Discussion:
Massa hasa the best job in F1
(too old to reply)
Willsy
2017-05-03 10:58:17 UTC
Permalink
* He's de-facto retired;
* He knows he's not in a championship challenging car;
* He's really only there to mentor his team-mate (who's useless);
* He's already wealthy, and doesn't need the money;

He's LITERALLY driving around on a Sunday afternoon for nothing
more than shits and giggles.

He has the best job in F1 by a million miles.
~misfit~
2017-05-03 12:09:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Willsy
* He's de-facto retired;
* He knows he's not in a championship challenging car;
* He's really only there to mentor his team-mate (who's useless);
* He's already wealthy, and doesn't need the money;
He's LITERALLY driving around on a Sunday afternoon for nothing
more than shits and giggles.
He has the best job in F1 by a million miles.
That depends on how much time he has to spend with the brooding (sulky)
Lance....
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
Alan Baker
2017-05-03 18:11:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Willsy
* He's de-facto retired;
* He knows he's not in a championship challenging car;
* He's really only there to mentor his team-mate (who's useless);
* He's already wealthy, and doesn't need the money;
He's LITERALLY driving around on a Sunday afternoon for nothing
more than shits and giggles.
He has the best job in F1 by a million miles.
That depends on how much time he has to spend with the brooding (sulky)
Lance....
It never ceases to amaze me how people like you can determine someone's
real personality with just a few minutes of video...
t***@gmail.com
2017-05-04 00:21:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Willsy
* He's de-facto retired;
* He knows he's not in a championship challenging car;
* He's really only there to mentor his team-mate (who's useless);
* He's already wealthy, and doesn't need the money;
He's LITERALLY driving around on a Sunday afternoon for nothing
more than shits and giggles.
He has the best job in F1 by a million miles.
That depends on how much time he has to spend with the brooding (sulky)
Lance....
It never ceases to amaze me how people like you can determine someone's
real personality with just a few minutes of video...
Misfart is an old senile pervert.
He has an erection for Lance's tight ass.
~misfit~
2017-05-04 08:15:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Willsy
* He's de-facto retired;
* He knows he's not in a championship challenging car;
* He's really only there to mentor his team-mate (who's useless);
* He's already wealthy, and doesn't need the money;
He's LITERALLY driving around on a Sunday afternoon for nothing
more than shits and giggles.
He has the best job in F1 by a million miles.
That depends on how much time he has to spend with the brooding
(sulky) Lance....
It never ceases to amaze me how people like you can determine
someone's real personality with just a few minutes of video...
Well I've actually seen far more than a few minutes as I watched most of the
Euro F3 races (a NZ driver was also driving for his daddy's team). Lance was
on the podium a lot so there was quite a lot of video and interviews...

That said I can understand how amazing it must be for people like you
witnessing normal people picking up cues from others and being able to
deduce temperament and state of mind. It must seem like magic to people like
you.

[Replying via Tex's post as I don't see yours - which begs the question; Why
do you address me at all? Unless you knew 'Tex' would quote you...]
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
Bobster
2017-05-04 09:33:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Alan Baker
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Willsy
* He's de-facto retired;
* He knows he's not in a championship challenging car;
* He's really only there to mentor his team-mate (who's useless);
* He's already wealthy, and doesn't need the money;
He's LITERALLY driving around on a Sunday afternoon for nothing
more than shits and giggles.
He has the best job in F1 by a million miles.
That depends on how much time he has to spend with the brooding
(sulky) Lance....
It never ceases to amaze me how people like you can determine
someone's real personality with just a few minutes of video...
Well I've actually seen far more than a few minutes as I watched most of the
Euro F3 races (a NZ driver was also driving for his daddy's team). Lance was
on the podium a lot so there was quite a lot of video and interviews...
That said I can understand how amazing it must be for people like you
witnessing normal people picking up cues from others and being able to
deduce temperament and state of mind. It must seem like magic to people like
you.
What it is is something that cannot be proven or disproven. You can pass any judgement you like on a person and say it's all down to your ability to read body language. Which may be true or may be horse shit. But, magically, your readings always result in positive things about people you like (EG Webber) and negative things about those you don't (Vettel, Rosberg, Stroll).
Post by ~misfit~
[Replying via Tex's post as I don't see yours - which begs the question; Why
do you address me at all? Unless you knew 'Tex' would quote you...]
Sauce for the goose and all that. You claiming to have somebody killfiled doesn't stop you replying to them.
geoff
2017-05-04 10:04:24 UTC
Permalink
On 4/05/2017 9:33 PM, Bobster wrote:
n the podium a lot so there was quite a lot of video and interviews...
Post by Bobster
Post by ~misfit~
That said I can understand how amazing it must be for people like
you witnessing normal people picking up cues from others and being
able to deduce temperament and state of mind. It must seem like
magic to people like you.
What it is is something that cannot be proven or disproven. You can
pass any judgement you like on a person and say it's all down to your
ability to read body language. Which may be true or may be horse
shit. But, magically, your readings always result in positive things
about people you like (EG Webber) and negative things about those you
don't (Vettel, Rosberg, Stroll).
Most here don't seem to have any problem iwith the idea of
psychoanalysing Hamilton.

Would it not be fair to deduce that he is slightly fragile and maybe
(over)sensititive ? Just as others have other traits that jump out -
sultry Fernando for instance(again though not without cause).

I put down his lacklustre performance at Sochi at least partly down to
the boy-racer who lost his legs just prior. That and the Merc-sabotage.

geoff
Bobster
2017-05-04 12:44:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by ~misfit~
n the podium a lot so there was quite a lot of video and interviews...
Post by Bobster
Post by ~misfit~
That said I can understand how amazing it must be for people like
you witnessing normal people picking up cues from others and being
able to deduce temperament and state of mind. It must seem like
magic to people like you.
What it is is something that cannot be proven or disproven. You can
pass any judgement you like on a person and say it's all down to your
ability to read body language. Which may be true or may be horse
shit. But, magically, your readings always result in positive things
about people you like (EG Webber) and negative things about those you
don't (Vettel, Rosberg, Stroll).
Most here don't seem to have any problem iwith the idea of
psychoanalysing Hamilton.
I wouldn't say "most", but it goes on. Few, though, claim the expertise that ~misfit~ does - or have this happy coincidence between body readings and the opinion he has several times expressed.
Post by ~misfit~
Would it not be fair to deduce that he is slightly fragile and maybe
(over)sensititive ? Just as others have other traits that jump out -
sultry Fernando for instance(again though not without cause).
Who? Stroll? I have no idea. He seems to be fairly straightforward when he talks to the press.
Post by ~misfit~
I put down his lacklustre performance at Sochi at least partly down to
the boy-racer who lost his legs just prior. That and the Merc-sabotage.
Who knows? He did well in F3, but he wouldn't be the first driver to look good in F3 and then look not so good in F1.
geoff
2017-05-04 20:08:53 UTC
Permalink
On 5/05/2017 12:44 AM, Bobster wrote:
.
Post by Bobster
Post by geoff
Most here don't seem to have any problem iwith the idea of
psychoanalysing Hamilton.
I wouldn't say "most", but it goes on. Few, though, claim the expertise that ~misfit~ does - or have this happy coincidence between body readings and the opinion he has several times expressed.
Post by geoff
Would it not be fair to deduce that he is slightly fragile and maybe
(over)sensititive ? Just as others have other traits that jump out -
sultry Fernando for instance(again though not without cause).
Who? Stroll? I have no idea. He seems to be fairly straightforward when he talks to the press.
Post by geoff
I put down his lacklustre performance at Sochi at least partly down to
the boy-racer who lost his legs just prior. That and the Merc-sabotage.
Who knows? He did well in F3, but he wouldn't be the first driver to look good in F3 and then look not so good in F1.
I was refrring to Hamilton, and how many have no problem making
assumptions about his character and state of mind, etc.

So why complain about the same treatment to Stroll ? OK less time to
evaluate so far....

geoff
Bobster
2017-05-05 02:27:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by geoff
.
Post by Bobster
Post by geoff
Most here don't seem to have any problem iwith the idea of
psychoanalysing Hamilton.
I wouldn't say "most", but it goes on. Few, though, claim the expertise that ~misfit~ does - or have this happy coincidence between body readings and the opinion he has several times expressed.
Post by geoff
Would it not be fair to deduce that he is slightly fragile and maybe
(over)sensititive ? Just as others have other traits that jump out -
sultry Fernando for instance(again though not without cause).
Who? Stroll? I have no idea. He seems to be fairly straightforward when he talks to the press.
Post by geoff
I put down his lacklustre performance at Sochi at least partly down to
the boy-racer who lost his legs just prior. That and the Merc-sabotage.
Who knows? He did well in F3, but he wouldn't be the first driver to look good in F3 and then look not so good in F1.
I was refrring to Hamilton, and how many have no problem making
assumptions about his character and state of mind, etc.
The main attack I see against Hamilton is that he's not much of a team player. This seems to go back to 2007 where he deliberately went against instructions from his team to gain an advantage in qualifying. So, it was a long time ago, but there's something to it. Or folks called him a prima donna when the stories about him trashing a hospitality room surfaced.

Mind you, he gets a lot in the real world too. There was at one time a very loud chorus of how his lifestyle will catch up with him. Whether or not I or anybody else agreed, it was still based on something he actually did.

But what we're talking about here is something different - it's judgement's on a driver's makeup based on some claimed special power of insight into the drivers psyche.
Post by geoff
So why complain about the same treatment to Stroll ? OK less time to
evaluate so far....
Is anybody else going to the same lengths that ~misfit~ goes to to not only dislike a driver, but to try to present his dislike as something actually scientific?
geoff
2017-05-05 03:53:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bobster
did.
But what we're talking about here is something different - it's judgement's on a driver's makeup based on some claimed special power of insight into the drivers psyche.
Post by geoff
So why complain about the same treatment to Stroll ? OK less time to
evaluate so far....
Is anybody else going to the same lengths that ~misfit~ goes to to not only dislike a driver, but to try to present his dislike as something actually scientific?
No. It's more to do with a scepticism of true innate ability, as
progress would appear to be somewhat (more ?) related to daddy throwing
money to facilitate.

That may or may not actual manifest itself in the driver's psyche, which
may or may not become apparent in the future.

geoff.
Bobster
2017-05-06 04:18:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by geoff
Post by Bobster
did.
But what we're talking about here is something different - it's judgement's on a driver's makeup based on some claimed special power of insight into the drivers psyche.
Post by geoff
So why complain about the same treatment to Stroll ? OK less time to
evaluate so far....
Is anybody else going to the same lengths that ~misfit~ goes to to not only dislike a driver, but to try to present his dislike as something actually scientific?
No. It's more to do with a scepticism of true innate ability, as
progress would appear to be somewhat (more ?) related to daddy throwing
money to facilitate.
Yes. There is that - though we always have to remember that Stroll got his super license by winning the Euro F3 championship. For a good team, yes, but there were other good teams. With Williams setting up his car, yes, but a team like Carlin is not going to be totally clueless when it comes to the technicalities.

He's had a lot of success in junior formulae. Dad would have to be not just rich but stupid to keep on bankrolling him if he were getting nowhere.

But this is not a one-off rant from ~misfit~. He repeatedly plays this card of having special gifts at being able to read people, always attacks (or praises) on the basis of things that can't be seen. Which he needs to, because drivers he detests have won 5 world championships in the last decade, and another one he fancies is behind Stroll in the championship this year.

His right, of course. Freedom of speech and all that. But anybody else's right to disagree and to say that they do.
Post by geoff
That may or may not actual manifest itself in the driver's psyche, which
may or may not become apparent in the future.
Well, I'm wary of those things. Most of us find what we want when we read between the lines. Some things are valid - the assertion that Hamilton is not a team player is one such, because there's some actual evidence. There is a lot controversy around Alonso's career - not many drivers would threaen to blackmail their own team (though how many have been in a position where they could is another matter). Vettel likes a good moan. And etc. But those are in a different realm - we see these things going on.
Bobster
2017-05-06 04:39:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bobster
He's had a lot of success in junior formulae. Dad would have to be not just rich but stupid to keep on bankrolling him if he were getting nowhere.
That said, a look at the guys Stroll competed with in the Toyota series in NZ in 2015 gives me pause.

Alfonso Celis (who is a test driver for Force India)
14th in F Renault 2.0 on 2013. 21st in Gp3 in 2014. 12th in GP3 in 2015. Hasn't won a race in any formula in the last 5 years, but somebody keeps on covering his costs.

Maison, runner up to Stroll, has a respectable career.

Ferruci, who was 3rd, was 19th in euro F3 in 2014, 11th the next year, 12th in GP3 last year - and all with good teams.

Nikita Mazepin, an FI test driver last year, has 3 years of mediocrity in various single seater competitions.
Bigbird
2017-05-05 05:41:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bobster
Is anybody else going to the same lengths that ~misfit~ goes to to
not only dislike a driver, but to try to present his dislike as
something actually scientific?
Hmm...

Can anyone think of an answer to that one? Lol.

I thought Bobster was a bit faster on the straights.

Another example of how personal agenda blinds people.
build
2017-05-04 13:17:35 UTC
Permalink
On Thursday, 4 May 2017 20:06:01 UTC+10, geoff wrote:
<snip>
Post by geoff
That and the Merc-sabotage.
geoff
Huh ?

So are you saying Merc sabotaged Lewis Hamilton?

How?

Thanks,
build

btw, are you the Kiwi geoff?
geoff
2017-05-04 20:09:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by build
<snip>
Post by geoff
That and the Merc-sabotage.
geoff
Huh ?
So are you saying Merc sabotaged Lewis Hamilton?
How?
Thanks,
build
btw, are you the Kiwi geoff?
It was a joke. And yes.

geoff
~misfit~
2017-05-04 13:18:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by ~misfit~
n the podium a lot so there was quite a lot of video and interviews...
Post by Bobster
Post by ~misfit~
That said I can understand how amazing it must be for people like
you witnessing normal people picking up cues from others and being
able to deduce temperament and state of mind. It must seem like
magic to people like you.
What it is is something that cannot be proven or disproven. You can
pass any judgement you like on a person and say it's all down to your
ability to read body language. Which may be true or may be horse
shit. But, magically, your readings always result in positive things
about people you like (EG Webber) and negative things about those you
don't (Vettel, Rosberg, Stroll).
Lucky for you that this was quoted.

Why would I like someone who displays negative 'things'? Surely it makes
sense to instead like those who display positive traits? At least for normal
people it does - maybe you want to write that down....
Post by ~misfit~
Most here don't seem to have any problem iwith the idea of
psychoanalysing Hamilton.
That's different - he's black.
Post by ~misfit~
Would it not be fair to deduce that he is slightly fragile and maybe
(over)sensititive ? Just as others have other traits that jump out -
sultry Fernando for instance(again though not without cause).
That's going a bit far isn't it? "Sultry" huh? How do you know that? <g>
Post by ~misfit~
I put down his lacklustre performance at Sochi at least partly down to
the boy-racer who lost his legs just prior. That and the
Merc-sabotage.
Indeed. ;-)
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
Bobster
2017-05-04 14:00:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by ~misfit~
Post by ~misfit~
n the podium a lot so there was quite a lot of video and interviews...
Post by Bobster
Post by ~misfit~
That said I can understand how amazing it must be for people like
you witnessing normal people picking up cues from others and being
able to deduce temperament and state of mind. It must seem like
magic to people like you.
What it is is something that cannot be proven or disproven. You can
pass any judgement you like on a person and say it's all down to your
ability to read body language. Which may be true or may be horse
shit. But, magically, your readings always result in positive things
about people you like (EG Webber) and negative things about those you
don't (Vettel, Rosberg, Stroll).
Lucky for you that this was quoted.
Why would I like someone who displays negative 'things'? Surely it makes
sense to instead like those who display positive traits? At least for normal
people it does - maybe you want to write that down....
I'm saying that you don't like somebody and then engineer unflattering things to fit. You don't like Vettel, so you have to use your supposed special insights to prove that he has unattractive qualities, seeks an unfair advantage etc etc. Same with Rosberg.

It's not enough to just not like a guy. Having decided that you don't like some driver or other (and let's be honest, being rich or being German helps) you have to demonstrate that there are unpleasant things about them.
Alan Baker
2017-05-04 17:24:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bobster
Post by ~misfit~
On 4/05/2017 9:33 PM, Bobster wrote: n the podium a lot so there
was quite a lot of video and interviews...
Post by Bobster
Post by ~misfit~
That said I can understand how amazing it must be for people
like you witnessing normal people picking up cues from others
and being able to deduce temperament and state of mind. It
must seem like magic to people like you.
What it is is something that cannot be proven or disproven. You
can pass any judgement you like on a person and say it's all
down to your ability to read body language. Which may be true
or may be horse shit. But, magically, your readings always
result in positive things about people you like (EG Webber) and
negative things about those you don't (Vettel, Rosberg,
Stroll).
Lucky for you that this was quoted.
Why would I like someone who displays negative 'things'? Surely it
makes sense to instead like those who display positive traits? At
least for normal people it does - maybe you want to write that
down....
I'm saying that you don't like somebody and then engineer
unflattering things to fit. You don't like Vettel, so you have to use
your supposed special insights to prove that he has unattractive
qualities, seeks an unfair advantage etc etc. Same with Rosberg.
It's not enough to just not like a guy. Having decided that you don't
like some driver or other (and let's be honest, being rich or being
German helps) you have to demonstrate that there are unpleasant
things about them.
It certainly seems that way to me.
Alan Baker
2017-05-04 17:22:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bobster
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Alan Baker
Post by ~misfit~
* He's de-facto retired; * He knows he's not in a
championship challenging car; * He's really only there to
mentor his team-mate (who's useless); * He's already
wealthy, and doesn't need the money;
He's LITERALLY driving around on a Sunday afternoon for
nothing more than shits and giggles.
He has the best job in F1 by a million miles.
That depends on how much time he has to spend with the
brooding (sulky) Lance....
It never ceases to amaze me how people like you can determine
someone's real personality with just a few minutes of video...
Well I've actually seen far more than a few minutes as I watched
most of the Euro F3 races (a NZ driver was also driving for his
daddy's team). Lance was on the podium a lot so there was quite a
lot of video and interviews...
That said I can understand how amazing it must be for people like
you witnessing normal people picking up cues from others and being
able to deduce temperament and state of mind. It must seem like
magic to people like you.
What it is is something that cannot be proven or disproven. You can
pass any judgement you like on a person and say it's all down to your
ability to read body language. Which may be true or may be horse
shit. But, magically, your readings always result in positive things
about people you like (EG Webber) and negative things about those you
don't (Vettel, Rosberg, Stroll).
Precisely.

:-)
Post by Bobster
Post by ~misfit~
[Replying via Tex's post as I don't see yours - which begs the
question; Why do you address me at all? Unless you knew 'Tex' would
quote you...]
Sauce for the goose and all that. You claiming to have somebody
killfiled doesn't stop you replying to them.
Precisely.

:-)
Alan Baker
2017-05-04 17:21:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Alan Baker
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Willsy
* He's de-facto retired;
* He knows he's not in a championship challenging car;
* He's really only there to mentor his team-mate (who's useless);
* He's already wealthy, and doesn't need the money;
He's LITERALLY driving around on a Sunday afternoon for nothing
more than shits and giggles.
He has the best job in F1 by a million miles.
That depends on how much time he has to spend with the brooding
(sulky) Lance....
It never ceases to amaze me how people like you can determine
someone's real personality with just a few minutes of video...
Well I've actually seen far more than a few minutes as I watched most of the
Euro F3 races (a NZ driver was also driving for his daddy's team). Lance was
on the podium a lot so there was quite a lot of video and interviews...
And you learned what?
Post by ~misfit~
That said I can understand how amazing it must be for people like you
witnessing normal people picking up cues from others and being able to
deduce temperament and state of mind. It must seem like magic to people like
you.
[Replying via Tex's post as I don't see yours - which begs the question; Why
do you address me at all? Unless you knew 'Tex' would quote you...]
Why do you imagine that the answer was for you alone?
Bigbird
2017-05-04 19:15:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by ~misfit~
[Replying via Tex's post as I don't see yours - which begs the
question; Why do you address me at all? Unless you knew 'Tex' would
quote you...]
No, it begs the question why you have replied to him when you have
previously decided that he isn't worth bothering with and you have no
intention of seeing his replies.

A killfile is not mutual.

A killfile can be useful but make no mistake it does not censure anyone
except yourself.
~misfit~
2017-05-05 00:53:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bigbird
Post by ~misfit~
[Replying via Tex's post as I don't see yours - which begs the
question; Why do you address me at all? Unless you knew 'Tex' would
quote you...]
No, it begs the question why you have replied to him when you have
previously decided that he isn't worth bothering with and you have no
intention of seeing his replies.
It's not just replies but also inane posts. In fact more the latter than the
former...
Post by Bigbird
A killfile is not mutual.
If only.
Post by Bigbird
A killfile can be useful but make no mistake it does not censure
anyone except yourself.
Very true. I'm not perfect. I have impulse issues so choose to remove
triggers. However sometimes they sneak through.

Also, despite that, when I see a post aimed at me it triggers another
thing - the old 'it's rude to not reply' impulse. Especially if what's being
said is so not only wrong but insulting (see trigger one).
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
t***@gmail.com
2017-05-05 15:41:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by ~misfit~
(see trigger one)
See this - you are an idiot
Loading...