|
|
Post by dsjr on Apr 6, 2016 8:07:19 GMT
I took my part on and tried to do the best I could. I thought the 'Greg-Gate' situation was done and dusted, but the post above seems not. The BMU socket only showed a short length of solid core wire and a solder joint where one of the transformer wires was attached to the main 'gridwork' of socket wiring. Maybe a torch was used in an attempt to scan inside, but even then, all you'd see through that aperture is part of the transformer top... The unit works for most who try it, it did for Greg FFS and the source of the transformer is there o HFS now for all to read - balanced transformers of this KVA rating and higher are expensive and not easy to source. I think it's a shame that others didn't join in with the loan scheme. I mean, one in particular who complained about it was invited to supply a couple of choice accessories for loan but fell silent - I wonder why? Thanks for (mostly) giving me an easy time with the loans. It was fun while it lasted  |
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Apr 6, 2016 8:12:25 GMT
You can come to any conclusion you like, but if you drop the idea that there is some kind of conspiracy then it's pretty clear. For the last time, we made the decision, we take the hit. It was not just about pressure from others, we've made it clear that the situation with only one vendor on board became untenable.
This thread alone is proof that you cannot consult with members over such an issue because there will never be unanimity. It's our ethos that we're guided by and that we stand by now.
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Apr 6, 2016 8:13:44 GMT
Alan, there are no trade members. Trade affiliations are already displayed.
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Apr 6, 2016 8:18:53 GMT
Dave, in case it wasn't clear, we do appreciate all your efforts with the NVA loan scheme. You made it a success and I thank you.
|
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on Apr 6, 2016 8:31:52 GMT
There are lots of assumptions being made here, accusations being bandied about and conclusions being leapt to.
Let us be clear, there was no pressure from 'elite' members or from anyone else. We are hiding nothing and protecting no-one.
I would urge anyone who doubts that to read the announcement again, only this time absorb the words that are actually used rather than the ones you think it uses.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pinch on Apr 6, 2016 8:34:31 GMT
Let us be clear, there was no pressure from 'elite' members or from anyone else. A forum isn't any good without its members, and we found ourselves in a position where we either listened to the complaints or held fast and lost a lot of members and involvement. |
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Apr 6, 2016 8:39:41 GMT
Chris was referring to pressure. We certainly had complaints in the area of bias through having only one vendor on board. Not just from members with trade affiliations. I repeat: we made the decision!
Right then, I think I've said all that needs to be said and we're in danger of this becoming circular.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 6, 2016 8:39:41 GMT
This thread alone is proof that you cannot consult with members over such an issue because there will never be unanimity. With respect - reading through the posts I would say there is almost universal disagreement with the decision to end the scheme with none in actual agreement (apart from the moderators who made the decision) This thread does not in any way prove your statement - in fact the complete opposite. |
|
|
|
Post by TheMooN on Apr 6, 2016 8:54:58 GMT
Martin....In the interest of open disclosure, I for one feel it only fair that the membership should be apprised as to the identity of the 'forum members with trade interest' who objected to the scheme and 'canvassed' you, let's put in those terms, for its closure ?
|
|
|
|
Post by Pinch on Apr 6, 2016 9:06:52 GMT
Thanks Martin, and I should take this opportunity to apologise for any additional grief that I've instigated around this issue for you - it's to TAS's credit that threads like this are allowed to exist.
As I noted in my opening post, I don't really follow the thought that the absence of multiple vendors taking advantage of the scheme creates the impression of bias - for my part, it really didn't. But supposing that this is really a genuine concern (and not just a stick that people with ulterior motives have taken to beating the scheme with), it seems to me that there would be various ways to guard against creating this impression, that stop well short of closing the scheme altogether.
That's my take on it anyway.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 6, 2016 9:15:31 GMT
Administrators, you made the decision under pressure. You said as much and I am not imagining it. There is zero support for your decision in this thread so the conclusion is an 'elite' group exist who's sensibilities are more important than the general membership. One member supplying loans was tenable up to now so why stop it? The opportunity for vendors who are not members or aware of the forum yet has been removed for the future. I am not surprised that the few trade members here have not participated. Perhaps they are too worried that the value for money their products provide would be questioned? I challenge any of the complainants to come out of the woodwork and provide valid arguments against the loan scheme and explain why they won't participate in such a scheme. I have an idea who they are but won't name any names. Only one has been honest enough to openly express his opposition which I respect and would still buy product from. As for the rest you are losing at least one potential customer and probably a lot more.
|
|
|
|
Post by jazzbones on Apr 6, 2016 15:17:19 GMT
A throw away remark on another forum I occasionally read said this would all end in tears; looks like it has?
Why aren't you all listening to music instead of barking and whinging at the three main guys of TAS who are genuine in their beliefs and have invested time, and more than likely their own money (certainly not yours), in setting up TAS? If you can do better than TAS, or any other forum for that matter, no one is stopping you, I'll hold the door open for you on the way out and await the birth of your own forums.
Glad my other hobby is books, solitary, absorbing and free from the playground bitching... come on girls, pull yourselves together and get back to the many other areas of HiFi thats here for free, you like free don't you?
|
|
|
|
Post by AlanS on Apr 6, 2016 15:57:49 GMT
A throw away remark on another forum I occasionally read said this would all end in tears; looks like it has?
Why aren't you all listening to music instead of barking and whinging at the three main guys of TAS who are genuine in their beliefs and have invested time, and more than likely their own money (certainly not yours), in setting up TAS? If you can do better than TAS, or any other forum for that matter, no one is stopping you, I'll hold the door open for you on the way out and await the birth of your own forums.
Glad my other hobby is books, solitary, absorbing and free from the playground bitching... come on girls, pull yourselves together and get back to the many other areas of HiFi thats here for free, you like free don't you? Thank you for your post and keeping the thread alive. What books do you recommend, haven't read one for years. Written a few programs though. |
|
|
|
Post by AlanS on Apr 6, 2016 16:04:31 GMT
Alan - we have no 'trade' members and no trade section - that is and always has been our ethos. However, we do have members who have a declared trade interest. I see one of those persons theaudiostandard.net/user/21 but he hasn't declared anything there or to me. I don't think I will bother trying to find the others |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 6, 2016 16:15:56 GMT
Let's look at the positives:
1. Lots of us got to try things we were curious about. It was free financially and also free from obligation.
2. Any maker or seller who put their products forward has benefitted from gaining the respect of members for their openness and vision in doing so.
3. Makers/sellers who had the same opportunity but didn't join in, are now clear to see and members can draw their own conclusions about them and their products.
4. Some of us got to buy products they wouldn't otherwise have contemplated. Some of us now have a "wish list".
5. Others got to maybe rule out options that didn't work for them.
6. You can STILL get a loan via PM AND write about it if you so wish
7. TAS embraced and tried to get the loan scheme to thrive. Who else did so? .......exactly.
If the guys here had simply said "no", we would've missed on a great opportunity. Nobody can force others to join in but I feel that those who didn't embrace the scheme are the real losers here.
|
|
|
|
Post by gazjam on Apr 6, 2016 18:53:42 GMT
I sympathise with you Greg.
I too am on RDs "bad list", so was never going to be supplied loan items, but I liked the loan scheme in general and have had no words with anyone (verbal or written) regarding getting it stopped.
I would like to see the NVA loan scheme ban rescinded. Can speak to Greg's character, having shared some time with him on different occasions over the years....and gotten drunk with him, which is where you REALLY get to know someone! End of the day...guys...Greg wouldn't have done that. Aside fom him (probably) taking the same view as myself that lifes too f*king short for this kind of nonsense, He's a straight up bloke. Prattle elsewhere (looking at you Hifi Subjectivist) doesn't mean its true. Some folk care too much about what others say but at the end of the day....who cares. Haters gonna hate, you know? Historically its not unfair to say...I think...that Hifi Subjectivist forum thrives on conflict and the less pleasant side of online forum life. I may be doing Richard a disservice here and apologies if I am but a forum is only as good as its members, and there are some spiteful mothertruckers on there... Always an easier choice to knock bridges down than to build them... |
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on Apr 6, 2016 18:57:02 GMT
A throw away remark on another forum I occasionally read said this would all end in tears; looks like it has?
Ron, I don't understand. No 'tears' from anyone who used it as the scheme worked and allowed people to try stuff for good or bad, that they wouldn't have tried otherwise as cash up front would have been demanded and it would have been SALE or return, not LOAN AND return, as the loan scheme is! Did you ever lay out over a grand of your hard saved dosh on that phono stage you were interested in? If you have, I'm sure you're delighted with it, but what if you hadn't been? Would you have had to beg to return it for a refund, or would you have been told to shove it as it was a private build talked about on the relevant forum I believe? Borrowing it first would have only cost you the carriage both ways and you wouldn't have felt obligated to buy it if there were doubts as to its suitability... That's why I cheekily offered you the loan of a Phono 2/PSU a few months ago, so you'd have had some form of reference - at no obligation - away from the rather dated and noisy Naim input cards I believe you were still using. You vociferously declined the offer and gave me good reason for doing so, which I took on the chin as manfully as I could. I'm not having a go, but I resent any possible gloating, just because other trade members here didn't want to loan anything out for others to try at no obligation. Apologies, but I felt I needed to say this. |
|
|
|
Post by gazjam on Apr 6, 2016 19:38:42 GMT
Again..no disrespect to Richard.
Always call a spade a spade, as will I.
Just relaying my personal experience of Greg.
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Apr 6, 2016 20:07:23 GMT
I see one of those persons theaudiostandard.net/user/21 but he hasn't declared anything there or to me. I don't think I will bother trying to find the others That link is to David Brook who has correctly declared himself as MCRU in his signature. |
|
|
|
Post by TheMooN on Apr 6, 2016 20:14:09 GMT
I sympathise with you Greg.
I too am on RDs "bad list", so was never going to be supplied loan items, but I liked the loan scheme in general and have had no words with anyone (verbal or written) regarding getting it stopped.
I would like to see the NVA loan scheme ban rescinded. Can speak to Greg's character, having shared some time with him on different occasions over the years....and gotten drunk with him, which is where you REALLY get to know someone! End of the day...guys...Greg wouldn't have done that. Aside fom him (probably) taking the same view as myself that lifes too f*king short for this kind of nonsense, He's a straight up bloke. Prattle elsewhere (looking at you Hifi Subjectivist) doesn't mean its true. Some folk care too much about what others say but at the end of the day....who cares. Haters gonna hate, you know? Historically its not unfair to say...I think...that Hifi Subjectivist forum thrives on conflict and the less pleasant side of online forum life. I may be doing Richard a disservice here and apologies if I am but a forum is only as good as its members, and there are some spiteful mothertruckers on there... Always an easier choice to knock bridges down than to build them... What on earth has this diatribe got to do with the main point and germane to this thread gazjam.? Yes, for the most part we are pretty much all aware of past histories and grudges being played out here, yes, for the most part reasonable minded folk may consider Mr Dunn to be at times an erasable and contrary character with entrenched views on the commercial way HiFi sales should operate within his utopia, on the other hand, it would appear that his company provides excellent products, at a very reasonable mark up as per his business model, a part of which comprises an opportunity to avail oneself of his risk and monetary free loan scheme. One considers these factors and either engages in commerce with his company or not What has played out within these walls of late has been to my mind a diss-service to the many, to the ends and designs of a few, Quite Shabby really. |
|
