This message was self-deleted by its author

[Pholus]

41. Ah yes, it is the fault of the "Murcan" so the onus is on him.

Let me continue to demean him, but I'll do it more substantially this time.

His main comparison in the interview was about the factory floor. That comparison is BULLLLLLLLSHIT and that is a quintessential "Murcan" term if you're keeping score. What is he comparing to? Nike Sweatshops? Textile mills? He mused about that a LOT and by how impressed he was at the difference on the sound and cleanliness on the floors.

WONDERFUL, but it is completely MEANINGLESS!

As I have explained excessively above, the product wouldn't work unless it was built in a clean room by people who themselves are not dirty. I am COMPLETELY UNIMPRESSED by that comparison of the factory floors OR the living space. The PRODUCT needs that environment, not the workers, so NO GENEROSITY on the part of the employer can be implied from the condition of the factory floor. How about working hours? 16 hours of repeately screwing in the same microscopic screw is inhumane. Did he study if the factory managers moved workers around? What about breaks? Do they exist? Those parts of the story will be told with all the data being collected by the investigators using their IPADS.

Oh yes, IPADS. Man, if I were an INDEPENDENT fact finder I'd use anything other than the product of the factory I was investigating. Unless of course it was part of the message I was trying to send to the people I was talking to. Then I'd carry one with a big fat Apple logo and a sticker of someone being kicked out the door taped to it as well.

Of course, the onus is on the "Murcan" by your last post. I'm trying to figure out who sits on the other side of the line. "Murcan" versus what exactly? Elitist snob comes to mind but I will withold a final conclusion.

I've got to call my name now too so we're square. Debate me on the points.