.
    And...?

    Why do you care what other people do so much? We choose to post there, you choose to read it or ignore it. (BTW, that thread is hilarious and if you take it too seriously, well...too bad)

    But you felt so above it all you had to start a new-thread to what, teach us a lesson? To make a profound judgment about posters here at TC, especially in that thread?

    You deserved the mockery you received for this thread. You used Ghandi in a failed attempt to make some kind of point, not us.
    08-02-2007 02:23 AM
  23. GreenHex's Avatar
    I know spellings don't matter anymore, but it's Gandhi
    08-02-2007 02:56 AM
  24. Pearl_Diva's Avatar
    I don't think he would be against it, I just think trying to equate Ghandi with a telephone is a bit offensive.
    It's confusing to me as to why he quotes people who are no longer on this Earth and haven't even seen the iPhone!!

    How about some real quotes from famous people who've actually commented on the iPhone?
    08-02-2007 05:54 AM
  25. Pearl_Diva's Avatar
    OK.

    I didn't "turn this into some profound judgment about the poster sat TC instead of (my) silly post." I did the opposite.

    You (and some others) got morally indignant at my bringing Ghandi into a discussion about a phone. That was YOU making the "profound judgment".
    Maybe that's because he and Einstein have passed on and never commented on the iPhone, EVER! So it seems you're making light. Not sure if that was your intention, but that could be why some got offended. The first one, people let go. The second time, maybe it's starting to leave a bad taste.
    08-02-2007 06:00 AM
35 12
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD