If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
BHelman,
Did you know that? The issue editor skims through it and randomly picks something to add to a title. I'm a journalist... In this case, the lead-in was a direct quote from the article, saying "We give the Monroy a razor thin edge". While you obviously differ, it should be possible to concede the article says just that - in the one and only passage directly comparing the units. It doesn't say "The Surecheck is way better" or something in that vein, even if you keep claiming it does. It doesn't say "The Monroy is way better" or anything like that, either. But I never claimed that. -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Which quote they use is subject to a random sample obviously, because
they continue on that quote to explain why for capability they pick the Trafficscope. My point is they mention clearly that the price difference is justified by the added capability of the Trafficscope. Like they said, you get what you pay for. Thomas Borchert wrote in message ... BHelman, Did you know that? The issue editor skims through it and randomly picks something to add to a title. I'm a journalist... In this case, the lead-in was a direct quote from the article, saying "We give the Monroy a razor thin edge". While you obviously differ, it should be possible to concede the article says just that - in the one and only passage directly comparing the units. It doesn't say "The Surecheck is way better" or something in that vein, even if you keep claiming it does. It doesn't say "The Monroy is way better" or anything like that, either. But I never claimed that. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
(Loran) wrote in
om: ...he said he didn't write that, but it is was a guy named paul bertorelli who did that. But paul is also in a mooney club with the guys from the monro company. I thought that was a pretty interesting discovery, considering they are supposed to be unbiased, I wonder just how unbiased their final editors are. I have known 'Berto for over a decade, and I can't see him changing his opinion for anything less than a 2x4 upside the head. G Certainly not because he is in the same "club" as someone else. [Besides, my experience is that the Monroy guy has so little people skills that he may have no friends.] Send Paul an e:mail and ask him! He'll give you his honest reason (even if it is "it's cute." G). ----------------------------------------------- James M. Knox TriSoft ph 512-385-0316 1109-A Shady Lane fax 512-366-4331 Austin, Tx 78721 ----------------------------------------------- |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Loran,
I actually know John Spencer Well, maybe you do. But maybe you're a dog. On the internet, who knows. The guy's name is Jon, not John. -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Actually his name is Jonathan.
I don't get the dog part???? Thomas Borchert wrote in message ... Loran, I actually know John Spencer Well, maybe you do. But maybe you're a dog. On the internet, who knows. The guy's name is Jon, not John. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Loran,
I don't get the dog part???? It's an old cartoon from the early days of the web, with two dogs sitting in front of a computer and one saying to the other "On the internet, no one knows if you're a dog" As for the original subject: Paul tells a different story. I'm waiting for Jon's reply, but somehow I don't think it will support your posting. -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
We (proxalert) contacted Aviation consumer on mid february to offer to
send a Proxalert R5 for evaluation. They came back 2 weeks after saying it's too late as they were unable to buy a device from a distributor. Our contact info are available since November 2003 but they never contacted us. If you don't see a follow up very soon on the R5 the conclusion will be evident ... (Loran) wrote in message . com... You know, I actually know John Spencer and when I asked him about this article, he let me know that he said the monro 300 did not perform as well as the surecheck vrx. So I asked him why the "razor edge" headline he said he didn't write that, but it is was a guy named paul bertorelli who did that. But paul is also in a mooney club with the guys from the monro company. I thought that was a pretty interesting discovery, considering they are supposed to be unbiased, I wonder just how unbiased their final editors are. (BHelman) wrote in message . com... Which quote they use is subject to a random sample obviously, because they continue on that quote to explain why for capability they pick the Trafficscope. My point is they mention clearly that the price difference is justified by the added capability of the Trafficscope. Like they said, you get what you pay for. Thomas Borchert wrote in message ... BHelman, Did you know that? The issue editor skims through it and randomly picks something to add to a title. I'm a journalist... In this case, the lead-in was a direct quote from the article, saying "We give the Monroy a razor thin edge". While you obviously differ, it should be possible to concede the article says just that - in the one and only passage directly comparing the units. It doesn't say "The Surecheck is way better" or something in that vein, even if you keep claiming it does. It doesn't say "The Monroy is way better" or anything like that, either. But I never claimed that. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Loran,
Jon got back to me. He says he doesn't know you, doesn't know a Loran and doesn't use it, either. You didn't really think you could get away with that, did you? Does Surecheck really need that kind of "advertising"? -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Thierry,
the conclusion will be evident ... The first conclusion we can safely draw here is that Loran lied. So let's not jump to any other, shall we? -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|