i miss freecell . let the flamming begin !

[Highlander_821]

What I am objecting to is not reviews. I object to the blatant marketing disguised as a review in exchange for free equipment. Even the disclaimer is misleading -- "*This radio was given to the writer for this explicit purpose of review*" It seems to me if the radio was sent for the EXPLICIT purpose of doing a review, it could be sent back after the review was prepared.

The other thing you have to look at is the behavior of the individual in the following 9 pages of discussion. He clearly goes from supposed impartial reviewer to grand defender and fanboy of the radio, it's company, the Lewis family, ad nauseum. A simple question about whether it has PL tone capability is only answered after multiple inquiries and then has to include the "RCI does it too" defense. LAME.

Add to this the position of the individual as a moderator who has shown a penchant for throwing his weight around and deleting challenging posts, you have a recipe for members who know better to just clam up. It puts a chilling effect out there to anyone who knows that 1 watt swinging 60 is overmodulated, distorted, and far, far from "clean." Or anyone who knows that a 3 element beam doesn't have 15 db gain over anything more than a coathanger. Or anyone who sees through mumbo jumbo like "This radio has CPU controlled AM, FM, and SSB." Better to just politely clear one's throat and move on, which is what all the smart people are doing. I just couldn't take it anymore and snapped. I do that sometimes. Sorry.

Freecell might have had a poor bedside manner, but at least he called bullshit when he saw it.

 

[Moleculo]

What I am objecting to is not reviews. I object to the blatant marketing disguised as a review in exchange for free equipment. Even the disclaimer is misleading -- "*This radio was given to the writer for this explicit purpose of review*" It seems to me if the radio was sent for the EXPLICIT purpose of doing a review, it could be sent back after the review was prepared.

It is standard practice in EVERY industry to provide products free of charge to publishers for review articles. Do you think Car & Driver buys all the cars they test drive for months on end? No, they don't. That's why the FTC now requires by law any reviewer in print or internet to include a disclaimer that the product was provided free. The FTC does not require products to be sent back...it's up to the product manufacturer to specify the terms of the exchange. You are free to try to get your hands on any product you like to publish a review, too. Noone is stopping you from doing this.

Anyone is free to disagree with a published review that is done by anyone on this site. As far as I know, the only posts that were deleted were the ones that were of a blatant violation of the site conduct guidelines. I will admit that I did not see all of the posts in question, so I can only go on what I did see. If a thread gets out of hand, it needs to be moderated. I agree that it can seem a little self serving when the one being disagreed with also is the one that has the ability to do the moderating. It takes a little time to learn how to walk that fine line, so just chalk it up to a learning lesson.

 

[mackmobile43]

What I am objecting to is not reviews. I object to the blatant marketing disguised as a review in exchange for free equipment. Even the disclaimer is misleading -- "*This radio was given to the writer for this explicit purpose of review*" It seems to me if the radio was sent for the EXPLICIT purpose of doing a review, it could be sent back after the review was prepared.

The other thing you have to look at is the behavior of the individual in the following 9 pages of discussion. He clearly goes from supposed impartial reviewer to grand defender and fanboy of the radio, it's company, the Lewis family, ad nauseum. A simple question about whether it has PL tone capability is only answered after multiple inquiries and then has to include the "RCI does it too" defense. LAME.

Add to this the position of the individual as a moderator who has shown a penchant for throwing his weight around and deleting challenging posts, you have a recipe for members who know better to just clam up. It puts a chilling effect out there to anyone who knows that 1 watt swinging 60 is overmodulated, distorted, and far, far from "clean." Or anyone who knows that a 3 element beam doesn't have 15 db gain over anything more than a coathanger. Or anyone who sees through mumbo jumbo like "This radio has CPU controlled AM, FM, and SSB." Better to just politely clear one's throat and move on, which is what all the smart people are doing. I just couldn't take it anymore and snapped. I do that sometimes. Sorry.

Freecell might have had a poor bedside manner, but at least he called bullshit when he saw it.

Unless you're referring to a different review I see none of your claims.
http://www.worldwidedx.com/cb-band-...w-cobra-148gtl-citizens-band-radio-radio.html

 

[Highlander_821]

It is standard practice in EVERY industry to provide products free of charge to publishers for review articles. Do you think Car & Driver buys all the cars they test drive for months on end? No, they don't. That's why the FTC now requires by law any reviewer in print or internet to include a disclaimer that the product was provided free. The FTC does not require products to be sent back...it's up to the product manufacturer to specify the terms of the exchange. You are free to try to get your hands on any product you like to publish a review, too. Noone is stopping you from doing this.

Anyone is free to disagree with a published review that is done by anyone on this site. As far as I know, the only posts that were deleted were the ones that were of a blatant violation of the site conduct guidelines. I will admit that I did not see all of the posts in question, so I can only go on what I did see. If a thread gets out of hand, it needs to be moderated. I agree that it can seem a little self serving when the one being disagreed with also is the one that has the ability to do the moderating. It takes a little time to learn how to walk that fine line, so just chalk it up to a learning lesson.

That's all fine with me. All I'm saying is that I think it is marketing. I'm not saying that he shouldn't be allowed to do it. It isn't my bandwidth.

 

[Moleculo]

All I'm saying is that I think it is marketing.

Of course that's how the product manufacturers view it, which is why they do it. And that's how their accountants book it, too.

 

[Robb]

What I am objecting to is not reviews. I object to the blatant marketing disguised as a review in exchange for free equipment. Even the disclaimer is misleading -- "*This radio was given to the writer for this explicit purpose of review*" It seems to me if the radio was sent for the EXPLICIT purpose of doing a review, it could be sent back after the review was prepared.

The other thing you have to look at is the behavior of the individual in the following 9 pages of discussion. He clearly goes from supposed impartial reviewer to grand defender and fanboy of the radio, it's company, the Lewis family, ad nauseum. A simple question about whether it has PL tone capability is only answered after multiple inquiries and then has to include the "RCI does it too" defense. LAME.

Add to this the position of the individual as a moderator who has shown a penchant for throwing his weight around and deleting challenging posts, you have a recipe for members who know better to just clam up. It puts a chilling effect out there to anyone who knows that 1 watt swinging 60 is overmodulated, distorted, and far, far from "clean." Or anyone who knows that a 3 element beam doesn't have 15 db gain over anything more than a coathanger. Or anyone who sees through mumbo jumbo like "This radio has CPU controlled AM, FM, and SSB." Better to just politely clear one's throat and move on, which is what all the smart people are doing. I just couldn't take it anymore and snapped. I do that sometimes. Sorry.

Freecell might have had a poor bedside manner, but at least he called bullshit when he saw it.

First of all, I am a Mod for the purpose of keeping the forum posts in line with the rules. AS far as any 'statement' I may make about radio electronics - or the hobby as it is - this is a forum and I invite correction. Surprised? I thought so. I never said that I know everything about radio, and that is NOT why I was made a Mod. I am here personally to learn from those who know more than me. For those that know less than me, I share what I can help them with.

As far as the comment about 'marketing a product' for some company. It is my discretion as the end user to say what I will. That's not marketing; that is my opinion. Because I like something doesn't mean that I like it because it was given. I've reviewed many things I've bought, and have run out of things to review. I've chsen things for the CB section that I felt had the most interest for CBers in the hopes of building up interest in that part of the forum and acquiring more internet traffic as well as new members. Which appears to be working.

The truth is, you have mistaken me for someone else. That is clearly a mistake of your own design. You said I am Bob 808 - whoever that is. And you are wrong. Let's see you admit that. The truth is, you think that I am abusing my responsibility as a Mod by doing reviews on epiupment supplied by the mfr. I could have done this if I wasn't a Mod, and so I had to figure that out for you. I have followed the FTC guideline to the letter as Moleculo had instructerd me. I am doing absolutely nothing wrong by writing reviews. You could have done this very same thing as well, but it has become apparent you have a case of sour grapes because I thought of it and you didn't. Simple as that. In case you haven't noticed, I like to write and am presently out of work while the economy flounders. I like to keep busy. I have also written a number of 'how to' articles which are several pages long and found in the CB section. These were written to help instruct new CBers and get them grounded in the hobby. Go see for yourself.

Of course, you also don't think this is work. It is obviously a lot more work that you realize. You think that it is a scam; and you have that right to think that. But you also refuse to accept the facts, and you are wrong. There is a LOT of work involved in doing reviews. Apparently more than you know or realize. Incliding accepting criticizm whether warrented or not.

For that matter, there is a lot of work in being a Mod. It is also a lot of work helping those who ask questions -and often get no responses- because some members who know the answer won't post. It is not as though they don't know the answer; they just wait for an opportunity to be funny and attempt to flame. I have to read all posts in order to keep people from doing just that, so I know who the offenders are - as I watch and wait. I often wait an hour after someone has posted a somewhat serious question about a problem thay have in front of them if it hasn't been answered. I invite you to do the same. It would make it a bit easier for me and be better for the person in need and the forum as a whole.

This is a forum, and I expect rhetorical responses for questions posed. The more - the better. If it wasn't a vast supply of info, this site wouldn't be experiencing the resurgence in the number of members and internet traffic that it does right now. Partly due to new reviews and mostly helping others find the answers they seek. In fact, I hope more new members post the simplest questions and not have to be afraid or intimidated to ask. I'd like to see members that have been here awhile pick up the pace of doing just that. Since they are salty their help is best when they begin to dole back out those things that this site has provided for them. But do and say whatever you want; it is a free forum and one can do as they please. Just so long as it is in line with the rules, I have no problems with anybody. I have said my peace.

 

[Sonwatcher]

You said I am Bob 808 - whoever that is. And you are wrong. Let's see you admit that.

I believe he was being comparative, not saying you were him.

 

[Highlander_821]

First of all, I am a Mod for the purpose of keeping the forum posts in line with the rules. AS far as any 'statement' I may make about radio electronics - or the hobby as it is - this is a forum and I invite correction. Surprised? I thought so. I never said that I know everything about radio, and that is NOT why I was made a Mod. I am here personally to learn from those who know more than me. For those that know less than me, I share what I can help them with.

As far as the comment about 'marketing a product' for some company. It is my discretion as the end user to say what I will. That's not marketing; that is my opinion. Because I like something doesn't mean that I like it because it was given. I've reviewed many things I've bought, and have run out of things to review. I've chsen things for the CB section that I felt had the most interest for CBers in the hopes of building up interest in that part of the forum and acquiring more internet traffic as well as new members. Which appears to be working.

The truth is, you have mistaken me for someone else. That is clearly a mistake of your own design. You said I am Bob 808 - whoever that is. And you are wrong. Let's see you admit that. The truth is, you think that I am abusing my responsibility as a Mod by doing reviews on epiupment supplied by the mfr. I could have done this if I wasn't a Mod, and so I had to figure that out for you. I have followed the FTC guideline to the letter as Moleculo had instructerd me. I am doing absolutely nothing wrong by writing reviews. You could have done this very same thing as well, but it has become apparent you have a case of sour grapes because I thought of it and you didn't. Simple as that. In case you haven't noticed, I like to write and am presently out of work while the economy flounders. I like to keep busy. I have also written a number of 'how to' articles which are several pages long and found in the CB section. These were written to help instruct new CBers and get them grounded in the hobby. Go see for yourself.

Of course, you also don't think this is work. It is obviously a lot more work that you realize. You think that it is a scam; and you have that right to think that. But you also refuse to accept the facts, and you are wrong. There is a LOT of work involved in doing reviews. Apparently more than you know or realize. Incliding accepting criticizm whether warrented or not.

For that matter, there is a lot of work in being a Mod. It is also a lot of work helping those who ask questions -and often get no responses- because some members who know the answer won't post. It is not as though they don't know the answer; they just wait for an opportunity to be funny and attempt to flame. I have to read all posts in order to keep people from doing just that, so I know who the offenders are - as I watch and wait. I often wait an hour after someone has posted a somewhat serious question about a problem thay have in front of them. I invite you to do the same. It would make it a bit easier for me and be better for the person in need and the forum as a whole.

This is a forum, and I expect rhetorical responses for questions posed. The more - the better. If it wasn't a vast supply of info, this site wouldn't be experiencing the resurgence in the number of members and internet traffic that it does right now. Partly due to new reviews and mostly helping others find the answers they seek. In fact, I hope more new members post the simplest questions and not have to be afraid or intimidated to ask. I'd like to see members that have been here awhile pick up the pace of doing just that. Since they are salty their help is best when they begin to dole back out those things that this site has provided for them. But do and say whatever you want; it is a free forum and one can do as they please. Just so long as it is in line with the rules, I have no problems with anybody. I have said my peace.

I NEVER said you were "bob 808" or anything like it. I would never do that. I joked around in one thread that you might want to borrow his paintshaker. That was an inside joke. I think I also implied that you were behaving in the same manner as "Lon" Tech808 at Copper's forum, in terms of misleading reviews and shady practices using your power as a mod to avoid criticism and keep the facts from being posted. So, no sir, I have nothing to admit to being wrong about, because I never said what you claim. More misleading/obfuscating on your part.

No sour grapes, either. I don't like to write at all, and I am definitely not good at it.

I object to you, being a ham who should know better, extolling the virtues of running 1 to 60 watt carrier to peak ratios on AM. I object to stupid shit like echo and talkback, and find it appalling to see hams referrring to either as a "feature" I object to mindless regurgitation of tech-babble you got straight from Sam Lewis. Trying to explain that overmodulation isn't overmodulation if you are increasing dynamic range. Repeating Gizmotchy's insanely inflated gain as if it were true. You should know better. I could go on and on. But you don't get called out because you are a moderator with a heavy hand.

 

[Robb]

The PM you sent me -I had shared it with all of the Mods.
They know.

I think you can write. "Extolling vitues" shows a fair reach of writing skill. Maybe you should.

I have said NOTHING about any of the particulars of the Gizmotchy antenna. I did talk about its claims; however I didn't say anything about my findings as yet. I did say that I was going to be comparative with a vertical antenna.

You seem to forget, the reason I like the OmegaForce - non HP - is based in fact. I owned one for a whole year and know it intimately. I will admit that my analogy in dynamics as used was inappropriate. But I was reaching to explain that a low carrier and massive swing does work. Actually, since MOSFET's are the norm now it is kind of academic. Isn't it?

You talk skip on an export radio on 11 meters - OK. This thread has providied you with the opportunity to speak your peace too. No heavy handed things happened here; have they? You are still wrong about your opinion of me - not that it matters much. I can let it all go at that, and we can agree to differ.

 

[DIRTYWHITEBOY]

freecell and a few others used to keep a lid on the BS around here , but they are gone now .
i know jack dug his own hole , and i could almost kick his ass for it , but hes a grown man . seems weve lost some other big brains here too , or at least they seem to only post few and far inbetween . some of the guys didnt have the best bedside manner , but they were a wealth of information .

has anyone else noticed a change , or is it just me ????

i miss freecell and concreteman

 

[GLR]

So what exactly happens to the items that you receive for review? Am I incorrect in believing that they become a part of your personal collection? If so, this is something I'm not used to seeing on this forum.

Also, if anyone runs a automotive forum I'd like to be an admin there, I could use a new suv.

 

[W5LZ]

The original question;
"has anyone else noticed a change , or is it just me ????"

Yes, I have noticed that things have changed. I think things have changed in such a way that could generally be called 'good'. Does that mean every single thing changed, down to a microscopic level has been 'good' in my opinion? Of course not, 'miracles' make me very nervous/suspicious, and if I agreed totally with anything it'd be a 'miracle'.
Standards.
Call them standards or rules. If applied equally to all, I think they are good. That means they apply to me as much as anyone else. I may not like a particular standard/rule, but that doesn't make much difference, it still applies. If it get's to where I can't abide by the standards/rules, it/they really 'grate' for some reason, I'll leave where that/those rules apply. The only thing I ask is that I be made aware of those standards/rules, and please tell me if I'm not following them. I've found that's a pretty good attitude, not just on forums, but everywhere. Big difference between breaking rules and changing them. Being willing to accept the consequences is one of those 'differences'.
That's about as far as I can go in this thread without getting very specific, and I don't want to do that.
- 'Doc

 

[K8PG]

I miss Who? Oh well-life goes on...........

YOU GAVE ME A BRAINFART !!!

ARGUE OVER STUPID XXXX AND .............

WE NEED TO ALL GET ALONG-

I think this forum-worldwidedx.com has grown for the better-But what do I know>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

[pro151]

You can't please all of the people all of the time.
I see a lot of things here that I like, I see some things that I either don't like or don't agree with.
The things I don't like, I don't keep up with. The members I don't like,
I don't read their threads or posts.
I do however find this to be a very informative and open forum in comparison to a lot of others.
I know that a lot of the members here have a different view of Redneck's than I do and I don't have a problem with that, I stand by my signature.
I do know that WWRF and Redneck's are my 2 favorite forums and 2 of the most open forums around. (now if you want a "true open forum" where you can just have at it, might I suggest RF Mudducks).
You could be over at CBRT where none of what has been said or discussed in this thread would have made it 5 minutes.

OK. I am through and back on the side now.
Carry on.

 

[Highlander_821]

I have said NOTHING about any of the particulars of the Gizmotchy antenna. I did talk about its claims; however I didn't say anything about my findings as yet. I did say that I was going to be comparative with a vertical antenna.

r.

From your post in the Gizmotchy thread:


"Since the Gizmotchy has +12Db gain before the add-on director; I should see a minimum of +15Db forward gain with the added director/"Power Booster..."

Ok. First, let's just assume that is DBi, and not DBd, which would be a more appropriate reference for this type of beam antenna, which is basically analogous to a 3 element yagi. Rounding numbers up to be generous, real world gain is probably closer to 7 DBi. Adding a single director element maybe gets you to 9 DBi.

Now if you had said that the Giz "claims" 12 db, you'd be all good. Words matter.

BTW, your Imax doesn't have 6 db gain over anything other than maybe a dummy load. I have an Imax and like it a lot, but it is just an end fed .64 radiator with a lossy matching circuit. At best, maybe a DB or two over a 1/2 wave dipole.

I'd like to end this feud as well, and admit to being way too impulsive sometimes. I'm also sorry for the way I spoke to you in my PM. That wasn't nice.