Not The Same.  Dealing with just one prominent troll at a time would be great.  That's not reality though.  Stuff like this is endless: "Hybrids are only a solution if people buy them, and in the US, past trends say they don't."  He's been posting that nonsense for each.  It's the garbage I dealt with years ago from other sources.  There's always someone who generalizes to the extreme.  Ordinary shoppers are gullible to that type of statement, which is why it works.  They associated some type of misconception with the "hybrid" label.  The antagonist exploits that incorrect assumption... and usually gets away with it.  This is why Prius was always hated by them so much.  It was easy to mislead about hybrid technology in general, since it was such a simple effort to lie about it.  How would the typical reader be able to identify the difference between a Camry and a Camry hybrid?  That in itself is quite a challenge.  When you look up information online, certain elements of efficiency get muddled.  It's very easy to mix up claims and not recognize associations correctly.  How many people do you think actually understand the difference between hybrids amongst automakers?  Very few do.  That presents opportunity for anyone wanting to undermine.  That means responses to efforts to impede don't need to go beyond just a call out.  Detail can be presented when someone requests it; otherwise, the choice is to be brief and to the point.  Like this:  Trends are an absolutely terrible measure of expectations.  The reason why is simple, they assume audience doesn't change.  Of course, dumping all types of hybrid into a single category invalidates the claim anyway.

Approach.  When an antagonist becomes absolutely desperate, they turn to FUD spreading.  Anything they can to do get a feeling of "F"ear, "U"certainty, and "D"oubt stirred in the discussion will serve as a distraction.  Just enough to keep you from getting acknowledgement of a fact is what they seek.  For example: "No fighting wars to keep oil tankers safe."  I immediately saw through that and was unwilling to even nibble at the bait.  Far too many trolling attempts have taken place recently by this individual.  Being a Volt owner trying to provoke on the big Prius forum without any purpose is a waste to everyone.  I would bring up concerns, expressing why my participation was relevant.  Remember the sighting of timeline?  I felt the approach GM was taking would do nothing but run out the clock.  It wasn't achieving anything.  Toyota is taking an entirely different approach, seeking a means to achieve the same goal without such a fundamental risk.  GM's turned out to be a colossal mistake.  Why would anyone follow that?  Already proven a terrible idea, it seems bizarre to even propose going down the same path.  Yet, that's what I'm seeing.  Ugh.  To that, I say too bad, as I stated with:  That effort to evade the point being made about approach by introducing FUD to the discussion is a great example of that nervousness growing.  You know all too well we have an enormous amount of domestic energy available, easily enough to support Toyota's approach of significant reduction of the energy we consume.  The spin that we need to eliminate is just another example of how an absolute can be used to impede progress, rather than promote it.  A plug-in hybrid like Prius Prime can easily cut consumption of imported oil to the point of no longer needing it.  That's why Toyota is working so hard to diversify their hybrid offerings.  The ones which sell the best are the ones that will be chosen for plug-in option sooner.  Again, your effort to evade has been noticed and called out.  Too bad if you don't like the approach.

Too Bad.  He got desperate and lashed out: "You can't do that with a smelly gasser toyota. (No matter how much carbon fiber is in the ornamental trim or the minimal improvement in a heat pump HVAC system...)"  That was the same old predictable behavior I saw back on the daily blog, now transferred over to the big Prius forum.  The difference now though is this venue isn't filled with enablers.  People reading these posts routinely demonstrate critical thinking.  They seek detail.  They ask questions.  They don't just blow off important facts to follow a red-herring.  It's quite amusing how unreceptive they are to that terrible enthusiast behavior of the past.  This is why virtually everyone who had fought me in the past has since vanished.  They failed to acknowledge need.  Focus on want obscured their perspective to such an extreme, they lost touch.  I never did.  Toyota never did.  It was an exercise in patience.  To that, I posted:  It's refreshing to see how you work so desperately to avoid acknowledgement and minimize what Toyota is striving to deliver... well thought out solutions for the masses.  151 horsepower of EV propulsion from the traction-motor currently being used in Mirai is yet another example.  Too bad if you don't like the approach.  A stack is a stack.  Improvement to lithium chemistry will benefit every recipient.  The cost simply isn't there yet, which is why limited rollout in the meantime is just fine.  Rushing to market, like GM did, accomplished what?

Stick in the Mud.  Like other antagonists, he pretended none of our past discussions ever took place, attempting to stir new interest: "I just can't believe that toyota is going to be the stick in the mud on this important subject..... The rest of you, just keep telling yourselves that BEV's are not the Sustainable Future and there is nothing wrong with buying fossil fuels from OPEC."  It was the usual vague comment, presenting extremes as if they were the norm, hoping to provoke.  I know all too well that detail kills.  In fact, that's how Prius Prime outlasted Volt.  I saw how weak & shallow the arguments of enthusiasts actually were.  Their hope was if enough people joined in to share their belief, that would somehow overcome the real-world barriers... which makes no sense.  If a vehicle isn't affordable, it's not affordable.  You can't just make a want happen by ignoring need.  Problem is, they end up believing their own FUD after awhile.  That's the consequence of group-think.  For example, calling Toyota a "stick in the mud" doesn't make it a reality.  Whether or not there is acknowledgement of significant fossil fuel buying reduction doesn't change the outcome; however, claims resulting in denial do serve as a form of acknowledgement.  It's confirmation that there really is a recognition... which is all I'm look for.  More isn't necessary.  Trolls don't need to be feed.  They just need to be identified and I stick it to them:  That attempt at a narrative reinforces what has been pointed out about Toyota's advances.  They are methodical steps to bring forward the entire fleet without disruption to dealer or consumer.  Antagonists spin that as not taking risk... or in this case, calling it a stick in the mud... to portray the image of no progress.  It's all quite amusing, the story of the tortoise and the hare playing out before our eyes.  That slow & steady is what wins.  It's not a race to simply cross the finish line first.  Winning is finding a way to bring forward the entire fleet.  All the refinements we see with for PHEV is setting that stage for EV.  In other words, the rest of us aren't taking the bait.

Nervous.  This was classic trolling: "What's the deal?"  An antagonist found an article of very questionable integrity, even to a someone poorly informed, and posted it posing that question.  It was obvious bait coming from a source clearly intent on stirring discussion.  He's one of those who pretends the discussion is entirely new, even though we've been through the same thing countless times already.  He one of those who thrive in the online combat, looking forward to endless fights as some type of redeeming entertainment.  I find myself less and less tolerant of that... simply because there's nothing to fight anymore.  Volt is dead.  As an owner who found "superiority" pleasure in the past, I followed his postings elsewhere.  That reveals much about a person's intentions.  He'd provoke us to someone find a weakness to exploit, then use whatever he could from that to deceive.  This is why I post an enormous amount of detail, with emphasis on the videos.  Those reveal who's really being honest.  Needless to say, I knew what he was up to and posted this in reply:  The deal is there are some who are growing desperate to spin a narrative.  They see their own favorite approach failing and don't like to see the engineering hidden within vehicles Toyota has delivered.  Advancements like the heat-pump and carbon‐fiber provide a distinct edge that antagonists hope will not get noticed I'd there's enough rhetoric to confuse & distract.  Articles like this confirm Toyota is making others nervous.

Talking Points.  Ironically, some people get so hung up on them, they contribute to their own detriment.  Today, it was: "This *apartments & parking garages make EVs impossible* talking point needs to die.  Installing chargers is apprentice level electrician work.  It's not a big deal."  I tried to point out the situation he was getting stuck in, but it was an audience of one who didn't seem receptive to any type of feedback.  It was just a post serving as an outlet to vent, rather than expect anything constructive.  I gave it a try anyway:  Comments like that is exactly how EV support loses credibility.  You're doing everyone a disservice by blowing off cost.  Expense to install chargers (equipment & labor) isn't trivial.  Power supply will likely need to be provided in the needed location as well.  Who will foot the bill for all that?  Then there's the reality of who's going to pay for the electricity (billing & collection) and for liability related to the charger (insurance & snow removal).  Heck, even signage & enforcement has costs involved.  Not taking any of that seriously is why it won't die.  The issue many costs not being addressed is a very big deal.

Think about how easy it is for a salesperson (a vital link in the chain to mainstream acceptance) to use the attention the battery-pack gets to highlight the value it returns.  A simple "25 miles of EV from the outlet you already have in your garage" is an easy message of purpose to convey.  That's effective marketing.

I created this thread for others to share their own real-world experiences.  I know we have posts elsewhere with random photos, but it can be handy to refresh & consolidate... especially now that 2020 deliveries have begun.  Feel free to join in with your photos.

GM Promises.  Their mess keeps getting worse.  This is how an article published this morning about the situation started: "GM CEO Mary Barra promised the automaker would launch 20 models of electric cars by 2023, beginning early this year.  The company denies claims in the trade press that it missed its self-imposed deadline for the first two product introductions this spring."  I remember that original claim back in early October of 2017 and kept reminding antagonists on a regular basis about that "over promise, under deliver" in the making.  It was always returned with rhetoric about how I was just an anti-GM troll that should be ignored.  Well, it's much harder to ignore CNBC the same way.  I wondered what would happen a few months ago, when that deadline had been reached and not a peep about the promises had been spoken.  A little bit of spin emerging, attempting to claim that wasn't for our market.  No one bought it though.  We have all been expecting 2 new vehicles based upon Bolt, exactly as GM had told us would happen.  Instead, we got nothing.  Now, we still wait.  The response this morning was an attempt to change the topic.  GM tried to divert attention to their autonomous driving technology, highlighting how "Cruise" would be a market leader... blah, blah, blah.  It was an obvious & desperate act of denial.  Then to my total surprise, the situation got even worse!  I certainly wasn't expecting a second effort to evade.  It came though.  Out of the blue, GM President Mark Reuss started hinting about bringing back Hummer as an electric vehicle.  There were several quotes about GM's exploration and rush to produce commercially viable electric-power vehicles that followed, then focus was directed to Hummer itself with: "It's massive.  There might be places where we go first that are not just heavy-duty work trucks but more style and capability for off-road.  There are lots of thing that are very attractive."  That's classic GM.  It's all fluff, no substance.  This is the approach GM has used for years to feed hype.  The hope is it will become a foundation for hope, even though there's no actual merit to build upon.  Volt enthusiasts were the gullible audience that gobbled up comments exactly like that.  They did if for years.  I'd point out the tragic mistake they were making, to base so much upon nothing.  With recognition of the behavior pattern, the trust should be questioned.  Instead, it is blindly awarded each time GM makes any type of promise.  Think about where we are now.  Neither Volt nor Bolt changed GM's status quo.  That legacy automaker is pushing guzzler SUVs more than ever.