Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Story here:  http://www.2theadvocate.com/news/40463852.html

CarmineD wrote:

There are too many comsumer complaints of Orecks clogging so no need for them to make the claim.  There is less chance of a Dyson clogging than there is of one of the others stealing from Dyson.  Judging from many of your previous statements stealing and lieing is permissable--------------if it benefits you or one of your favorites.

HARDSELL wrote:

Do you have proof for this allegation?  Or just a clever dyson shill to divert attention from the truth?

Carmine D.

dusty wrote:

Not quite Dusty.  How are you?  I suspect if it were an egregious act of commission, the Forum policers would handle it accordingly. 

I read the original exchanges between HS and 'turtle1' and knew what HS said.  When I saw the misquoted excerpt by MOLE I took it as an error in posting  a quoted message [act of omission].  Not the first or last time it will happen.  Never gave it a second look/thought.  MOLE has never been known here to impugn posters here personally and/or professionally.  Unlike some who post here, MOLE sticks to the products not the people. 

BTW, MOEL posed several questions to HS which are still unanswered.  HS is the one who always seeks answers from others but never provides himself.   HS made an issue of the misquote to avoid answering MOLE.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:
Doing well thanks...just working thru the slow days of summer.  You know how it is, nobody thinks about vacuuming when you can sit on the patio, enjoy the sun and sip drinks instead of doing housework.

I too read the original exchanges and knew what Hardsell said.  I also realized that  if one were to use the quote button or to copy and paste Hardsells comments there would be no issue at all.  However, the quote that Mole attributed to Hardsell would have had to have been edited on purpose for it to still make sense. Whether HS brings this up to avoid answering questions or not, it's a legitimate complaint.  We can't all go around altering others words so we can use it to better our own opinions.

I suspect Mole meant it as a dig at HS but that's only because I've seen these exchanges before...for somebody new here who didn't know the history I think it takes away from the credibility of the forum and the discussion held here. Just my 2 cents.

Dusty

Hello Dusty:

In over 40 years of the vacuum store biz, summers were always the worse.  My partner, when I had a partner for the road work, used the down time to hone his tennis skills.  Ranked 6th in NJ at one time.  I played the nags!  All the tracks in the NJ/NY/MD area.

I appreciate your opinion but disagree with the reasons I explained.  I have had the system malfunction when posting a quote and other processes.  Maybe it was my fault, and/or my computer.  It happens on occasion.  In any event if anyone should be upset it is 'turtle1' at whom HS's comment was directed.  Or me whose is mentioned by name along with the misquote.  I could attribute it to mean me.  Neither of us is upset with MOLE.  Apparently, the Forum watchers here either.

One whole truth and nothing but the truth that apparently all have missed, except MOLE, is the reference to TOM GASKO and MOTORHEAD and dyson and TACONY.  No comments on that statement and MOLE nailed it right on the head. 

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

I can see how one could make an issue with the filter never clogging statement.  I also understand that a person with common sense would know that some maintenance (cleaning filter) would be required for it to never clog.  If it never clogged without maintenance there would be no need fot it in the first place.

It is just as laughable to read when one claims that Oreck, Hoover and others are good for 15 or more years.  They just fail to tell how much maintenance costs will be during that 15 years. 

HARDSELL wrote:

Hello my dyson friend HS:

Common sense my dyson friend is very uncommon. 

FACT:  No vacuum maker you cited above, nor any others in over 100 years of the vacuum industry, ever printed in its product literature, on cartons, and sales information that its vacuum products had 'zero maintenance costs' SAVE ONE.  Your fave d brand.  Remember the sugar coating to buy and use.  That claim now long gone by dyson is one prima facie example.  Fool me once shame on you.  Fool me twice shame on me. 

Carmine D.

HARDSELL wrote:

Carmine, 

It should be very clear that I was referring to individuals in my quote above.  You should also realize that the second paragraph is referring to one of the many half truths made by some of the self proclaimed pros.

HS dyson friend:

It's very obvious that I'm talking about disengenuos [read: false, misleading, UNTRUE] product claims made by ONE vacuum brand in over 100 years and not people who post here. 

Dusty pointed out the error of allowing misleading/untrue posts here.  The same applies to products.  False, misleading, untrue written claims result in consumers losing credibility in the product and brand name.  Your fave d brand is guilty in the first degree.

I related a story here about a young mother who purchased a new dyson from COSTCO for almost $600 only to return it a year later, with the box, receipt, and owner manual in tow.  Why?  It lost suction!  I said to her when I met her in the parking lot with dyson and child in hand:  Did you clean the filter?  She'll looked at me with a look that would kill.  She said when I bought this vauum for $600, nobody told me I had to clean filters.  They told me it would never clog and lose suction.  That's why I paid $600 for it!  She got her money back.  Oops!  There goes another dyson refurb!

Carmine D.

dusty wrote:
Dusty's right.  Re-editing others words only highlights lack of integrity.

DIB