So Manwin now owns both AVN and GFY? - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

Quentin · 01-12-2011, 02:29 PM

Look at this way: does anyone have any evidence of any substance at all suggesting that AVN has been purchased by Manwin?

If not, then your basis for suspecting that assertions to the contrary by AVN representatives are false is..... what exactly? A hunch?

I didn't say it is not true, btw; what I said is that my understanding is that it isn't true, and that I trust the source that tells me there is no truth to the rumor.

That's all I have to go on at the moment. Should someone provide compelling evidence that Manwin has purchased AVN, I'll take my lumps for weighing in incorrectly... and for not just keeping my mouth shut when I was less than 100% sure of the actual score.

Given the sort of bullshit that gets posted to GFY on a daily basis, I don't blame anybody for believing/not believing anything that is stated herein, I suppose.

BVF · 01-12-2011, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DirtyWhiteBoy

Seriously, I'm as hairy as that dude AND if I grew my hair out, I'd rock that style. This guy is like a long lost brother.

Why? You enjoy intentionally looking like a clown?

DWB · 01-12-2011, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quentin

Look at this way: does anyone have any evidence of any substance at all suggesting that AVN has been purchased by Manwin?

Does anyone have evidence of any substance they didn't?

I doubt anyone ever will. After all the thieving shit they've done and the alleged ties to crime money, I'd want Manwin to be a silent partner too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVF

Why? You enjoy intentionally looking like a clown?

I'm hairy like that. Can't deny it. I'm part Wookie.

We're not all coco butter smooth like you are.

georgeyw · 01-12-2011, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quentin

Look at this way: does anyone have any evidence of any substance at all suggesting that AVN has been purchased by Manwin?

If not, then your basis for suspecting that assertions to the contrary by AVN representatives are false is..... what exactly? A hunch?

I didn't say it is not true, btw; what I said is that my understanding is that it isn't true, and that I trust the source that tells me there is no truth to the rumor.

That's all I have to go on at the moment. Should someone provide compelling evidence that Manwin has purchased AVN, I'll take my lumps for weighing in incorrectly... and for not just keeping my mouth shut when I was less than 100% sure of the actual score.

Given the sort of bullshit that gets posted to GFY on a daily basis, I don't blame anybody for believing/not believing anything that is stated herein, I suppose.

If it's not true, then why all the smoke and mirrors bs? Why don't the owners just come out and say 'hey we bought this that and whatever'?

I have never understood this.

Quentin · 01-12-2011, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DirtyWhiteBoy

Does anyone have evidence of any substance they didn't?

Ah -- the tried and true rhetorical technique of recasting the argument so that your opponent must "prove a negative."

Sure, it's entirely illogical, and not really a valid means of coming up with a conclusion in any fact-deprived context.... but it is most assuredly a GFY-approved argumentative technique.

There's just one little problem with that line of reasoning, however: by that reasoning, just about any hair-brained assertion can be presented as reasonably possible, because proving a negative is quite often not possible.

I know, I know, formal logic is boring.... so let's just throw it out. Instead, just look at this way; remove the company names from the equation, and here's what you have:

* We don't have any evidence showing that (A) didn't buy AVN (unless you count Fabian's direct statement to that effect... but I suspect that DWB is not about to accept Fabian's word on anything), but someone has started a rumor that (A) purchased AVN

* We also don't have any evidence that (B) didn't purchase AVN either.... but a representative of (B) has directly and publicly claimed to have purchased AVN.

On the one hand, we have a possibility that is entirely speculative.

On the other, we have a possibility that has been asserted proactively and publicly by the very person claiming to have purchased the company.

In your opinion, which of the two claims, (A) or (B), is more likely to be true; the one that is effectively unsupported by any evidence at all, or the one that involves direct, public claims by two different parties/entities?

Another way of putting it (at least for those who are hearing the rumor second or third hand, and not directly from the people who started the rumor): which do you trust more, the statements of people whose credibility you question, or the statements of people whose credibility you cannot even assess at all, because you don't know who they are, or what they are basing their claim on?

will76 · 01-12-2011, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DirtyWhiteBoy

Can someone please confirm this stomach churning news?

If it's true, look at the bright side... all the companies who have been screwed by them now get to PAY them for advertising.

I'm outta here if they bought it... waiting for confirmation and then the bros can celebrate my leaving.

dyna mo · 01-12-2011, 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quentin

Ah -- the tried and true rhetorical technique of recasting the argument so that your opponent must "prove a negative."

Sure, it's entirely illogical, and not really a valid means of coming up with a conclusion in any fact-deprived context.... but it is most assuredly a GFY-approved argumentative technique.

There's just one little problem with that line of reasoning, however: by that reasoning, just about any hair-brained assertion can be presented as reasonably possible, because proving a negative is quite often not possible.

I know, I know, formal logic is boring.... so let's just throw it out. Instead, just look at this way; remove the company names from the equation, and here's what you have:

* We don't have any evidence showing that (A) didn't buy AVN (unless you count Fabian's direct statement to that effect... but I suspect that DWB is not about to accept Fabian's word on anything), but someone has started a rumor that (A) purchased AVN

* We also don't have any evidence that (B) didn't purchase AVN either.... but a representative of (B) has directly and publicly claimed to have purchased AVN.

On the one hand, we have a possibility that is entirely speculative.

On the other, we have a possibility that has been asserted proactively and publicly by the very person claiming to have purchased the company.

In your opinion, which of the two claims, (A) or (B), is more likely to be true; the one that is effectively unsupported by any evidence at all, or the one that involves direct, public claims by two different parties/entities?

Another way of putting it (at least for those who are hearing the rumor second or third hand, and not directly from the people who started the rumor): which do you trust more, the statements of people whose credibility you question, or the statements of people whose credibility you cannot even assess at all, because you don't know who they are, or what they are basing their claim on?

whomever bought it was behind 9/11 as well.

signupdamnit · 01-12-2011, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by will76

I'm outta here if they bought it... waiting for confirmation and then the bros can celebrate my leaving.

It's unlikely they'd tell you. I see evidence that Manwin owns webcams.com (Fabian's business profile lists it as one of his sites). Did they ever announce that? Probably not because they knew what it would do to business.

Eric · 01-12-2011, 04:11 PM

Why Panos did not make a new thread is not clear to me, but to end the rumors I am pasting his reply here and closing this thread.

http://www.gfy.com/17839087-post44.html

01-12-2011, 02:29 PM	#51
Quentin Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 1,280	Look at this way: does anyone have any evidence of any substance at all suggesting that AVN has been purchased by Manwin? If not, then your basis for suspecting that assertions to the contrary by AVN representatives are false is..... what exactly? A hunch? I didn't say it is not true, btw; what I said is that my understanding is that it isn't true, and that I trust the source that tells me there is no truth to the rumor. That's all I have to go on at the moment. Should someone provide compelling evidence that Manwin has purchased AVN, I'll take my lumps for weighing in incorrectly... and for not just keeping my mouth shut when I was less than 100% sure of the actual score. Given the sort of bullshit that gets posted to GFY on a daily basis, I don't blame anybody for believing/not believing anything that is stated herein, I suppose. __________________ Q. Boyer

01-12-2011, 04:11 PM	#59
Eric Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: The Helm! Posts: 8,818	Why Panos did not make a new thread is not clear to me, but to end the rumors I am pasting his reply here and closing this thread. http://www.gfy.com/17839087-post44.html __________________ No One