Re: The “range–extended” EV (BEVx) considered
Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:10 pm
TonyWilliams wrote:epirali wrote:TonyWilliams wrote:You're post, on face value, is nothing but a troll.
No, you keep using the word troll, but I don't think it means what you think! Disagreement is not trolling.
Saying something intentionally wrong to elicit a response is indeed a "troll".
In Internet slang, a troll is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.
This sense of the word troll and its associated verb trolling are associated with Internet discourse, but have been used more widely. Media attention in recent years has equated trolling with online harassment. For example, mass media has used troll to describe "a person who defaces Internet tribute sites with the aim of causing grief to families." In addition, depictions of trolling have been included in popular fictional works such as the HBO television program The Newsroom, in which a main character encounters harassing individuals online and tries to infiltrate their circles by posting negative sexual comments himself.What is damaging EV adoption is the purity test.
And yet, I'm not against hybrids. Buy all the hybrids you want. Heck, buy a Hummer or two. But, I am against folks that say that EV advocates are hindering EVs, like you. Once again, a troll looking for a response.So how is this not a simple and clear example of how it hurts adoption to arbitrary reject something? As someone else posted here this may not be needed when there are affordable 200 mile BEVs, but we are still a few years away.
Holy smokes... you acknowledge what I've been saying? Something about longer range EVs and a ubiquitous DC charging infrastructure will spring board EV sales? Wow, it doesn't appear that EV advocates are that bad, after all.
Why, then, would we want hydrogen? Of hydrids? (I'm almost afraid to ask that one!)
I know the definition of a Troll, and honestly your posts and responses are a pretty good definition.
I said (and please read carefully) that people who advocate ONLY EVs, and are irrationally against Rex, or FCEVs are hindering adoption, because they are not understanding that most people will NOT adopt pure EVs anytime soon, even with spotty charging available.