Moe wrote: ↑Sun Jul 15, 2018 7:28 am No, but should you be surprised that what appears on Fox News has a pro-Republican/Pro-Trump bias? I take it "That Genius" is kind of an aspirational title, eh? Everything in media has a bias. If you're oblivious to that, more power to you.

That's exactly what I'm pointing out, the bias. Are you suggesting I just accept it? Kind of Nazi idea, tbh. And no, it's not an aspirational title, it's sarcastic, bad attempt at an ad hominem.

Let's try and raise the bar..oh, wait...

in this forum
if u hit the bars u r low life, bottom feeder, sexpat
if hit the high end places u r ballers, pretentious,
if u hit the temples, arts places, eco lodges etc u r a hippie, soap dodger

no winning in this fourm

bolueeleh wrote: ↑Sun Jul 15, 2018 8:11 am in this forum
if u hit the bars u r low life, bottom feeder, sexpat
if hit the high end places u r ballers, pretentious,
if u hit the temples, arts places, eco lodges etc u r a hippie, soap dodger

no winning in this fourm

Thank god I dont fit into any of those categories.


I guess I'm a winner.

Duncan wrote: ↑Sun Jul 15, 2018 8:15 am

bolueeleh wrote: ↑Sun Jul 15, 2018 8:11 am in this forum
if u hit the bars u r low life, bottom feeder, sexpat
if hit the high end places u r ballers, pretentious,
if u hit the temples, arts places, eco lodges etc u r a hippie, soap dodger

no winning in this fourm

Thank god I dont fit into any of those categories.


I guess I'm a winner.

I am so sad. I seem to be a low life pretentious soap dodger sexpat......................

But I am happy and don't give a fuck what anyone thinks..

Moe wrote: ↑Sun Jul 15, 2018 7:53 am I for one am shocked that the NYTimes writes articles that they think might appeal to their core demographic. They must be the first news source to ever engage upon such behavior.

What news sources do you read that you consider unbiased, comrade?

ETA: Btw, excellent godwinning there - what did that take, like three posts to a Nazi mention? Sweet.

Perhaps you misread my post. Nobody is complaining that they write for their core-demographic (which you see as New Yorkers) - albeit that that is something you have failed to prove. But hey, let's ignore your consistent failure to prove that, despite the statistics I provided, and let's allow you to keep on citing it in your defence. Sound fair?

No news source is unbiased, that's why people offer opinions...revolutionary idea?

My criticism is that they only mention the higher-end restaurants...I suppose because no New Yorker would ever dream of eating at a less expensive place? I have several American friends and acquaintances who choose the less expensive places, and I would hazard a guess that many New Yorkers would also be interested. I hav eread literally thousand sof posts by Americans who have commented on the low prices here. I'm guessing at least a percentage of those were NYT readers. Just a hunch.

You could have a great meal on 172 for under $10, max $20, but hey, let's not tell people that, because no New York Times reader would ever want to eat there, LOL.

And let's not forget the expat-owned more reasonable places frequented by Gen Mack, flb, Orange Dragon, damn Jeff Mudrick owned a place that was way cheaper, and often frequented by hundreds of Americans (at least some of whom are New Yorkers), even Larry's great food...and not $50=$80 a pop.

One of the most consistent draws of Cambodia, as acknowledged by every thinking person, and referred to by hundreds of thousands of tourists and expats is the cheap eat and drink options. I suggested your holy grail take cognisance of that, but no, you believe that no NYT reader would interested, they should hide that information and concentrate solely on high-end restaurants.

Great marketing idea, it explains some stuff.

I'm out, go ahead with more ad hominems

Duncan wrote: ↑Sun Jul 15, 2018 8:15 am

bolueeleh wrote: ↑Sun Jul 15, 2018 8:11 am in this forum
if u hit the bars u r low life, bottom feeder, sexpat
if hit the high end places u r ballers, pretentious,
if u hit the temples, arts places, eco lodges etc u r a hippie, soap dodger

no winning in this fourm

Thank god I dont fit into any of those categories.


I guess I'm a winner.

Likewise...but I have to admit, he has a point. It doesn't matter what you post, someone will disagree. But that's the point of a forum, I thought? Just let's do it in a way that doesn't include ad hominems when one is losing a debate or settling scores.

Moe wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 12:20 amI think most every thinking person here knows what it is that draws thousands of potential tourists (the people who are likely targets of an article written in the travel section of the NY Times) and it doesn't involve eating or drinking cheaply. I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the Tourism Board of Cambodia isn't going to be swooping in to offer you a job anytime soon.

You mad, bro?


So tourism doesn't involve eating or drinking cheaply? Wow, you're well-informed. Guess those millions of tourists who had partaken must be a figment of our collective imagination.

Tbh, I don't want a job with the Tourism Board, so it's moot.

No, I'm not mad, (at least not any moreso than the average poster on here) but you are blocked for the last of several ad hominems. Bye.

OK, so it's official.

Nobody factors in cheap food and drinks when planning a destination. Backpackers, middle-income people, begone. The NYT says so, apparently.

Guess the three people who liked my post are also mad...strange the ad hominer got nada likes...

Speaking of being sensitive to marketing for tourism, how's that working out for you? Any great business successes in eateries or pubs?

Oh, wait...