Re: [EVDL] EV Digest, Vol 43, Issue 15
On 13 Feb 2011 at 9:22, Lawrence Rhodes wrote:
> ... we should be all be asking if this works or not ...* I figure more
> people on the EVDL have had dealing with these people good or bad and
> hopefully will share their experience.
>From what I've seen, the response you're most likely to get here, if you get
any at all, is "It worked for me" or "It's junk."
I don't mean to denigrate anyone on the EVDL, but from what I've seen in the
past, the majority of us are consumers, not researchers. At that level
we're not that much different from the folks who post reviews elsewhere on
the web - Amazon, Epinions, and so forth.
FYI, I include myself in that group. I seldom take the time to investigate
what's really going on. If it works, that's usually enough for me. Mea
Certainly there are a few who will go beyond that level, but not many of us
will actually carry out rigorous tests on a product like this, as Roger
proposed. In fact, even some of the most well-educated and technologically
sophisticated members of this list have, in the past, limited their testing
and reporting on new products to simple anecdotes. Maybe it's just a matter
of limited time - I can certainly understand that!
Regardless of the "why," most folks who have an interest in something like
this might buy it and hook it up or otherwise put it into use. If it does
something that seems to help, they'll say "it worked for me," even if the
improvement is coincidental. If it doesn't, they'll say "it's junk," with
very little further information. Maybe it didn't work for them because they
didn't follow instructions, or because they used it for the wrong purpose.
You usually can't tell for sure.
So while user reports here can be of some utility, what you really want is
the kind of well controlled test that Roger suggested.
You may have different standards, but the fact that the principals wouldn't
take part in such a test tells me all I need to know about them.