http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=36338
Why did my post go to Texas? Inquiring minds want to know.
Why did my post go to Texas? Inquiring minds want to know.
Ok I'll post it. Since it mentions me as well as Joe Rassmussen and also (very important) mentions our business aka livelyhood, it's no longer private, you're talking about me - behind my back. You also take a bit of glee in the fact they you have a workaound on the advertising/self promotion rules, ( that I have followed to the letter of that law, till today) on this forum and that chumps like myself and Joe are out of the loop as far as forum free reign privalages. Those are your words in that email, not mine not Fred's, not Jam's. Just bringing it to light.
scottnixon said:http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=36338
Why did my post go to Texas? Inquiring minds want to know.
You posted a private email without the originator's permission. A non-no no matter what the content.
dave
don´t you think PD has good reason to order your DAC for backengineering as we know now he wants to sell a similar product?
scottnixon said:
I'm not talking behind your back. I was talking to Fred, knowing he will forward it to you. In other words, it was like talking to you directly.
Whatever your livelyhood is dependant on, it shouldn't be concern here. I still hope that you completely understand that till today, I didn't make any money on the GC PCB sold on this forum.
Since Brian offered me international distribution, I started being concerned how this affects your business. If you contacted me personally and showed your concern, that this indeed affects your livelyhood, I would ask Brian to stop marketing those boards, and I would definitely not touch them either. I stress again the fact, that as of today I didn't make a penny on those GC kits.
However, you, jam and your friends decided to take subversive tactics and this indeed doesn't present you in a good light. It shows lack of ethics and school kids behaviour.
Since I mentioned to Fred my opinion on the subject, I was hoping that if you are not completely satisfied with our practices, we could talk about it and we could come to terms that would be satisfying to both interested parties and allow both to exist in this competetive market.
I understand that your business suffered severly in the light of the group buys and if you want to discuss it privately, I am open to suggestions.
till said:
Till,
My DAC is already designed deal. If I wanted Scott's PCB, it was only for comparison purposes.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/attachment.php?s=&postid=367667
I just learned today that bare PCB is available, as a complete unit is way out of my range, pricewise.😉
In case i would design a product were similar oneas are allready avaiable i would also have a look at them. No critics on that.
What makes me thinking is this "how to sell stuff to the diy community" - conspiracy.
Something must happen on that. Split board and members in one diyaudio.com and one diykitsellers.com board i propose.
What makes me thinking is this "how to sell stuff to the diy community" - conspiracy.
Something must happen on that. Split board and members in one diyaudio.com and one diykitsellers.com board i propose.
... a mind-reader...
... a used-car salesman...
... a considerate, doting philanthropist...
... a pot calling the kettle black...
... and a Xerox machine!!!
Is there no end to your talents, Peter? When will you realise that every thinking person sees through your thin veneer of taking credit for/seeking to profit from application note circuits and the fruits of other's engineering endeavours?
Your replies as above are lame in the extreme and I for one don't believe you. I suspect till, jam, jocko, fred, scott and a bunch of others feel the same, no matter how disinclined planet10 and his friends are to act on illegal e-mail postings, despite the patent truth contained therein. Which paints you poorly, Peter. Very poorly.
I now see tangible and irrefutable evidence to back my historically instinctive view of you as generally objectionable.
planet10 said:
contrary to misbelief, emails, without any confidentiality qualifier, can be shared without the sender's prior (written or oral) permission.
This has been tested in court here in the states, and I was most recently personally involved in such a case.
so if you don't want your email (and voice mail) to get forwarded without your consent, you have to state explicitly in the email.
otherwise, you lose.
millwood said:
We are not talking about the laws of the land, we are talking about the rules at diyAudio.
dave
planet10 said:
contrary to misbelief, you cannot have a private rule that is in conflict with the law. For example, you cannot enslave members here because you have such a rule. such a rule wouldn't stand a chance in litigation.
DrG said:
a bad used-car salesman too, 🙂
DrG said:
I respectably disagree here. What's wrong with profiting from appliation notes? Aren't there published with the goal to encourage people to use them and hopefully profit from them?
Profiting from other's engineering know-how is of cours another matter.
DrG said:
I agree with you too.
DrG said:
I agree with you too.
DrG said:
I have long suspected the same through my dealings with Peter. I think maybe the eagerness for money has impaired his judgement lately.
millwood said:
It may be legal to forward an email without consent if there is no discalimer in it in your country but it's moot. If it is against the rules of this board you will face moderation, sinbin or even banishment and there is nothing you can do about it.
You have a lot to learn, millwood. 😉
planet10 said:
I would imagine that it is based on where the server is (or maybe the domain is).
No, you cannot live in a lawless world, even if virtually.
scottnixon said:
In that case we are (according to Millwood) allowed to do whatever we please, as far as Im concerned, Latvia is still working on a set of rules for digital communication.
Magura🙂
- Status
- Not open for further replies.