[/zn/]

Gotta disagree. The Ferragamo's are by FAR the better designed uni IMO. They have been voted one of the BEST uni's EVER for a long time.

Not sure if the new uni's will get that same kind of recognition. Honestly, I just don't see the new uni even being the same conversation.

We just disagree on that last sentence. In terms of recognition, who knows? But you keep acting like it is impossible to like both. Well maybe for you, and that's fine by me. But to me (and others) yes it is possible to like both.

In terms of design the Ferragamos were fundamentally no different from the blue n whites, basically just a change in color, and so basically the blue and whites and blue and yellows are the same uni.





...

[Ramsdude]

We just disagree on that last sentence. In terms of recognition, who knows? But you keep acting like it is impossible to like both. Well maybe for you, and that's fine by me. But to me (and others) yes it is possible to like both.

In terms of design they were fundamentally no different from the blue n whites, basically just a change in color, and so in a lot of ways the blue and whites and blue and yellows are the same uni.





...

WTF you talking about? I never said " it is impossible to like both." I have even stated there are things I like about the new uni. You are something else man.

As for "in a lot of ways the blue and whites and blue and yellows are the same uni", how so? Other than the horn on the helmet being the same shape, they are not even close to each other "In terms of design" but hey...you keep being you, buddy!

[/zn/]

WTF you talking about? I never said " it is impossible to like both." I have even stated there are things I like about the new uni. You are something else man.

I don't know how you managed somehow to find anything to be antagonistic about in my last post (let alone that. antagonistic) ... but I guess where there's a will there's a way.

....

[Ramsdude]

I don't know how you managed somehow to find anything to be antagonistic about in my last post .

....

I am sure you don't! Twisting around what someone has posted just to try and bolster your point isn't antagonistic?

[/zn/]

I am sure you don't! Twisting around what someone has posted just to try and bolster your point isn't antagonistic?

Oh jeez. Lol. Let it go man. Getting bent outta shape about things that aren't there is not your best look.

[moklerman]

Oh jeez. Lol. Let it go man. Getting bent outta shape about things that aren't there is not your best look.

The look is just fine since you ignored what he said and put words in his mouth.

[/zn/]

The look is just fine since you ignored what he said and put words in his mouth.

Enh, lol, I did no such thing.

He said Not sure if the new uni's will get that same kind of recognition. Honestly, I just don't see the new uni even being the same conversation.

To which I said But you keep acting like it is impossible to like both. Well maybe for you, and that's fine by me. But to me (and others) yes it is possible to like both.

If you think there's this huge terrible divide between not "even in the same conversation" and "impossible to like both," then you're being way too sensitive.

It was an offhand, no big deal remark by me. I thought I was just repeating what he said.There was nothing in my remark--it wasn't antagonistic, or confrontational, just okay you think x that's fine I think y. Just conversation. He took it wrong. So did you.

...

[moklerman]

Enh, lol, I did no such thing.

He said Not sure if the new uni's will get that same kind of recognition. Honestly, I just don't see the new uni even being the same conversation.

To which I said But you keep acting like it is impossible to like both. Well maybe for you, and that's fine by me. But to me (and others) yes it is possible to like both.

If you think there's this huge terrible divide between not "even in the same conversation" and "impossible to like both," then you're being way too sensitive.

It was an offhand, no big deal remark by me. I thought I was just repeating what he said.There was nothing in my remark--it wasn't antagonistic, or confrontational, just okay you think x that's fine I think y. Just conversation. He took it wrong. So did you.

...

You don't even recognize where you did it.

[/zn/]

You don't even recognize where you did it.

"It."

Are you looking for a fight? Cause you won't find one here. Not interested. Nothing happened, and you are making a big deal out of that nothing.

[moklerman]

"It."

Are you looking for a fight? Cause you won't find one here. Not interested. Nothing happened, and you are making a big deal out of that nothing.

Why is it you always bring up fighting when everyone else is just having a conversation. Granted, it's usually pointing out your mistakes or inconsistencies but still, just because you are being called on something doesn't mean it's about to be a fight.

Of course, that you see things that way may suggest some things. No, "it" was you putting words in someone's mouth and then acting as if they were in the wrong for pointing it out. And then suggesting that I wanted to fight about it because I agreed.

I do not know why it is your habit to misrepresent and misconstrue what other people say but I know how it looks.