Garmin GPS - Re: GPSMAP 60CSx eating microSD cards? >>> Questionable moral code of this group....

Author

Re: GPSMAP 60CSx eating microSD cards? >>> Questionable moral code of this group....

The Stig

2007-07-21, 10:33 pm

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 20:01:09 -0700, TPKeller <TPKeller@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Jul 18, 7:41 pm, "Bruce." <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>Didn't you read the rest of his sentence? He did that so he could
>swap the working card for the broken card, then he returned the broken
>card as if it were the newer working card. So he unloaded his broken
>card back on some unsuspecting vendor, who will likely just pass it
>back to Lexar. Sneaky at best, but I can understand one's frustration
>at a non-responsive customer service department.
>

I find it interesting that whenever a request for a 'registration
number', or source for copywrited software is posted here, the hue & cry of
'Thief!, Thief!, Thief!' is long and loud, but the actions of the person
defrauding a retailer are merely referred to as 'sneaky' (by ONLY the above
respondent).

In the first case, anyone posting registration information, or software
is committing an offence, according to the EULA of the software manufacturer.

Anyone receiving a registration code, or downloading c/w software is
only guilty of 'receiving a benefit at no cost to themselves'.

In both of the above, there is no economic loss to the software
manufacturer (as the receiver wouldn't have purchased it anyway).

In this case, the new card was STOLEN, with a REAL economic loss to the
retailer and untold 'aggro' to perhaps multiple future purchasers, until the
card is finally removed from the retail system. All because some fool wouldn't
accept responsibility for the agreement he entered upon with his original
purchase.

As a group, most of you are (in mho) a bunch of hypocritical,
self-righteous assholes.

Happy Trails

2007-07-21, 10:33 pm

On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 22:03:52 GMT, The Stig <thestig@cardiff.com>
wrote:
> I find it interesting that whenever a request for a 'registration
>number', or source for copywrited software is posted here, the hue & cry of
>'Thief!, Thief!, Thief!' is long and loud, but the actions of the person
>defrauding a retailer are merely referred to as 'sneaky' (by ONLY the above
>respondent).

> As a group, most of you are (in mho) a bunch of hypocritical,
>self-righteous assholes.

Not only did you NOT complain about this yourself before, making
yourself one of the hypocritical, self-righteous assholes, but you
have the idiocy to start a new thread about it, instead of keeping it
on topic.

If you disdain us as a group, why don't you XXXX off and take your
wisdom (hahaha) and elevated morality, such as it is, elsewhere?

D. Coriolis

2007-07-22, 3:33 pm

Sorry about the delay.

I paid $52 cash (a bit high) for the replacement card, how is that
stolen? When returning the broken card to Walmart, I explained that it
worked fine for a while in my GPS and then died at a very inopportune
time (vacation in SE AZ). It should be labeled as defective and
returned to Lexar.

I have no idea how Walmart handles their defective returns with
Lexar, but I'm sure that nobody was burned in the process and I feel
VERY MORALLY GOOD ABOUT THE WHOLE THING, THANK YOU!

The Stig <thestig@cardiff.com> wrote: "All because some fool
wouldn't accept responsibility for the agreement he entered upon with
his original purchase." So you're suggesting that I just flush $52
down the toilet, accepting a dead card that Lexar wont fix? For god
sakes they didn't even respond to my emails after confirming the card
was indeed dead. What planet are you from?

Bottom line, Lexar FORCED me to do this whole thing due to their
frigid customer service. Who's immoral in this case: BIG BAD LEXAR for
treating it's customers like SHI*!!! and hoping I would just go away
and accept a dead card.

Dave

On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 22:03:52 GMT,

>On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 20:01:09 -0700, TPKeller <TPKeller@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> I find it interesting that whenever a request for a 'registration
>number', or source for copywrited software is posted here, the hue & cry of
>'Thief!, Thief!, Thief!' is long and loud, but the actions of the person
>defrauding a retailer are merely referred to as 'sneaky' (by ONLY the above
>respondent).
>
> In the first case, anyone posting registration information, or software
>is committing an offence, according to the EULA of the software manufacturer.
>
> Anyone receiving a registration code, or downloading c/w software is
>only guilty of 'receiving a benefit at no cost to themselves'.
>
> In both of the above, there is no economic loss to the software
>manufacturer (as the receiver wouldn't have purchased it anyway).
>
> In this case, the new card was STOLEN, with a REAL economic loss to the
>retailer and untold 'aggro' to perhaps multiple future purchasers, until the
>card is finally removed from the retail system. All because some fool wouldn't
>accept responsibility for the agreement he entered upon with his original
>purchase.
>
> As a group, most of you are (in mho) a bunch of hypocritical,
>self-righteous assholes.

LinkBot