Quote from: newIndia on December 22, 2014, 03:31:33 PM

Quote from: xhomerx10 on December 21, 2014, 06:32:34 PM

Quote from: MichaelBliss on December 21, 2014, 04:54:44 PM

Quote from: raskul on December 21, 2014, 09:12:09 AM

Quote from: dogie on December 21, 2014, 09:03:29 AM

Quote from: ensurance982 on December 21, 2014, 01:00:29 AM

Quote from: dogie on December 17, 2014, 03:15:36 PM

This company's rating has been updated in the Manufacturer Trustworthiness thread.

[This message won't be monitored, discuss any concerns in the thread.]

I gotta say this is a tad uncalled for... FC has communicated more than ever (well except for the funding and early gen 1 period) over the last weeks or so. The 1/10 points at communication deserve at least something better Cheesy

Have a look through any of the product threads. Its been the same thing repeated for months and months, bad communication, customer support, technical support and impossible to get hold of anyone. It goes on for pages and pages and pages and pages across all the threads.

I think what dogie is confusing here is the difference between a product manufacturer and an interent formus user.
When you purchase an item from a manufacturer, they do not have a duty to be on hand 24/7 on a related, but separate from their own sales platform forum.
I do think dogie has been slightly harsh and I can actually see a h/w race which is pretty much neck-and-neck-and-neck-and-neck at the moment.

The real problem is that one user "Doggie" has so much power and influence over "ratings" - since he is the only one rating these companies it seems. You can't really blame him for providing a service. Since he's the only one, he becomes a bit of a dictator in a community that respects "decentralization", not tyranny. The obvious solution would be for other Doggies to emerge and do their own ratings. A better solution would be to set something up where the rating is a transparent forumula that takes as it's input ratings of various users. Doggie's thread, and the way he can play God and make or break a company, always seemed ridiculously authoritarian and incompatible with bitcoin principals of democracy and plurality, etc.
I mean, even if Doggie is a saint today; what's to stop him from selling his account to Spoondoolies or someone? Centralization is not good. Neither is authoritarianism. Distrust anyone who decides to become an "authority". Sorry Doggie, you seem like an all right guy, but I can't support what your doing.

You make a valid argument though I wonder how many others would willingly take this task without the promise of remuneration?

Is dogie doing all these without remuneration ? I guess I have seen manufacturers sending him miner for free for a review. I might have been mistaken... so please correct me if I am wrong.

dogie does receive miners from most manufacturers for a honest review (if the reviews were biased then he would not be as influential). His criteria is very transparent IMO and anyone should be able to come to the same conclusions as dogie assuming they have the same expertise and invest enough time looking into the same facts