|
Post by firebottle on Feb 16, 2019 12:23:46 GMT
So?
|
|
|
Post by savvypaul on Feb 16, 2019 12:28:18 GMT
So...why publish a load of marketing guff (apparently part copied from elsewhere) to pretend that they do understand it? To justify £2400 for a box of 'secret ingredients' and £600 each for 'special' cables? So...what's inside it?
|
|
|
Post by macca on Feb 16, 2019 12:42:37 GMT
So...why publish a load of marketing guff (apparently part copied from elsewhere) to pretend that they do understand it? You ever seen that film with Dudley Moore where he's an advertising exec who decides to tell the truth? 'Buy Volvos, they're boxy but they're good.' And considered why it doesn't work in real life?
|
|
|
Post by savvypaul on Feb 16, 2019 12:45:11 GMT
So...why publish a load of marketing guff (apparently part copied from elsewhere) to pretend that they do understand it? You ever seen that film with Dudley Moore where he's an advertising exec who decides to tell the truth? 'Buy Volvos, they're boxy but they're good.' And considered why it doesn't work in real life? The marketing guff makes scientific claims that the manufacturer is unable to substantiate. I assume Alan will take it apart and tell us what's inside it?
|
|
|
Post by macca on Feb 16, 2019 13:00:36 GMT
You ever seen that film with Dudley Moore where he's an advertising exec who decides to tell the truth? 'Buy Volvos, they're boxy but they're good.' And considered why it doesn't work in real life? The marketing guff makes scientific claims that the manufacturer is unable to substantiate. Just like a lot of marketing guff does, as we've already discussed. And it is also careful to stay within the bounds of what is considered acceptable. It paints a picture rather than makes outright statements of fact. Like pretty much all advertising copy does. I don't see where you are going with this. Everyone does it, why single out the Coherent?
|
|
|
Post by savvypaul on Feb 16, 2019 13:11:41 GMT
The marketing guff makes scientific claims that the manufacturer is unable to substantiate. Just like a lot of marketing guff does, as we've already discussed. And it is also careful to stay within the bounds of what is considered acceptable. It paints a picture rather than makes outright statements of fact. Like pretty much all advertising copy does. I don't see where you are going with this. Everyone does it, why single out the Coherent? I seem to be going in exactly the same direction that you went in, yourself, earlier in the thread... Macca said: "if I wasn't happy to discuss the workings then I'd just say nothing. I wouldn't obfuscate and give explanations that are clearly just bullshit, which is what he has done. Part of the reason given for the high price is the extensive R&D. Yet he doesn't even have a THD+N measurement that he can post up. Even if it showed nothing it would at least indicate that some R&D had been done. " ...the other 'place' I'm going with it is that I'm expecting Alan to open it up and tell us what's in it. He's done that with other gear, so I'm eager to read his findings on this one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2019 13:22:47 GMT
I know cut coherent some slack Sav, they didn't invent the GB they've only jumped on the gravy train for gain.
There's a load o dosh to be made from the gullible.
|
|
|
Post by sq225917 on Feb 16, 2019 13:26:02 GMT
Alan prove its audible with a blind test and you can climb the 'its different' step.
Show it improves snr or thd+ noise and you can go to the top of the stairs.
Until then it remains a box that 'might' sound different irrespective of who says anything about it. But in all likelihood its just an aerial to inject noise into the system, on balance of probabilities and based on measurement of similar devices.
Were there users with other boxes I suspect we'd be discussing those instead.
|
|
|
Post by macca on Feb 16, 2019 13:28:33 GMT
Just like a lot of marketing guff does, as we've already discussed. And it is also careful to stay within the bounds of what is considered acceptable. It paints a picture rather than makes outright statements of fact. Like pretty much all advertising copy does. I don't see where you are going with this. Everyone does it, why single out the Coherent? I seem to be going in exactly the same direction that you went in, yourself, earlier in the thread... Macca said: "if I wasn't happy to discuss the workings then I'd just say nothing. I wouldn't obfuscate and give explanations that are clearly just bullshit, which is what he has done. Part of the reason given for the high price is the extensive R&D. Yet he doesn't even have a THD+N measurement that he can post up. Even if it showed nothing it would at least indicate that some R&D had been done. " ...the other 'place' I'm going with it is that I'm expecting Alan to open it up and tell us what's in it. He's done that with other gear, so I'm eager to read his findings on this one. Part of the stated justification for the price was the R&D. That's not the same thing as making scientific claims. Which they don't explicitly do in any case.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2019 13:31:36 GMT
Grounding Box Research and Development.
Cool😎
😁😁😁
|
|
|
Post by savvypaul on Feb 16, 2019 13:56:08 GMT
I seem to be going in exactly the same direction that you went in, yourself, earlier in the thread... Macca said: "if I wasn't happy to discuss the workings then I'd just say nothing. I wouldn't obfuscate and give explanations that are clearly just bullshit, which is what he has done. Part of the reason given for the high price is the extensive R&D. Yet he doesn't even have a THD+N measurement that he can post up. Even if it showed nothing it would at least indicate that some R&D had been done. " ...the other 'place' I'm going with it is that I'm expecting Alan to open it up and tell us what's in it. He's done that with other gear, so I'm eager to read his findings on this one. Part of the stated justification for the price was the R&D. That's not the same thing as making scientific claims. Which they don't explicitly do in any case. I'm confused by your apparent change of analysis. A few days ago you said "In fairness you can rarely get a comprehensive suite of measurements from any manufacturer for any product but in the case of the grounding box a specific claim has been made regarding reduced noise levels so it isn't unreasonable to ask for verification of that." You also said "I think it's just a parlour trick and if you're in the 'I want to believe' camp it will probably work. I mean how can people say the effect is obvious and someone else hear nothing?" And "I've been in this hi-fi game 30 years man and boy so I think that entitles me to cast aspersions on miracle products that have no technical explanation in the same way that I don't need to jump off the roof of my house to know I'll break both of my legs." Are you now saying that the maker is a shining example of straight forwardness and transparency? Has your view changed as a result of Alan's testimonial for the Coherent box? I am open minded about whether it works - my criticism applies to the pricing and the 'spiel'.
|
|
|
Post by macca on Feb 16, 2019 14:10:43 GMT
Part of the stated justification for the price was the R&D. That's not the same thing as making scientific claims. Which they don't explicitly do in any case. Are you now saying that the maker is a shining example of straight forwardness and transparency? No clearly I'm not. However my opinion has changed a number of times since this first became a topic of discussion, as new information has come to light. My opinion being flexible and based on the information available at the time as opposed to on some ideological, agenda-driven or textbook basis i.e it is subject to change. I'm happy at the moment to believe that it is possible the product works to a degree but the manufacturer is not sure how. Even if they did they would not say anyway which makes the point moot. As regards R&D I'd expect that to have some measurement (and reasonably controlled blind listening tests) involved. Saying you've done R&D when all you've done is subjective experimentation and sighted listening is disingenuous IMO. Maybe not in someone else's'. I've no problems with them making the same general claims of improved sound as pretty much all other manufacturers do.
|
|
|
Post by savvypaul on Feb 16, 2019 14:18:19 GMT
Are you now saying that the maker is a shining example of straight forwardness and transparency? No clearly I'm not. However my opinion has changed a number of times since this first became a topic of discussion, as new information has come to light. My opinion being flexible and based on the information available at the time as opposed to on some ideological, agenda-driven or textbook basis i.e it is subject to change. I'm happy at the moment to believe that it is possible the product works to a degree but the manufacturer is not sure how. Even if they did they would not say anyway which makes the point moot. As regards R&D I'd expect that to have some measurement (and reasonably controlled blind listening tests) involved. Saying you've done R&D when all you've done is subjective experimentation and sighted listening is disingenuous IMO. Maybe not in someone else's'. I've no problems with them making the same general claims of improved sound as pretty much all other manufacturers do. Thanks Martin, What is the 'new information' that 'has come to light' and has changed your opinion? How do you view Jez's assertion that 'believing in grounding boxes is like believing in a car with square wheels'?
|
|
|
Post by macca on Feb 16, 2019 14:39:58 GMT
No clearly I'm not. However my opinion has changed a number of times since this first became a topic of discussion, as new information has come to light. My opinion being flexible and based on the information available at the time as opposed to on some ideological, agenda-driven or textbook basis i.e it is subject to change. I'm happy at the moment to believe that it is possible the product works to a degree but the manufacturer is not sure how. Even if they did they would not say anyway which makes the point moot. As regards R&D I'd expect that to have some measurement (and reasonably controlled blind listening tests) involved. Saying you've done R&D when all you've done is subjective experimentation and sighted listening is disingenuous IMO. Maybe not in someone else's'. I've no problems with them making the same general claims of improved sound as pretty much all other manufacturers do. Thanks Martin, What is the 'new information' that 'has come to light' and has changed your opinion? How do you view Jez's assertion that 'believing in grounding boxes is like believing in a car with square wheels'? Various testimonials and a partial explanation of how it might work offered me by an EE. Whilst I respect Jez's knowledge and experience he states that all interconnect and speaker cables always sound the same in all circumstances and IME he is wrong about that. I don't know any other EE who thinks that either. So he could be wrong about the box. I stress 'could be.'
|
|
|
Post by savvypaul on Feb 16, 2019 14:44:20 GMT
Thanks Martin, What is the 'new information' that 'has come to light' and has changed your opinion? How do you view Jez's assertion that 'believing in grounding boxes is like believing in a car with square wheels'? Various testimonials and a partial explanation of how it might work offered me by an EE. Whilst I respect Jez's knowledge and experience he states that all interconnect and speaker cables always sound the same in all circumstances and IME he is wrong about that. I don't know any other EE who thinks that either. So he could be wrong about the box. I stress 'could be.' Thanks Martin. I appreciate you taking time to clarify. Out of curiosity, what was the partial explanation of how it might work?
|
|
|
Post by firebottle on Feb 16, 2019 15:05:46 GMT
I am open minded about whether it works - my criticism applies to the pricing and the 'spiel'. I appreciate that and can understand most peoples similar criticism. The grounding box is completely potted so dismantling it isn't going to reveal anything. I do know that Tony of Coherent Systems is keen to understand how they work and is investigating ways to find out. Whether this comes to fruition remains to be seen.
|
|
|
Post by savvypaul on Feb 16, 2019 15:16:14 GMT
I am open minded about whether it works - my criticism applies to the pricing and the 'spiel'. I appreciate that and can understand most peoples similar criticism. The grounding box is completely potted so dismantling it isn't going to reveal anything. I do know that Tony of Coherent Systems is keen to understand how they work and is investigating ways to find out. Whether this comes to fruition remains to be seen. Thanks, Alan, Do you have any commercial interest in them or did you just try one out of curiosity?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2019 15:20:11 GMT
Alan prove its audible with a blind test and you can climb the 'its different' step. Show it improves snr or thd+ noise and you can go to the top of the stairs. Until then it remains a box that 'might' sound different irrespective of who says anything about it. But in all likelihood its just an aerial to inject noise into the system, on balance of probabilities and based on measurement of similar devices. Were there users with other boxes I suspect we'd be discussing those instead. I did test this blind and found it made a difference in Al's system. You're here next weekend Simon, how's about we get Alan and we both sit and test it blind. I dont know if there will be any effect in my system so this may not yield much of a definitive answer but I'm willing to try
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2019 15:25:01 GMT
I appreciate that and can understand most peoples similar criticism. The grounding box is completely potted so dismantling it isn't going to reveal anything. I do know that Tony of Coherent Systems is keen to understand how they work and is investigating ways to find out. Whether this comes to fruition remains to be seen. Thanks, Alan, Do you have any commercial interest in them or did you just try one out of curiosity? Believe me, Paul. I've pushed Alan to crack it open. When he tried, there's a substance inside that was preventing it from happening. The bolts on the front were removed and the same substance was stuck in the bolt threads and in the thread holes. The only way to get a look is to cut it in half and examine the cross section. I wouldn't expect anyone to cut £1.3k worth of gear in half. PS, EVERYTHING that has crossed Alan's work bench has been opened up and had its guts mapped and examined. There's no special treatment for any particular brand.
|
|
|
Post by savvypaul on Feb 16, 2019 15:42:47 GMT
Thanks, Alan, Do you have any commercial interest in them or did you just try one out of curiosity? Believe me, Paul. I've pushed Alan to crack it open. When he tried, there's a substance inside that was preventing it from happening. The bolts on the front were removed and the same substance was stuck in the bolt threads and in the thread holes. The only way to get a look is to cut it in half and examine the cross section. I wouldn't expect anyone to cut £1.3k worth of gear in half. PS, EVERYTHING that has crossed Alan's work bench has been opened up and had its guts mapped and examined. There's no special treatment for any particular brand. Thanks, Oliver, Yes, I was hoping Alan could shed some more light on it as I have seen him talk about products he has taken apart. No, wouldn't expect anyone to 'do' £1.3k of their own money on smashing the box open. If the maker doesn't want to say what's in it, though, then my scepticism about pricing cannot change.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2019 15:47:41 GMT
Believe me, Paul. I've pushed Alan to crack it open. When he tried, there's a substance inside that was preventing it from happening. The bolts on the front were removed and the same substance was stuck in the bolt threads and in the thread holes. The only way to get a look is to cut it in half and examine the cross section. I wouldn't expect anyone to cut £1.3k worth of gear in half. PS, EVERYTHING that has crossed Alan's work bench has been opened up and had its guts mapped and examined. There's no special treatment for any particular brand. Thanks, Oliver, Yes, I was hoping Alan could shed some more light on it as I have seen him talk about products he has taken apart. No, wouldn't expect anyone to 'do' £1.3k of their own money on smashing the box open. If the maker doesn't wan't to say what's in it, though, then my scepticism about pricing cannot change. Your position is understandable. It's hard to "trust" people, especially when there's cloak and dagger surrounding them. Tony has however been very happy to admit there is a bit if the "black art" to this and all you can do is accept that for what it is. An admission that he doesn't fully understand why it work. What should also be noted is that why it works and whether it works are unrelated. It was easy to hear the effect in Alan's system, although it wasn't a profound slap in the face, it was obvious once you realised the effect was more subtle. Enough for me to pick it blind.
|
|
|
Post by savvypaul on Feb 16, 2019 15:56:46 GMT
Thanks, Oliver, Yes, I was hoping Alan could shed some more light on it as I have seen him talk about products he has taken apart. No, wouldn't expect anyone to 'do' £1.3k of their own money on smashing the box open. If the maker doesn't wan't to say what's in it, though, then my scepticism about pricing cannot change. Your position is understandable. It's hard to "trust" people, especially when there's cloak and dagger surrounding them. Tony has however been very happy to admit there is a bit if the "black art" to this and all you can do is accept that for what it is. An admission that he doesn't fully understand why it work. What should also be noted is that why it works and whether it works are unrelated. It was easy to hear the effect in Alan's system, although it wasn't a profound slap in the face, it was obvious once you realised the effect was more subtle. Enough for me to pick it blind. If someone says 'it seems to work' but I genuinely don't know why...that's fair enough. Even if they are the manufacturer. I couldn't entertain owning one due to the pricing. At that sort of money it has to tick both the 'improvement' and 'material value' boxes, for me. Not just the former. However, assuming Alan has no commercial interest in it, then I would be minded to give extra weight to his subjective opinion of it - can't be easy for an EE to overcome the idea that there is no explanation for how it works!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2019 16:09:40 GMT
Your position is understandable. It's hard to "trust" people, especially when there's cloak and dagger surrounding them. Tony has however been very happy to admit there is a bit if the "black art" to this and all you can do is accept that for what it is. An admission that he doesn't fully understand why it work. What should also be noted is that why it works and whether it works are unrelated. It was easy to hear the effect in Alan's system, although it wasn't a profound slap in the face, it was obvious once you realised the effect was more subtle. Enough for me to pick it blind. If someone says 'it seems to work' but I genuinely don't know why...that's fair enough. Even if they are the manufacturer. I couldn't entertain owning one due to the pricing. At that sort of money it has to tick both the 'improvement' and 'material value' boxes, for me. Not just the former. However, assuming Alan has no commercial interest in it, then I would be minded to give extra weight to his subjective opinion of it - can't be easy for an EE to overcome the idea that there is no explanation for how it works! Why assuming? Why is there a belief or concern that the HiFi forum fraternity are out to lie, deceive and con other frats of their hard earned cash? There has not been one single shred of evidence to suggest that Alan has a commercial interest? I've spent 5 years buying goods from places like Japan, Europe, the UK etc, over the internet via bank transfers, from private sellers! Not once have i been ripped off, or let down by anyone i have bought from BUT according to some paranoid androids spreading their bullshit around the place, little bob down the road is falsely promoting £2k grounding boxes and £16K Class D amplifiers and the like to unsuspecting Audiophiles!! It's fucking pathetic.
|
|
|
Post by savvypaul on Feb 16, 2019 16:22:48 GMT
If someone says 'it seems to work' but I genuinely don't know why...that's fair enough. Even if they are the manufacturer. I couldn't entertain owning one due to the pricing. At that sort of money it has to tick both the 'improvement' and 'material value' boxes, for me. Not just the former. However, assuming Alan has no commercial interest in it, then I would be minded to give extra weight to his subjective opinion of it - can't be easy for an EE to overcome the idea that there is no explanation for how it works! Why assuming? Why is there a belief or concern that the HiFi forum fraternity are out to lie, deceive and con other frats of their hard earned cash? There has not been one single shred of evidence to suggest that Alan has a commercial interest? I've spent 5 years buying goods from places like Japan, Europe, the UK etc, over the internet via bank transfers, from private sellers! Not once have i been ripped off, or let down by anyone i have bought from BUT according to some paranoid androids spreading their bullshit around the place, little bob down the road is falsely promoting £2k grounding boxes and £16K Class D amplifiers and the like to unsuspecting Audiophiles!! It's fucking pathetic. Well, I didn't know, either way. Hence, my qualification. Alan is a dealer, Tony is a dealer. It's a reasonable thing to understand what the relationship is. It wouldn't be unreasonable for Alan and Tony to work together on a commercial project if that is what they wanted to do. A yes or no would suffice. I haven't accused anyone of anything underhand, I haven't even assumed anything underhand, and I have no motivation to do so.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2019 16:30:57 GMT
Why assuming? Why is there a belief or concern that the HiFi forum fraternity are out to lie, deceive and con other frats of their hard earned cash? There has not been one single shred of evidence to suggest that Alan has a commercial interest? I've spent 5 years buying goods from places like Japan, Europe, the UK etc, over the internet via bank transfers, from private sellers! Not once have i been ripped off, or let down by anyone i have bought from BUT according to some paranoid androids spreading their bullshit around the place, little bob down the road is falsely promoting £2k grounding boxes and £16K Class D amplifiers and the like to unsuspecting Audiophiles!! It's fucking pathetic. Well, I didn't know, either way. Hence, my qualification. Alan is a dealer, Tony is a dealer. It's a reasonable thing to understand what the relationship is. A yes or no would suffice. I haven't accused anyone of anything underhand, and have no motivation to do so. Alan Isn't a dealer. Tony is. Alan is a hobbyist - Small Manufacturer. He doesn't sell other peoples stock & has no online presence other than on a couple of forums. I'm also not suggesting you accused anyone of anything. I am asking why you suspect or instantly question/suggest there could be foul play or vested interest connected to the mans opinion, when you, nor anyone else has any proof to either suspect or suggest there could be?
|
|
|
Post by savvypaul on Feb 16, 2019 16:44:03 GMT
Well, I didn't know, either way. Hence, my qualification. Alan is a dealer, Tony is a dealer. It's a reasonable thing to understand what the relationship is. A yes or no would suffice. I haven't accused anyone of anything underhand, and have no motivation to do so. Alan Isn't a dealer. Tony is. Alan is a hobbyist - Small Manufacturer. He doesn't sell other peoples stock & has no online presence other than on a couple of forums. I'm also not suggesting you accused anyone of anything. I am asking why you suspect or instantly question/suggest there could be foul play or vested interest connected to the mans opinion, when you, nor anyone else has any proof to either suspect or suggest there could be? I asked because I would give more weight to the opinion of someone who spends their own money and has no connection to the maker, as opposed to someone who has a commercial interest in the product. That's not to say that I assume the latter would be dishonest, in any way. I wasn't clear, so I made the qualification. Anyway, thanks for clarifying. If you look again at what I said about Alan, you will see that I was proposing to give additional weight to his subjective opinion. My assumption was to think better of him, not worse. I agree, for sure, that people shouldn't automatically assume that 'the HiFi forum fraternity are out to lie, deceive and con'. Would you agree that someone who seeks simple clarity shouldn't automatically be assumed to be doing the same?
|
|
|
Post by macca on Feb 16, 2019 16:52:41 GMT
Paul - That all the cables you plug into it star earth onto the block or mix of stuff inside creating some sort of reference ground. At least that is how I understood the explanation anyway. I mentioned it to Jez earlier on this thread I think but he thought it there was nothing to it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2019 16:53:19 GMT
Alan Isn't a dealer. Tony is. Alan is a hobbyist - Small Manufacturer. He doesn't sell other peoples stock & has no online presence other than on a couple of forums. I'm also not suggesting you accused anyone of anything. I am asking why you suspect or instantly question/suggest there could be foul play or vested interest connected to the mans opinion, when you, nor anyone else has any proof to either suspect or suggest there could be? I asked because I would give more weight to the opinion of someone who spends their own money and has no connection to the maker, as opposed to someone who has a commercial interest in the product. That's not to say that I assume the latter would be dishonest, in any way. I wasn't clear, so I made the qualification. Anyway, thanks for clarifying. If you look again at what I said about Alan, you will see that I was proposing to give additional weight to his subjective opinion. My assumption was to think better of him, not worse. I agree, for sure, that people shouldn't automatically assume that 'the HiFi forum fraternity are out to lie, deceive and con'. Would you agree that someone who seeks simple clarity shouldn't automatically assumed to be doing the same? My issue is "the need" to clarify. To need to clarify suggests doubts about the motive of the opinion in the first place. To which there has been absolutely NO suggestion or evidence that would support the rise of this "need" Did you clarify the motive of opinion when Westie was lauding his Duevel planets? His soneteer gear? Dave's opinion on anything at all? He works in the trade!!! Did you clarify the motive of anyone else here for their opinion to add weight to subjectivity?
|
|
|
Post by savvypaul on Feb 16, 2019 17:10:57 GMT
I asked because I would give more weight to the opinion of someone who spends their own money and has no connection to the maker, as opposed to someone who has a commercial interest in the product. That's not to say that I assume the latter would be dishonest, in any way. I wasn't clear, so I made the qualification. Anyway, thanks for clarifying. If you look again at what I said about Alan, you will see that I was proposing to give additional weight to his subjective opinion. My assumption was to think better of him, not worse. I agree, for sure, that people shouldn't automatically assume that 'the HiFi forum fraternity are out to lie, deceive and con'. Would you agree that someone who seeks simple clarity shouldn't automatically assumed to be doing the same? My issue is "the need" to clarify. To need to clarify suggests doubts about the motive of the opinion in the first place. To which there has been absolutely NO suggestion or evidence that would support the rise of this "need" Did you clarify the motive of opinion when Westie was lauding his Duevel planets? His soneteer gear? Dave's opinion on anything at all? He works in the trade!!! Did you clarify the motive of anyone else here for there opinion to add weight to subjectivity? I know that Westie does not work in the trade. I don't need to ask. I know that Dave does work in the trade. I don't need to ask. Would I seek to clarify the status of someone who is claiming massive improvements made by an item and posting those opinions frequently and across different forums? Yes, if their status was not obvious. That doesn't mean that I assume the worst, by any means. Macca has stated here, and elsewhere, that Alan is a good bloke who he respects for his knowledge and opinions. That was my starting point, and remains so. I've met Alan once and have no reason to doubt him, or Macca. I do believe in transparency. Clarifying is not doubting or assuming, quite the opposite. You are reading more into this than is there and you are coming across as excessively defensive. If something or someone elsewhere has pissed you off, don't take it out on me. If you are concerned that people think wrongly about Alan then you should welcome transparency to help you refute any such claims. Think about it - my question is helpful to you (and Alan), not derogatory.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2019 17:34:14 GMT
My issue is "the need" to clarify. To need to clarify suggests doubts about the motive of the opinion in the first place. To which there has been absolutely NO suggestion or evidence that would support the rise of this "need" Did you clarify the motive of opinion when Westie was lauding his Duevel planets? His soneteer gear? Dave's opinion on anything at all? He works in the trade!!! Did you clarify the motive of anyone else here for there opinion to add weight to subjectivity? I know that Westie does not work in the trade. I don't need to ask. I know that Dave does work in the trade. I don't need to ask. Would I seek to clarify the status of someone who is claiming massive improvements made by an item and posting those opinions frequently and across different forums? Yes, if their status was not obvious. That doesn't mean that I assume the worst, by any means. Macca has stated here, and elsewhere, that Alan is a good bloke who he respects for his knowledge and opinions. That was my starting point, and remains so. I've met Alan once and have no reason to doubt him, or Macca. I do believe in transparency. Clarifying is not doubting or assuming, quite the opposite. You are reading more into this than is there and you are coming across as excessively defensive. If something or someone elsewhere has pissed you off, don't take it out on me. If you are concerned that people think wrongly about Alan then you should welcome transparency to help you refute any such claims. Think about it - my question is helpful to you, not derogatory. Paul, what has pissed me off is exactly what i have said to you. Nothing more, nothing less. I don't want an extension of the thinking (or lack of in my opinion) demonstrated elsewhere on the internet. To suggest that because someone has improved their system and vocalised their opinion in multiple locations means they need to clarify their connection to that products manufacturer is absolute bollocks. The internet frequenters would have to spend every waking minute validating opinions rather than doing what 90% of us do, which is accept the opinion and then investigate further if we want to. Ultimately making up our own mind on the product. IF there is a genuine reason to question the motives of a forumite, (such as demonstrated here: forums.stevehoffman.tv/threa...#post-20613491) then i'd accept that. "You are reading more into this than is there and you are coming across as excessively defensive" Quite possibly. But as a moderator here, i will challenge anything i think needs challenging.
|
|