WayTools' TextBlade Keyboard to Start Shipping to Test Group Users Next Week

[dabigkahuna]

But as to WT, even if they do get sued and lose, that's no guarantee that we'll recover our money, and we certainly won't recover the time and energy we'd waste on suing them.

Doesn't matter if we get anything back or not. It only matters that it would cost them dearly. It simply isn't going to happen. There is no rational reason to do it in the first place and more than enough reason to avoid doing it even if they wanted to.

I think one problem with your posts is that you go after exaggerations with the same vigor as you go after non-facts. It really muddles matters.

Let's look at the example you used, but in full: The full statement the critic made was, "so she got a free gift from BiggerFan. 8 months before us."

As you know since you read my response, this falsely said she got a free gift, that another poster worked for WT (since otherwise he couldn't have given here the "gift" of a TB - he, like me, have been falsely accused of this before so it isn't a one time thing), and that we'd be waiting 8 more months.

That isn't a matter of exaggerations. That is a person making stuff up, including misrepresenting people. So, yep, I'll nail them for it.

I think I've been pretty clear about what I favor. I favor rational arguments. I do NOT favor unfairly questioning people's integrity - such as was done to Juli or when people accuse me of working for WT, etc. I favor providing accurate praise or criticism so those potential customers you care about can make their own decisions based on the truth, not made up stuff or exaggerations.

Sure, a lot of what I post is viewed as helping WT. Not my fault that most of the nonsense comes from their critics! C'mon, how many posters have you seen exaggerate or say false things that are positive about them? Zero?
[doublepost=1456428679][/doublepost]

A reliable source got access to this script from a soon-to-be-released podcast and forwarded it to me

Ah, a work of fiction, designed to promote definite insinuations with no regard to facts.

 

[Night Spring]

Doesn't matter if we get anything back or not. It only matters that it would cost them dearly. It simply isn't going to happen. There is no rational reason to do it in the first place and more than enough reason to avoid doing it even if they wanted to.

Except WT hasn't always acted rationally. Like their paranoia over competitors pulling their feet, and their accusations of people posting under multiple accounts.

Let's look at the example you used, but in full: The full statement the critic made was, "so she got a free gift from BiggerFan. 8 months before us."

As you know since you read my response, this falsely said she got a free gift, that another poster worked for WT (since otherwise he couldn't have given here the "gift" of a TB - he, like me, have been falsely accused of this before so it isn't a one time thing), and that we'd be waiting 8 more months.

That isn't a matter of exaggerations. That is a person making stuff up, including misrepresenting people. So, yep, I'll nail them for it.

So just go after the free gift part, and leave the 8 months alone.

I think I've been pretty clear about what I favor. I favor rational arguments. I do NOT favor unfairly questioning people's integrity - such as was done to Juli or when people accuse me of working for WT, etc. I favor providing accurate praise or criticism so those potential customers you care about can make their own decisions based on the truth, not made up stuff or exaggerations.

Sure, a lot of what I post is viewed as helping WT. Not my fault that most of the nonsense comes from their critics! C'mon, how many posters have you seen exaggerate or say false things that are positive about them? Zero?

Seeing how they haven't done much to be positive about, it's hard to say whether anyone will embellish praise of WT with falsehoods and exaggerations, but I've seen it happen in plenty of other circumstances.

And whether or not questioning Juli or your integrity is unfair is a matter of interpretation. You are so vigorous in your defense of WT, that I do think it's reasonable for people to ask if you are one of them, or working for them. And Juli's articles about TextBlade have attracted questions because the tone of it was so different from other MacRumors articles. I was hardly the only one saying it looked too much like an ad, rather than reporting. So no, I don't think questioning you or Juli is unfair. Some of the posts questioning her may have crossed the line from polite questioning into being emotionally abusive, but if you are in fact in favor of rational arguments, then you should see that there's rational basis for positions and arguments other than your own.

 

[dabigkahuna]

Like their paranoia over competitors pulling their feet, and their accusations of people posting under multiple accounts.

Well, I don't know if there are people from competitors trying to cause trouble - which is why I don't make those accusations. Likewise about the multiple accounts. But, same as with everyone else, unless they are willing to offer actual proof, they shouldn't be making those statements. Even if they have proof internally. Which would also mean I don't know if it is paranoia. But it doesn't matter since the issue is what they say publicly.

So just go after the free gift part, and leave the 8 months alone.

I think it is worth pointing out that in a simple statement they claimed 3 things and were wrong or exaggerating. Shows a pattern of not so good consistency. Regardless of what they believe themselves, I'm confident they hoped others would accept that exaggeration just as they hoped people would believe the bogus claim of a gift and the charge that someone worked for WT.

And whether or not questioning Juli or your integrity is unfair is a matter of interpretation. You are so vigorous in your defense of WT, that I do think it's reasonable for people to ask if you are one of them, or working for them.

They aren't asking. They are making the direct claim and continue to do so after being told I'm not. So, as I keep pointing out, this is a tactic to shut down views they don't like. Rather than argue about what was written, make counter-arguments, etc, they try to go after someone's integrity. Happens quite regularly, many places. It is, frankly, intellectually dishonest.

And Juli's articles about TextBlade have attracted questions because the tone of it was so different from other MacRumors articles.

Strange, but I've been reading MR for years and saw nothing wrong with this example. But, if I was frustrated to the point of not thinking straight, I could read all kinds of things into perfectly rational statements.

I even referred before to an example someone tried to use - something to the effect that the TB was a unique approach to keyboards. Yet that is absolutely a true and accurate statement. Only reason to complain about it is because the critic just can't stand anything that isn't trashing them.

 

[Night Spring]

Well, I don't know if there are people from competitors trying to cause trouble - which is why I don't make those accusations. Likewise about the multiple accounts. But, same as with everyone else, unless they are willing to offer actual proof, they shouldn't be making those statements. Even if they have proof internally. Which would also mean I don't know if it is paranoia. But it doesn't matter since the issue is what they say publicly.

Ok, but I don't see you taking WT to task for making these proofless accusations. Private messages don't count, as I can't see those, so they might as well not exist.

I think it is worth pointing out that in a simple statement they claimed 3 things and were wrong or exaggerating. Shows a pattern of not so good consistency. Regardless of what they believe themselves, I'm confident they hoped others would accept that exaggeration just as they hoped people would believe the bogus claim of a gift and the charge that someone worked for WT.

See, when WT repeatedly keep pushing back their shipping date, you give them the benefit of doubt, saying these things happen when making a new product. But when people make unfounded suppositions and exaggerations while complaining about WT's repeated product delays, you ascribe to them the worst possible motivations, without any proof. You apply different standards to WT and to their critics.

I even referred before to an example someone tried to use - something to the effect that the TB was a unique approach to keyboards. Yet that is absolutely a true and accurate statement. Only reason to complain about it is because the critic just can't stand anything that isn't trashing them.

I'm not sure exactly what you are referring to here, but it seems to be another example of you attributing the worst conceivable motivation to WT critics.

 

[dabigkahuna]

Ok, but I don't see you taking WT to task for making these proofless accusations. Private messages don't count, as I can't see those, so they might as well not exist.

They count the same as when I privately contact critics. But as I keep saying, at this point it doesn't matter since the mere discussion of that private contact has now made my position public, hasn't it? So you should have no problem with this.

when WT repeatedly keep pushing back their shipping date, you give them the benefit of doubt, saying these things happen when making a new product. But when people make unfounded suppositions and exaggerations while complaining about WT's repeated product delays, you ascribe to them the worst possible motivations, without any proof. You apply different standards to WT and to their critics.

No, not even close. First, are you saying these things could not have happened (many delays because of bugs)? Because I'm pretty sure that it is quite possible, especially considering how complicated this thing is and all the new tech.

Second, this isn't remotely the same as accusing me or Biggerfan of working for Waytools and continuing to do so even after being told we do not. At best you can say it is "possible" we are lying. But that won't work because it means you would be playing the "liar" card to justify ignoring any arguments brought up. It would also mean you can't complain about accusations like that from WT. I've objected to both.

I'm not sure exactly what you are referring to here, but it seems to be another example of you attributing the worst conceivable motivation to WT critics.

I'm pointing out that, regardless of that person's motivation, their example made no sense unless they were just looking for excuses to complain. You see, I not only read their complaints, but I read their arguments use to back up their claims (if they even bother to give them). And I respond accordingly.

 

[Rolanbek]

And I respond accordingly.

Or not it seems.

 

[dabigkahuna]

Or not it seems.

Sometimes there is no purpose when all that is going on is that someone misses the point or, no matter how many criticisms I make of WT, there is always one more they want me to address - all while those who post misinformation get pretty much a pass. Which is fine. Everybody can post as they see fit. I respond as I see fit.

 

[ericpeets]

I don't partake in the waytools forum, because as someone has said, it's quite dysfunctional. And 'daBigKahuna' is a prime example of why it's dysfunctional. He thrives in it, and waytools provides him the perfect environment.

I have not read all his posts there, I don't think anybody has, but I don't think he's particularly pro-waytools. He just wants to butt heads with as many people as possible. It may sound like he's pro-waytools, but he's actually anti-(anti-waytools). He doesn't do any favors to waytools by voluntarily insisting on being their frontline. His arguments are poor, and he tends to bury his own point with volume. Until recently, I thought he has good intentions but his articulation was just piss poor.

But someone compared his behavior with those with aspergers, and i think it's apt. It's obvious he's starved for attention, probably because he was given none all his life. Even his attempts to be nice come off as "nasty", at least awkward. If his posts mirrors his real life, he must be socially inept, barely clinging onto fringe of society. So I feel sorry for him. All his messages sound like it's being pound out of loneliness from an asylum. I wish him the best of luck in finding peace with all his angst whether it's thru providing justice for waytools or other "victims" by schooling all those evil, nefarious "critics" and "attackers" and "irrationals" and other "idiots" with his own brand of "logic" and "rational" (not to mention, voluminous) wall of text.

 

[dabigkahuna]

He just wants to butt heads with as many people as possible.

Actually, I like it best when people knock off the bogus attacks - and personal ones - and make arguments on merit. It just doesn't happen very often.

But someone compared his behavior with those with aspergers, and i think it's apt. It's obvious he's starved for attention, probably because he was given none all his life. Even his attempts to be nice come off as "nasty", at least awkward. If his posts mirrors his real life, he must be socially inept, barely clinging onto fringe of society. So I feel sorry for him. All his messages sound like it's being pound out of loneliness from an asylum.

See what I mean? And just like that, you remove any need to actually make a rational argument or show how my arguments are poor. It's true, I don't argue like you. I actually take people's statements that I disagree with and show what is wrong with them. Tends to make for long posts.

It would be so much easier to make a post like you just did. But that just wouldn't be right.

 

[ericpeets]

Actually, I like it best when people knock off the bogus attacks - and personal ones - and make arguments on merit. It just doesn't happen very often.



See what I mean? And just like that, you remove any need to actually make a rational argument or show how my arguments are poor. It's true, I don't argue like you. I actually take people's statements that I disagree with and show what is wrong with them. Tends to make for long posts.

It would be so much easier to make a post like you just did. But that just wouldn't be right.

It's interesting to see that anything you don't agree with or cannot understand is considered "bogus attacks", which you think is synonymous with "criticism" which in turn you automatically deem as "illogical", "irrational", etc. They're not necessarily the same thing. You use this with such broad stroke at everyone (you know you're vague, don't you?) it's difficult to have any non-general discussion with you.

Your asking for "arguments on merit" is nothing more than demanding people agree with you, and only from people you like. If someone's ticked you off in the past, it doesn't matter how many "arguments with merit" are given. If you don't like them, nothing they say will have merit, as is the case with MaggieL, Trickflow, et. al. Just admit it. Their arguments are not always without merits, you just don't like them. And even if you do, you're hardly the paragon of "logic", "rational", "intelligent" or other magnanimous word you use to pad your resume.

But what I find interesting is that the people you're attacking (with such broad strokes) seem to be the same from which you're pandering for sympathy. Is it any wonder that those people will not like you, or even agree with you? Okay, as Rolanbek said so eloquently, adulation is not your goal. But if that's the case, trying to make a public case to the same people you attacked (to the tune of 900+ posts), and win their favor, should also not be your goal. While I admire your persistence and the obviously long, hard effort you put in, I'm afraid you're barking up the wrong tree, because it's the same tree you've been pissing on. And this where the mention of aspergers becomes apt, since nothing else explains your crazy, self-destructive behaviors.

My post above was not made TO you. It was my observation OF you, and a warning to others that falling into the trap of engaging you in a discussion that will sooner or later degrade into childish mudslinging, and in the end nothing more than exercise in futility.

You don't want dialogue, you just want to fight. You don't want to add anything insightful to a discussion. You just get off on being a contrarian. And if you feel like you're losing, you ask the same people you picked a fight with to empathize with you. The real world doesn't work like that. You can't have things both ways. Again, aspergers. Think about it. Bye.

 

[Night Spring]

Again, aspergers.

I don't know enough about Aspergers to tell if DBK's behavior fits or not. It does seem that our conversation has been going in circles for the last few pages, and I'm getting nowhere in trying to get him to acknowledge his obvious bias in favor of WayTools (or as you put it, anti-anti-WT).

I'll check back in tomorrow to see if any testing unit ships.

 

[dabigkahuna]

It's interesting to see that anything you don't agree with or cannot understand is considered "bogus attacks", which you think is synonymous with "criticism" which in turn you automatically deem as "illogical", "irrational", etc.

I usually provide the quotes and then explain why they are "attacks" or "bogus", etc.

Like mentioned here earlier. The critic claimed Juli got a "gift" of the text blade - but she didn't. It was just one for her to test AND RETURN when done. And that this "gift" came, obviously, from WT was given to her by Biggerfan - which clearly means they were saying he worked for WT. Just made up trash. Certainly nothing to show he gave it to her. So that was both bogus and an attack on Biggerfan.

So, tell me, what is it about such comments from a WT critic that you don't find to be an attack or not bogus? What is logical and rational about their comments?

Your asking for "arguments on merit" is nothing more than demanding people agree with you, and only from people you like.

False. I'm posting back and forth to people who often have disagreed with me on the WT forum and there are no problems. They don't make things up, for one thing. I'm sure they still don't agree with me or with how I post. So what? Doesn't mean we can't discuss things.

If you don't like them, nothing they say will have merit, as is the case with MaggieL, Trickflow, et. al. Just admit it.

Wrong again. Not my fault that Maggie claimed I was a tool for WT, etc. Oh, and I publicly posted that I thought Maggie should be chosen for TREG.

Heck, when Trickflow requested I ask Mark four questions, even though he had not treated me well, I said I would ask one of them and also said, logically, that I wouldn't promise to answer all questions because that could get "out of hand" with other people wanting their questions asked. And I said there could be some questions not asked because I may not think them appropriate.

So, in return, I was called "snotty" and criticized for not being willing to "ask four questions". But, of course, it wasn't about just four questions.

I believe at least two other posters - who also often disagree with me - called TF out on his rant, but he still kept at it, most recently by saying no one else asked me ask a question. Trouble is, anyone who read the thread knows that is not true. But even if it were, so what? I was responding based on what I expected. He didn't wait to see. He went right into the BOGUS ATTACK that was IRRATIONAL and ILLOGICAL.

But what I find interesting is that the people you're attacking (with such broad strokes) seem to be the same from which you're pandering for sympathy.

Nope. Don't need sympathy. I'm just pointing out that they somehow always find things I need to change, yet don't seem to have any concern about those who post erroneous information in the course of their rants. Including attacking others. That's not looking for sympathy. That is pointing out a rather blatant inconsistency. Funny, really, since they want me to criticize WT more in order to be "fair". Well, they can practice what they preach. Or not. I just point these things out.

And this where the mention of aspergers becomes apt, since nothing else explains your crazy, self-destructive behaviors.

That comes from an effort to ridicule someone rather than deal with the arguments they lay out.

Now, I realize few people will have read this far, but for those who have, let me first suggest they note that I took the various CLAIMS about me and methodically rebutted them with the actual facts that occurred.

Let's compare that with your approach:

Hmmm, seems you made around 20 claims about me in your last two posts and, let's see, there is no backup for them. Like this one: "You don't want to add anything insightful to a discussion."

That, like pretty much all the rest, is just a claim. Worse, it requires you ignore many of the things I have posted that directly contradict your claim. Convenient, isn't it?

There are plenty of things I've added to the discussion. Like the early post I made that took a series of claims that were simply wrong in many ways - and I provided the facts. That sure seems like a good thing - unless you don't want any facts that reduce the things you can legitimately criticize WT for. I wasn't mean about it. Just corrected things.

Just go back to the first page of comments - I have two there (15 & 18). All useful information, correcting statements and putting others in context. I submit that is a very good thing. And completely rebuts your assumption. So do you dare deal with what I actually say when it contradicts your assumptions?


[doublepost=1456469294][/doublepost]

I don't know enough about Aspergers to tell if DBK's behavior fits or not. It does seem that our conversation has been going in circles for the last few pages, and I'm getting nowhere in trying to get him to acknowledge his obvious bias in favor of WayTools (or as you put it, anti-anti-WT).

Notice what you just did? If I don't agree with you, I'm supposedly OBVIOUSLY biased in favor of WT. Yet you never seem to consider that this, at the very least, can show that you can't admit that you are biased against them.

I give you the same challenge above. Show how my posts on the first page of the comments are not useful information and simply accurate (as opposed to biased). Furthermore, in spite of the fact that I was correcting some pretty clearly false claims from other posters, I wasn't mean about anything.

 

[Night Spring]

Notice what you just did? If I don't agree with you, I'm supposedly OBVIOUSLY biased in favor of WT. Yet you never seem to consider that this, at the very least, can show that you can't admit that you are biased against them.

Er, what? I've repeatedly admitted I'm biased in favor of WT customers. I've never said I'm not biased against WT.

I give you the same challenge above. Show how my posts on the first page of the comments are not useful information and simply accurate (as opposed to biased). Furthermore, in spite of the fact that I was correcting some pretty clearly false claims from other posters, I wasn't mean about anything.

I did not say your post contained no useful information. Nor did I say you were being mean. I referred to those posts as examples of you doing the job that WT's PR department should be doing.

I'm not sure what other people may or may not have said, but personally. I've never thought you were being mean to anyone. But you do seem to misread people's intentions from time to time. Like you thinking I accused you of being mean, or producing no useful information. I didn't accuse you of either of those things.

 

[Rolanbek]

Sometimes there is no purpose when all that is going on is that someone misses the point or, no matter how many criticisms I make of WT, there is always one more they want me to address - all while those who post misinformation get pretty much a pass. Which is fine. Everybody can post as they see fit. I respond as I see fit.

You have not addressed the questions I asked here where I have a right of reply. Some you have not addressed in public at that I can see.

You are avoiding answering them and choosing to engage others in petty argument to the tune many hundreds of words and much of your time. That time will give you no traction in getting to whatever goal you are aiming for.

I will ask you again to look at my questions of you and give them some thought.

Pm me if you wish.

R

 

[dabigkahuna]

I referred to those posts as examples of you doing the job that WT's PR department should be doing.

I don't care if they should be doing them or not. BTW, as far as we know, they don't have a PR department. They sure need one! (see? criticism!).

Critics have used the mere existence of my giving ACCURATE information to "support" the claim that my purpose is to help WT. Really kinda weird, as if it is better to let false information be unchallenged rather than correct it! I don't work that way. And the fact that I was nice while correcting errors - I could easily claim they were lying, btw - shows that I'm not trying to pick fights with anyone.

I didn't accuse you of either of those things.

Then I need to clarify because I didn't say it well at all.

The other poster said I never gave any useful information. My challenge to you was to have you analyze the content yourself in hopes you would specifically recognize I did give useful information and, even though I was dealing with a bunch of false claims, I was just correcting things, without looking for a fight. That is, instead of just saying, "I didn't accuse you", but be able to say based on actual facts in my posts, that the accusation from others is actually false.

This, imo, is how well functioning societies work. With people who strongly disagree on many things also being able to speak out and say, "I don't agree with much of what they say, but that accusation simply isn't true". I'm a big fan of societal pressure. The web really needs it! Instead we usually get comments like, "It's the web, what do you expect?"

Well, I know what I expect. Nothing surprises me anymore. But while I debate many issues on many forums, I have found that I'm always doing my very tiny bit to try to get people to realize it can be so much better. I simply don't accept that things can't get better. In fact, I think the number one reason many things don't get better is because of that very attitude that it can't!

You may not agree. No one may agree. But it won't stop me from at least trying.
[doublepost=1456473266][/doublepost]

You have not addressed the questions I asked here where I have a right of reply.

Uh, that isn't a "right".

I'm simply not going to criticize Waytools for A and B and C only to have you say, "Well what about C? What about D? Etc. It's obvious it will never end and I'm not going to let all the focus be on WT and none on people who post things that are not true.

You do your thing and I'll do mine - and mine covers criticism of BOTH.

 

[Night Spring]

The other poster said I never gave any useful information. My challenge to you was ...

Why are you giving me this challenge? I'm not responsible for what someone else said.

EDIT: it occurs to me that "never" is an exaggeration. Same with people who complain WT "never" communicates, when what they actually mean is WT don't communicate enough. So what the other poster was saying is that most of the things you post isn't useful, not that you actually never post anything useful. If you keep thinking every exaggeration is a lie, then you'll end up calling people liars even though they were just exaggerating, and they'll get offended, and that will derail any meaningful conversation you could have had.

 

[Rolanbek]

So you flat out refuse to answer any of my civil questions?

If you do not want to engage in meaningful dialogue with someone who is interested in you point of view, that to say your point of view described directly as opposed to being described as the antithesis of the comments you post in opposition to, it seems to feed back and confirm the issues of image and self we touched on earlier.

I asked you in plain terms what you thought because I am actually interested.

Like I said if you are worried about giving up ground against the others then just Pm me.

R

 

[Night Spring]

Critics have used the mere existence of my giving ACCURATE information to "support" the claim that my purpose is to help WT.

I said this before, but I'll try it again. Just because something is accurate, doesn't mean it is neutral. It is possible to just pick those facts that support one point of view. In your case, you jump in to list facts that are favorable to WT. It's not unreasonable to think your purpose is to help WT.

Also, you think you are listing just facts, but you are often mixing facts with conclusions drawn from underlining facts. Like when you said there is no kill switch. That was a conclusion you drew from the fact that WT had this token system on TextBlade. I thought that token system could be interpreted as being a kill switch. So two people looked at the same fact and came to different conclusions. I think there were other things you said were facts which I thought were not really facts but your interpretations. No, I'm not going to go back and dig them up. The important thing is not that we analyze each and every one of those things, but to recognize that there is a difference between facts and interpretations. And if you want others to stick to facts, then you should first make sure you don't confuse your own interpretations with facts.

 

[Rolanbek]

Also, you think you are listing just facts, but you are often mixing facts with conclusions drawn from underlining facts. Like when you said there is no kill switch. That was a conclusion you drew from the fact that WT had this token system on TextBlade. I thought that token system could be interpreted as being a kill switch. So two people looked at the same fact and came to different conclusions.

Things WT's have said:
There is a token which if it is not refreshed by connecting to their app, expires.

This expiry stop the unit working

This token will be set to a timer-less state on completion of Treg.

source https://forum.waytools.com/t/treg-notes-15-feb/1408

Things this means:
The token can be changed remotely
The state of the token determines whether the unit operates.

Things unknown:
Setting the token to a timer-less state is or is not a one way process?

Things to consider:
Fuctionally what is the difference between setting the timer for infinite days and 730 days?

If the token was changed would you know unless it triggered a failure state?

Can a bricked unit be re flashed with fresh firmware to undo the bricking? If so does this need to be done by WT?

What happens if WT misses a deadine?

***
No conclusions there just statements from WT and questions. I wonder if they would post the answers in public. To dispell the FUD around this topic?

I would ask on WT but they haven't returned a communication from me in 5 months.

R

Edit:SPAG, formatting, source

 

[dabigkahuna]

Just because something is accurate, doesn't mean it is neutral. Also, you think you are listing just facts, but you are often mixing facts with conclusions drawn from underlining facts.

I don't care if they are neutral. I've addressed this before. If the fact ALSO happen to help someone, that is no reason not to give them! To act that way would, in fact, show bias!

As for mixing facts and conclusions, you can always provide an actual example. Oh, and it turns out you did. Cool:

Like when you said there is no kill switch. That was a conclusion you drew from the fact that WT had this token system on TextBlade. I thought that token system could be interpreted as being a kill switch. So two people looked at the same fact and came to different conclusions.

1. I never said there was no kill switch. There is one. I said their was no REMOTE kill switch. That is, they couldn't just send some signal to kill the device. It was handled, via tokens, on the equipment in your hands.

2. I also said that to some people this difference is unimportant (see? understanding their view).

3. I also explained this token system to show that a related complaint - that the test units would have a different code - is not true. The code is the same.

4. And, finally, I explained why there was really nothing to fear in a kill switch because it is used during testing - and is 100% valid to do so. And that there is no logical reason for them to ever use after testing is done, both because there really is no reason, but also because they'd get sued if they killed regular units.

So, you see, we didn't disagree on there being a kill switch. We disagreed on how it worked but I'm the only one who actually presented the facts about it. We disagreed about the code changing (but I actually had the facts). And we disagreed about the importance of it after testing is done. The weight of any argument is heavily on my side. The only argument against it has been, "But WT is irrational". That isn't a very strong argument! Anyone who thinks they are that bad should not even consider being a customer. Being "irrational", the probably have bad things in there they haven't even told us about!

I think there were other things you said were facts which I thought were not really facts but your interpretations.

Do you see the problem here? In the one item you specified, I could show your initial premise was simply wrong, but you won't look up the others you think exist.

Maybe the other examples don't hold up to examination either. This is why I spend a lot with examples, quotes, etc. It gives people something to argue against, if they can.

It is analysis that let's us actually see if someone is making a good argument.

And if you want others to stick to facts, then you should first make sure you don't confuse your own interpretations with facts.

But so far you haven't shown I actually did that. I dealt with the only example you gave.

Besides, people can interpret things. But when they go overboard, I'll address it. For example, when people claim I work for WT simply because I don't criticize them for everything and dare correct some false claims about them, that isn't rational interpretation. That is a tactic to try to get people to ignore rebuttal.

 

[ericpeets]

Why are you giving me this challenge? I'm not responsible for what someone else said.

Because apparently, somewhere along the line, you incurred his wrath. It can be something small like questioning him or simply using words he doesn't care for, who knows? He will start by being confrontational (or challenging), then pick apart what you say from now on, but don't worry, he will try to earn your sympathy too by presenting mounds of information about why he's right (but implying all the while you're wrong). You're slowly becoming a critic, irrational, bogus attacker. God help you if you end up in that bucket.

It's an ongoing pattern at WT forums, and the reason why I stay away.

 

[Night Spring]

The only argument against it has been, "But WT is irrational". That isn't a very strong argument! Anyone who thinks they are that bad should not even consider being a customer.

Well, I agree about not considering being their customer. I think I indicated already that I've come to the conclusion I won't be buying TextBlade.

As for whether "WT is irrational" is a strong or weak argument -- I don't know. Logically, maybe it isn't much of an argument. But then the point is that WT has been acting in ways that -- hm, maybe not defy logic, but is more emotion based than logic based. So I just don't trust them with a kill switch for my product.

And I'm still not convinced of the distinction between a kill switch and remote kill switch, so you'll have to excuse me for thinking that you said there was no kill switch. I've finally got it in my head that you think there is a distinction, though I stil don't understand why that distinction is important to you.

For example, when people claim I work for WT simply because I don't criticize them for everything and dare correct some false claims about them, that isn't rational interpretation. That is a tactic to try to get people to ignore rebuttal.

People think you work for WT not because you correct factual mistakes or you don't criticize WT as much as other people, but more because of how you do it. And then you ascribe a motivation to them ("try to get people to ignore rebuttal"). But the thing is, people are already upset at WT, and then they see you defending them, and the first thing they think of isn't to look at your rebuttals and try to react to that rationally. They are just going to see someone defending someone they are mad with, and get mad at the person doing the defending too. That's human nature. If you want rational discussion, you've got to take human emotions into account, and try not to inflame them. We can't always succeed, but if you are going to do something unpopular, you've got to be prepared for the reaction. So I don't think they are trying to do something as sophisticated as getting people to ignore the rebuttal. They are just seeing you defending WT, and thinking you must be one of them or work for them, and then they say so.

Actually, if your factual rebuttals had, in fact, come from WT, that might have started constructive dialogue (well, maybe not, considering they are more than a year late in shipping their product). But you doing their communication for them doesn't work, because people focus on "who are YOU to be speaking for WT?"

 

[Rolanbek]

Because apparently, somewhere along the line, you incurred his wrath. It can be something small like questioning him or simply using words he doesn't care for, who knows? He will start by being confrontational (or challenging), then pick apart what you say from now on, but don't worry, he will try to earn your sympathy too by presenting mounds of information about why he's right (but implying all the while you're wrong). You're slowly becoming a critic, irrational, bogus attacker. God help you if you end up in that bucket.

It's an ongoing pattern at WT forums, and the reason why I stay away.

I can't get him to respond at all, what did I do?

 

[Night Spring]

Because apparently, somewhere along the line, you incurred his wrath. It can be something small like questioning him or simply using words he doesn't care for, who knows? He will start by being confrontational (or challenging), then pick apart what you say from now on, but don't worry, he will try to earn your sympathy too by presenting mounds of information about why he's right (but implying all the while you're wrong). You're slowly becoming a critic, irrational, bogus attacker. God help you if you end up in that bucket.

It's an ongoing pattern at WT forums, and the reason why I stay away.

Heh. Ok, well, this thread is pretty much dead anyway, and I happen to have some free time, and I'm kind of enjoying talking to him while I wait to see if those testing units ship.

 

[dabigkahuna]

If you keep thinking every exaggeration is a lie, then you'll end up calling people liars even though they were just exaggerating, and they'll get offended, and that will derail any meaningful conversation you could have had.

Which kinda means they get to post things that aren't true, but the real problem is if I call them on it??? I'll also remind you when I addressed many of these things in the first page, I didn't say they were liars when they provided wrong information.

He will start by being confrontational (or challenging), then pick apart what you say

Ooooh, I'm "challenging". Imagine that, daring to challenge arguments or claims people make that I disagree with. How terrible! And pick things apart? You mean like providing what someone says and then showing how they are wrong? We just had an example where I supposedly claimed there was "no kill switch", yet what I actually said was there was no REMOTE kill switch. You know, because there is a kind of kill switch. Is that some nasty "picking apart" tactic? Or is it simply correcting the record? And please don't waste time saying there is not much difference in results - because I said that from the start myself.

How about your comments on me - pretty much a series of personal criticisms just throw out there - nah, not like that can derail meaningful conversations! They seem to be just dandy to you.