|
Post by AlanS on Apr 6, 2016 20:30:53 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. Perhaps that is how you see it, knowing he is trade and I choose him because I knew MCRU was trade before this forum existed. But hard as it may be for you to appreciate UNLESS you know MCRU is an active trade then there is not an unambiguous statement "this person is trade and this is his business". I repeat he has not declared himself as a trade to ordinary members, the people who's views you ignored.
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Apr 6, 2016 20:51:57 GMT
I agree. My previous post was made because I needed to challenge inaccurate stuff RD was posting on his forum about me, and so it appears to continue.
I very much appreciate the support I have received from pre65 and Gazjam. Respect to both of you.
From a personal perspective, the sooner this thred is locked and shut down the better. Maybe that will bring RD's irrational rantings to a close.
On the closure of the loan scheme, all now must have been said. Surely it is time to close this thread.........please?
MODERATION: Content removed - Attacks on fellow members are a fundamental breach of rules, Greg. You know this and you have been guilty of it before.
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on Apr 6, 2016 21:22:30 GMT
Not for you or I to say Greg. I'm not having a go at you, as you and the BMU saga weren't the cause of this decision as far as I know and I *thought* the matter now closed, but you had a go and then RD replied and so it goes on and on and on The loan scheme was quite fair and open for the likes of MCRU and/or Sound Hifi/Timestep to join in if they felt they had products that people could try with no financial commitment up front. They and others less obvious here didn't wish to participate and THAT was the reason why the loan scheme was terminated, or so it was said.
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Apr 7, 2016 5:49:04 GMT
Perhaps that is how you see it It's not "how I see it", it's there in black and white. If any forum member with trade affiliations joins TAS as a member, we ask them to declare their interest in their signature. To the best of my knowledge, they have all done so. If any are missing, we would be glad to put that right.
|
|
|
Post by DaveC on Apr 7, 2016 7:06:39 GMT
dsjr
Please do not blame me ! I made my stance perfectly clear and sadly was not accommodated by the Management.
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on Apr 7, 2016 7:28:47 GMT
But Dave, your 'stance' was that instead of taking part in a loan scheme (which is what was being offered) we should give your business an area of the forum where you would have moderating rights specifically in order to protect yourself from your competitors. How exactly would that have fitted with our desire to be non-partisan, which after all, that was the purpose of offering the loan scheme to everyone?
|
|
|
Post by AlanS on Apr 7, 2016 7:29:27 GMT
Perhaps that is how you see it It's not "how I see it", it's there in black and white. If any forum member with trade affiliations joins TAS as a member, we ask them to declare their interest in their signature. To the best of my knowledge, they have all done so. If any are missing, we would be glad to put that right. Signature MCRU is me! | Clearaudio Master Innovation | Stradivari | TT2 Arm | Music First SUT + Pre-Amp | LDA 300B's | Lumin Server | Melco N1A | Music First Ref Phono Amp | Russell K RED100 Speakers | SLiC Cables | IsoTek Mosaic Genesis | A Chair Which does not say Trade. Unless you already know MCRU trades, bla,bla I also know Tim Curtis may be trade but he is for free and accepts contributions so like NVA does things differently and may be disliked by the conventional. This has become tedious. I don't like being whatevered. It is your decision as you say.
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Apr 7, 2016 7:33:28 GMT
You're right, it is tedious.
|
|
|
Post by DaveC on Apr 7, 2016 7:42:44 GMT
But Dave, your 'stance' was that instead of taking part in a loan scheme (which is what was being offered) we should give your business an area of the forum where you would have moderating rights specifically in order to protect yourself from your competitors. How exactly would that have fitted with our desire to be non-partisan, which after all, that was the purpose of offering the loan scheme to everyone? It would fit in exactly the same way the NVA Loan Scheme did, but you said yes to NVA and no to me. Simples ! Once again, do not blame me, I'm the injured party here................
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on Apr 7, 2016 7:47:33 GMT
You were offered exactly the same facility as everyone else was. By any definition, that is impartiality. I don't think I blamed you or anyone else for anything.
|
|
|
Post by pre65 on Apr 7, 2016 8:05:41 GMT
But Dave, your 'stance' was that instead of taking part in a loan scheme (which is what was being offered) we should give your business an area of the forum where you would have moderating rights specifically in order to protect yourself from your competitors. How exactly would that have fitted with our desire to be non-partisan, which after all, that was the purpose of offering the loan scheme to everyone? It would fit in exactly the same way the NVA Loan Scheme did, but you said yes to NVA and no to me. Simples ! Once again, do not blame me, I'm the injured party here................ Not as I see things.
I think "TRADE" members should have a more prominent disclosure, as said before, the MCRU one is not obvious if you are not aware of David's business.
*
|
|
|
Post by Slinger on Apr 7, 2016 8:46:44 GMT
Am I talking to myself here? There is/was/will never be such a thing as "The NVA loan scheme" and that's half of the reason for the bitching, the detractors seem to have re-named it to suit their own agendas. It is, was, and evermore shall be the loan scheme, pure and simple. The fact the NVA were the only company to take advantage of it is neither here nor there.
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on Apr 7, 2016 8:59:48 GMT
But Dave, your 'stance' was that instead of taking part in a loan scheme (which is what was being offered) we should give your business an area of the forum where you would have moderating rights specifically in order to protect yourself from your competitors. How exactly would that have fitted with our desire to be non-partisan, which after all, that was the purpose of offering the loan scheme to everyone? It would fit in exactly the same way the NVA Loan Scheme did, but you said yes to NVA and no to me. Simples ! Once again, do not blame me, I'm the injured party here................ It's not really the same though, is it? I was asked to administer a LOAN scheme here and at HFS, for NVA equipment and OTHER MANUFACTURERS were asked to take part in the good spirit of the venture - nothing to do with me, they'd administer their own loan arrangements if they took part! Forum member gets in touch to borrow an item of gear, I locate it and arrange transport to said member, member tries it and passes it back or onwards. the ONLY commitment was in carriage costs and the 'policed' request to write a review, GOOD OR BAD, of said loaned product. Many here liked it as it removed obligation to buy (yes Ron Jazzbones, it did!!!). I really don't feel it was the same as a 'Timestep Room' and I'm dragging in MCRU here too, as he supplies power supplies for all sorts of gear and he could also have made a loan unit with popular output voltage (12V?) available for people to try at no expense other than carriage. hell, I'd have been interested in a sooper-dooper 12V supply to replace the caiman smps one on my twin-supply Digit Opto! £200 is a lot of dosh for a small transformer in a box with a tenner's worth of components I'm exaggerating a little bit you get the point), but if people had the chance to TRY one, even if an immediate sale didn't happen, it would plant seeds for the future and word would spread about how well it worked, so others might take the plunge. Mods, I'm sorry. This is now in danger of becoming circular and it's already been noted that 'personalities' are coming into it and maybe I've done the same, although it's not meant to do so in a derogatory or critical manner. This whole godamned hobby should be a FUN thing to take part in and the improved quality of music reproduction at home should be a much desired outcome of schemes like this. I've been put under a considerable amount of stress over certain audio-based issues recently, which have had a knock-on effect on streeses at home and I nearly had to walk away from it all (putting food on my family's table be damned!), but the 'need' to communicate in my audio life-obsession, together with basically loving making the stuff has won through, for now.
|
|
|
Post by DaveC on Apr 7, 2016 9:31:32 GMT
I never said it was the same. It isn't the same. And that was my point. Does anyone listen ?
Dave
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on Apr 7, 2016 9:54:41 GMT
So lay out your real objections to the loan scheme. Having your own sub-forum is different as you've suggested and possibly seen as a step too far as I was ALWAYS moderated on the 'loan' thread, but isn't this a little more insular? I'm sure a 'Timestep Thread' would be welcomed - I mean, you apparently have a good offer on DL103 cartridges at present, although you mentioning this instead of me might be judged as too self serving, I don't know - my naivety, my bad...
|
|
|
Post by DaveC on Apr 7, 2016 9:57:17 GMT
dsjr I'm getting tired of this, please read my previous posts.
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on Apr 7, 2016 10:13:15 GMT
Ok, stay stumm then. I'll trawl back and see if you've given your reasons for objecting to the loan scheme in general.
Oh, you mean this then?
"Martin
With the greatest respect; the loan scheme is a benefit to your vendor(s). The loan scheme is a shop front and it is also a sales mechanism, how could it not be ? At one point a vendor had 3 posts in the 10 most recent, is that not a shop front ?
Also running a thread (once again) about a product that had finished production, when in fact it hasn't at all, is also a shop front and of benefit to the vendor.
A vendor showing a product but not quoting the price is also a shop front and a sales mechanism.
The loan scheme in my view directly violates your stance/ethos. Also in my view it disenfranchises those vendors who choose globally not to run loan schemes.
Why not level the playing field and let "trusted" vendors have their own moderated area ? I know it would conflict with your ethos, but you moved to accommodate the loan scheme ?
This is a great forum, lets make it greater ?
Regards
Dave (C)"
Of course the loan scheme is of benefit to vendors if any sales are made out of it. I don't think anyone ever suggested otherwise, but the whole point was that loanees never had to buy up front to get the chance to try at home. Hell, I was in audio retail long enough to have countless time-wasters in for dems who obviously weren't going to buy. In fact, they'd do the rounds of local dealers (Hifi Dave will confirm we Hertfordshire dealers had a shared list of such people at one time as they did the rounds). I had a couple of strangers later on who bought goods, kept a week and then returned what were by then ex-dem or second-hand goods, demanding a refund because they didn't like their purchase, something my boss intensely disliked having to do - a difficult one this, as we weren't 'John Lewis,' but had these people been more upfront to start with, there'd have been less pain later - but that was the bosses choice, not mine. Allowing ONE SAMPLE of a popular priced item for LOAN sort-of side-steps this and over a year or so, may well pay for itself in sales gathered from it's use as a loan item.
I never suggested you or similar offering expensive items for loan like this, as you'd probably want more personal control over 'home dems,' but a popular power supply or cable suggestion is quite another thing imo.
We'll just have to beg to differ here.
|
|
|
Post by DaveC on Apr 7, 2016 10:22:57 GMT
Not at all, if you had bothered to read the previous, then you would not be asking me to repeat it all over again and again. EDIT: Ah, I see DQ has done it for you and you have substantially edited accordingly !
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on Apr 7, 2016 10:30:53 GMT
DQ does nothing for me My post above was all my own work
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2016 10:55:30 GMT
Once again, do not blame me, I'm the injured party here................ Eh - how on earth are you the 'injured party' - that completely escapes me. I thought you were a business man. Failing to take advantage of a business opportunity doesn't make you an victim - just not a very shrewd operator.
|
|