# Company Bricks User's Software After He Posts a Negative Review



## newtekie1 (Jan 1, 2017)

A user, Jim, of Ham Radio Deluxe wasn't too happy with its apparent incompatibility with Microsoft Office. He posted a negative review of the software at eHam.net, calling out the company for its seeming unwillingness to fix the underlying issue. The user also opened a support ticket with HRD Software hoping it could solve his problems.

HRD Software replied to the ticket, telling the user to download a patch for the malfunctioning software. Seems normal enough. But more problems developed.

[SIGQUOTE]_I've tried to install the update according to your directions. Now when I click on the HRD icon, I get the splash screen from version 6.3.0.610 for about a second, and then it disappears and nothing else happens..._[/SIGQUOTE]

The company's response?

[sigquote]_We would also like to request that you NOT RENEW your support nor use our software due to the review you placed on eHam back in September. Remember that? http://www.eham.net/reviews/review/143372

If you remove the eHam review, which was blatantly false, we will remove the blacklist from you call. You are not buying software, you are buying your callsign's access to the software..._[/sigquote]

On page 3 of the support ticket, the co-owner of HDR, Rick, begins responding to the support ticket.  It is Rick that informed the user that he will remove the user from the blacklist if he removes the review. Rick then starts threatening the user with legal actions.

[sigquote]we put nothing  on your computer, we put you on a blacklist in the code.

See you in court.[/sigquote]


This was the first mention of legal action.  The user also reports that Rick actually called him, and left at least one threatening voicemail threatening him with legal action, the user posts about this on page 38 of the QRZ.com forum thread about he issue.

And with that, HRD Software set its reputation on fire. A long thread at QRZ.com is the ham enthusiast forum's version of Sherman's March to the Sea, with HRD being razed to the ground like so many antebellum mansions.

But there's a twist: 37 pages into into this forum's discussion of HRD's brutally inept handling of a customer complaint, the other co-owner of the company wades into the fray and tries to apologize.  On page 38 of the thread, Rick, chimes in and also apologizes, blaming his mood swing on his diabetes.(Side note: I have diabetes, and I'll tell you that is a completely BS excuse. He would have been better going with the Mel Gibson defense.)

Is it enough?  The other co-owner, Rick, seems to be the one throwing the fuel on the woodpile, and when it caught fire they panicked.  It is pretty clear the company's policy was to blacklist anyone that posts a bad review.  This type of behavior is completely unacceptable.


Whole Story Can Be Read Here.

*Update:* HDR has released a press release found here(PDF) stating the co-owner Rick will be leaving the company.  Of course they don't mention the real reason, but that's to be expected.


----------



## dorsetknob (Jan 1, 2017)

ME THINKS THIS IS AN INFRINGEMENT OF 

The First *Amendment* (*Amendment* I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, ensuring that there is no prohibition on the *free* exercise of religion, abridging the *freedom of speech*, infringing on the *freedom of* the press, interfering with the *right* to 
ect
 lawyer UP AND sue


----------



## sneekypeet (Jan 1, 2017)

No different than what went down with IC Diamond. Just because you run a company does not mean you have common sense!


----------



## EarthDog (Jan 1, 2017)

sneekypeet said:


> No different than what went down with IC Diamond. Just because you run a company does not mean your employees have tact


fixed!


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jan 1, 2017)

dorsetknob said:


> ME THINKS THIS IS AN INFRINGEMENT OF
> View attachment 82599
> The First *Amendment* (*Amendment* I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, ensuring that there is no prohibition on the *free* exercise of religion, abridging the *freedom of speech*, infringing on the *freedom of* the press, interfering with the *right* to
> ect
> lawyer UP AND sue



Actually no infringement.  That covers laws and governmental action, not private companies, unless it causes injury (such as screaming "Fire!" in a crowded theatre).

Unless you are being facetious?   If so, then by all means keep truckin'.   

The Amendment was the new nation's reaction to the heavyhanded British Governors not allowing the press in the American Colonies to say what they wanted about the other actions which they felt were unfair.


----------



## dorsetknob (Jan 1, 2017)

Not a Dollar chasing ShitSharklawyer but Company's like this by demanding you remove comments Are infringing your Rights to Free Speach


----------



## Silas Woodruff (Jan 1, 2017)

Of course an apology is not enough, he claims whatever he downloaded also affects other programs, therefore I think legal action is appropriate.

It's not cool for them to give him a link and mess with his computer claiming that whatever they downloaded is the fix for their problem....


----------



## Totally (Jan 1, 2017)

dorsetknob said:


> ME THINKS THIS IS AN INFRINGEMENT OF
> View attachment 82599
> The First *Amendment* (*Amendment* I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, ensuring that there is no prohibition on the *free* exercise of religion, abridging the *freedom of speech*, infringing on the *freedom of* the press, interfering with the *right* to
> ect
> lawyer UP AND sue



The constitution only applies between the citizen and the governing body. Unless they are receiving government funds, bringing up amendment rights is just looking to get laughed at in this situation since this does not apply at all and shows a lack of understanding. The reason for blacklisting and the ensuing quid pro quo does present a strong case for discrimination/harassment and the legality of this is for the courts to decide since from the sound of the article he never paid the software that the company blacklisted him from.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jan 1, 2017)

dorsetknob said:


> Not a Dollar chasing ShitSharklawyer but Company's like this by demanding you remove comments Are infringing your Rights to Free Speach



What they did was lowdown dirty and wrong, but it is not a Free Speech issue.  

Many people, including Americans, tend to think that right is much more encompassing than it really is.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jan 1, 2017)

EarthDog said:


> fixed!



Not really.  In both cases, it was the owner of the company causing the problems.


----------



## cdawall (Jan 1, 2017)

Either way can't blacklist someone for posting a negative review. Sounds like a good flag for the BBB.


----------



## EarthDog (Jan 1, 2017)

That was the owner that replied there?!!! I thought it was a tech, then the owner came in later... wow. Sad.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jan 1, 2017)

EarthDog said:


> That was the owner that replied there?!!! I thought it was a tech, then the owner came in later... wow. Sad.



Two owners, appearing to not be on the same page, but more likely that's how they do business on purpose.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jan 1, 2017)

cdawall said:


> Either way can't blacklist someone for posting a negative review. Sounds like a good flag for the BBB.



Definite flag for the BBB, but according to the EULA they actually an blacklist someone for any reason.  Coffee cold?  Lets blasklist some users!



rtwjunkie said:


> Two owners, appearing to not be on the same page, but more likely that's how they do business on purpose.



It appears the owner that apologized has no dealing with the day to day operation of the company.  He is just an investor that now has to play cleanup for the bad practices of the owner that was in charge.


----------



## Mr.Scott (Jan 1, 2017)

BBB is worthless.
Social media has much more impact. Take it to the people.


----------



## cdawall (Jan 1, 2017)

newtekie1 said:


> Definite flag for the BBB, but according to the EULA they actually an blacklist someone for any reason. Coffee cold? Lets blasklist some users!



My fix for situations like this? Someone should mail them a bag of shit.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jan 1, 2017)

If this ends up in court (probably small claims), HRD is going to end up paying "Jim" the value of the software, court fees, and the hundreds/thousands on top of that for the threats and blacklisting.

The only way a review can be used against you in court is if there are false statements made in it (defamation).  The plaintiff has to prove the statements are false at the time they were authored.  The review mostly talks about "known issues" HRD can't fix or refuses to fix.  I can't see defamation going anywhere.




Mr.Scott said:


> BBB is worthless.
> Social media has much more impact. Take it to the people.


BBB only works on businesses that care about customer relations.  I get a strong impression HRD does not.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jan 1, 2017)

EarthDog said:


> That was the owner that replied there?!!! I thought it was a tech, then the owner came in later... wow. Sad.



It was originally handled by a tech, named Tim I think.  The tech originally did the blacklisting, and then replied about the review in the support ticket.  Then, in the support ticket, the owner Rick chimed in and confirmed that the blacklist was because of the review.  Apparently Rick is the owner actually running the show, and he made the policy to blacklist anyone that speaks out negatively about the software.  Rick also directly called the user and made legal threats on the user's voicemail.

So, yeah, this isn't a case of an employee acting outside of the company's wishes.  This is an employee doing exactly what the owner of the company told them to do.


----------



## dorsetknob (Jan 1, 2017)

Totally said:


> but anyway what kind of person do you have to be to complain about a paid service that you are using for free? So it was well within their right to blacklist the guy after they noticed that he did not pay for the software


Your wrong i suspect you did not read or comprehend the Story in OP post ( link in 1st post )
let me c/p relevent part you Missed or deliberatly got wrong

""_I purchased HRD 6.3, only to find out Windows XP was not supported. So, I installed HRD on a brand new Windows 10 machine, and everything appeared to be working fine. Then, I installed Office 365, and it broke the LogBook. Known problem, they say. There is a whole page devoted to telling you how to tweak the registry, download things, repair files, etc, etc.""

*I purchased = He paid for it* and so its not Free* and he is not using it for FREE*_


----------



## Totally (Jan 1, 2017)

dorsetknob said:


> Your wrong i suspect you did not read or comprehend the Story in OP post ( link in 1st post )
> let me c/p relevent part you Missed or deliberatly got wrong
> 
> ""_I purchased HRD 6.3, only to find out Windows XP was not supported. So, I installed HRD on a brand new Windows 10 machine, and everything appeared to be working fine. Then, I installed Office 365, and it broke the LogBook. Known problem, they say. There is a whole page devoted to telling you how to tweak the registry, download things, repair files, etc, etc.""
> ...



Oops, I misinterpreted the their response "_You are not buying software, you are buying your callsign's access to the software..._” Sorry . I thought they were calling him out. No, no need to jump on me like that.


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 1, 2017)

dorsetknob said:


> ME THINKS THIS IS AN INFRINGEMENT OF
> View attachment 82599
> The First *Amendment* (*Amendment* I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, ensuring that there is no prohibition on the *free* exercise of religion, abridging the *freedom of speech*, infringing on the *freedom of* the press, interfering with the *right* to
> ect
> lawyer UP AND sue



Sadly, it's not an infringement of the first amendment, because they aren't passing a law, but licensing software they have the sole rights to.

It's a dick move, but the First Amendment has nothing to say on this.

EDIT:  I see I was beat to the punch on this.


----------



## dorsetknob (Jan 1, 2017)

R-T-B said:


> It's a dick move, but the First Amendment has nothing to say on this.


 you under estimate the sick twisted moral less Virtual less Attributes of the American Laywer and their dollar grubbing mindset
A Company putting Pressure on some one to change their Opinion is Oppressing Free Speach
or are you saying only governments can oppress/deny Free Speach
if that is the Case i pity you after the inauguration coming up Soon


----------



## Jetster (Jan 1, 2017)

First off. It is a dick move. But the BBB has no authority (can damage the reputation) and its completely within the companies right to do business with who they choose, as long as it does not discriminate any protected groups. Now I guess you cold argue in civil court that it is extortion, then As far as remove the review. But now way is it a violation of any civil rights


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jan 1, 2017)

dorsetknob said:


> or are you saying only governments can oppress/deny Free Speach



Yes, my man, that is what he is saying.  Did you miss the previous two responses, which he acknowledges? 

In the U.S., free speech protection is only afforded to people in regard to it not being disallowed or curtailed by law or governmental decree.

Basically, a private entity, unless acting "under the color of law" cannot violate a person's civil rights.


----------



## dorsetknob (Jan 1, 2017)




----------



## R-T-B (Jan 1, 2017)

rtwjunkie said:


> Yes, my man, that is what he is saying.  Did you miss the previous two responses, which he acknowledges?
> 
> In the U.S., free speech protection is only afforded to people in regard to it not being disallowed or curtailed by law or governmental decree.
> 
> Basically, a private entity, unless acting "under the color of law" cannot violate a person's civil rights.



Exactly.



dorsetknob said:


> if that is the Case i pity you after the inauguration coming up Soon



I pity all of us after what happened last election.


----------



## dorsetknob (Jan 1, 2017)

rtwjunkie said:


> Basically, a private entity, unless acting "under the color of law" cannot violate a person's civil rights.


And the right to Free speach/Free press Don't you feel that this corp by applying pressure to remove Comments that it feels unfavorable is Attempting the Denial of the right of Free speach


----------



## jboydgolfer (Jan 1, 2017)

A couple years back I made a purchase on Amazon.com, it was an actual physical item after receiving it and received an email from the seller asking me out right.  If I left a good review they would compensate me with a free gift . No maybe it's just me but when a company controls the reviews it gets doesn't that sort of dilute the whole point of the review?

 I reported them to Amazon immediately. Much to my surprise it happen twice more both times which I reported.  Sadly this seems like something both Amazon and the rest of the world is becoming more and more comfortable with.

A few years back I actually learned  that there are Internet companies that hire people without morals to give good reviews and they use s****y you tubers to spread that information and help them recruit. This is why it doesn't pay to make a purchase  based off of what "shitty poop 97",or some other username says about a product,since there's a good chance he was paid to say it


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jan 1, 2017)

dorsetknob said:


> And the right to Free speach/Free press Don't you feel that this corp by applying pressure to remove Comments that it feels unfavorable is Attempting the Denial of the right of Free speach



No I don't feel it is.  You don't have a right to free speech with private entities.

In the private arena, you can say what you want, sure, but there are consequences.

If you want an example, go ahead and flagrantly violate the TPU forum rules on what you can say. Watch the reaction, which will be either vacation or banning, depending on the severity.

Just to be clear, there is nothing governing anything other than Government interference in that right of free speech.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
http://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment1.html


----------



## dorsetknob (Jan 1, 2017)

Guess the founding fathers ( almost all Lawyers ) didn't want the people to have rights just the impression of rights


----------



## Jetster (Jan 1, 2017)

dorsetknob said:


> Guess the founding fathers ( almost all Lawyers ) didn't want the people to have rights just the impression of rights



Its not hard to search case law.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jan 1, 2017)

dorsetknob said:


> Guess the founding fathers ( almost all Lawyers ) didn't want the people to have rights just the impression of rights



No, the emphasis was protecting the people from governmental dominance, which was why the American Colonies rebelled in the first place.

@jboydgolfer, I have to agree totally. Some of these companies are real a-holes about reviews.  If it were me, I would WANT honest reviews, so I knew what I was doing well on, and what I needed to improve so I could increase my sales.


----------



## qubit (Jan 1, 2017)

HRD Software have clearly heard about customer service. Wankers.


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 1, 2017)

dorsetknob said:


> And the right to Free speach/Free press Don't you feel that this corp by applying pressure to remove Comments that it feels unfavorable is Attempting the Denial of the right of Free speach



Not as defined in the constitution, no.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jan 1, 2017)

jboydgolfer said:


> A few years back I actually learned that there are Internet companies that hire people without morals to give good reviews and they use s****y you tubers to spread that information and help them recruit. This is why it doesn't pay to make a purchase based off of what "shitty poop 97",or some other username says about a product,since there's a good chance he was paid to say it



They don't just pay them to post good reviews.  Internet shills are paid to do a lot more than that.  They go on forums and defend the products against anyone that speaks negatively.  They post false bad reviews for competing products. They post on forums bad mouthing competing products.



rtwjunkie said:


> No, the emphasis was protecting the people from governmental dominance, which was why the American Colonies rebelled in the first place.



Exactly.  The bill of rights was to limit the government's power over the people.  It does not apply to private interactions.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Jan 1, 2017)

rtwjunkie said:


> No, the emphasis was protecting the people from governmental dominance, which was why the American Colonies rebelled in the first place.
> 
> @jboydgolfer, I have to agree totally. Some of these companies are real a-holes about reviews.  If it were me, I would WANT honest reviews, so I knew what I was doing well on, and what I needed to improve so I could increase my sales.



 Maybe I making more of it than it is, but at the same time no company whether they deal in physical or digital or any other type of product should control both the creation and the feedback.  I remember hearing something a while back also from Amazon where the creators of some game or something were  reviewing their own software.

 I've seen certain reviews where it actually has a disclaimer at the bottom  of the review which says "this review was written by a person who got their product for free".  To me I don't pay any mind to those reviews they may as well not do them. I think the whole point of it is to fool the person who reads through to quickly or takes the reviews to seriously in the hopes that they'll get away with something. I mean let's be honest they do it because it works and what (it)is ....is fooling the consumer.


----------



## EarthDog (Jan 1, 2017)

As a reviewer, it's a bit disconcerting to hear that point of view... if you get a free product you're automatically a shill. W1z doesn't buy gpus unless they don't send them.. mobos, cpus.... all sent from companies. Anand, Tom's... etc. In fact, I don't know one review site which purchases all or even a lot of their hardware/games they review... that's asinine (and quite costly).


----------



## Mr.Scott (Jan 1, 2017)

EarthDog said:


> As a reviewer, it's a bit disconcerting to hear that point of view... if you get a free product you're automatically a shill. W1z doesn't buy gpus unless they don't send them.. mobos, cpus.... all sent from companies. Anand, Tom's... etc. In fact, I don't know one review site which purchases all LR EVEN A LOT of their hardware/games they review... that's asinine (and quite costly).



While I agree, on the flipside, I've been shut off by a few companies for posting a less than stellar review for some products. So.........take that for what it's worth.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Jan 1, 2017)

Mr.Scott said:


> While I agree, on the flipside, I've been shut off by a few companies for posting a less than stellar review for some products. So.........take that for what it's worth.




 Thank God that hasn't happened to me yet ....  I wouldn't be able to order a single thing online anymore . Just Newegg alone has gotten some pretty harsh reviews for me in the recent year and a half to two years. I'm of the opinion ,   That constructive criticism him is good criticism. We all learn from our mistakes companies shouldn't be much different. Coca-Cola learn from new Coke, ubisoft learned from uplay, and a third example. If a company were to do something like that to me I'd have to take it to the public....Facebook etc. and let everyone know that dealing with them was like buying weed off your cousin  at    a Metallica concert

i JUST ordered a headset off of B&H and the checkout process was Shit, so i gave it a 1 out of 5 star rating, and told them why, this is the response i got.i know its a canned response, but this is what they should be.


----------



## Mr.Scott (Jan 2, 2017)

I was actually talking about companies that send me product for review.
If it were just reviews for items I purchased, I probably would have to use an alias by now. lol


----------



## EarthDog (Jan 2, 2017)

Mr.Scott said:


> While I agree, on the flipside, I've been shut off by a few companies for posting a less than stellar review for some products. So.........take that for what it's worth.


so have we... and the fish couldn't have been any bigger... we stuck to our proven (by three editors/benchers) results and since that point, no samples. But x we are meeting with them at CES so hopefully we an get back on the same page.


----------



## Mr.Scott (Jan 2, 2017)

EarthDog said:


> so have we... and the fish couldn't have been any bigger... we stuck to our proven (by three editors/benchers) results and since that point, no samples. But x we are meeting with them at CES so hopefully we an get back on the same page.


I have been in contact with the bigger of the companies also, trying to get back inside. They used to send me stuff monthly.
The smaller one's I don't really care about. Samples were few and far between anyway.


----------



## Totally (Jan 2, 2017)

EarthDog said:


> As a reviewer, it's a bit disconcerting to hear that point of view... if you get a free product you're automatically a shill. W1z doesn't buy gpus unless they don't send them.. mobos, cpus.... all sent from companies. Anand, Tom's... etc. In fact, I don't know one review site which purchases all or even a lot of their hardware/games they review... that's asinine (and quite costly).


  Really? There's a clear difference you guys here at TPU, Anand, and most other review sites. You guys are objective whenever possible have clear tests and metrics that are outlined, that can be recreated by anyone wanting to do so to independently verify or can be verified against results of others sites. Versus a 'review' found on an amazon product page, or video reviews by JoeISayNothingbutGoodThingsSomebody on YouTube. Have some faith, man.


----------



## dalekdukesboy (Jan 2, 2017)

dalekdukesboy said:


> As I and many say on all these intel threads with stupidly overpriced hardware that is barely better than 5 years ago...hurry up Zen and be as good as possible, I think us techies have suffered non progress long enough.



Lol yes I had this cued up in multi-quotes from before and after lengthy disagreement from it find it humorous to randomly post it out of context here



cdawall said:


> My fix for situations like this? Someone should mail them a bag of shit.



However this was said here, and I found that rather funny

Also as many here pointed out this company deserves to be "blacklisted" by customers so to speak and yeah Jim may win in court but they acted very unprofessionally plus literally threatened him with court all due to him buying their product and having issues and being honest with them about it.  From what I see he wasn't a dick about all of his issues, but they were and then some so this is where boycotts and just spreading the bad word about the company will probably cost them enough to learn them a lesson and financially suffer for terrible customer service.


----------



## dalekdukesboy (Jan 2, 2017)

rtwjunkie said:


> What they did was lowdown dirty and wrong, but it is not a Free Speech issue.
> 
> Many people, including Americans, tend to think that right is much more encompassing than it really is.



Yes, tell me about it, just read the litany of responses here jumping on this company as if free speech is even in play here, which it isn't.  



dorsetknob said:


> you under estimate the sick twisted moral less Virtual less Attributes of the American Laywer and their dollar grubbing mindset
> A Company putting Pressure on some one to change their Opinion is Oppressing Free Speach
> or are you saying only governments can oppress/deny Free Speach
> if that is the Case i pity you after the inauguration coming up Soon



This, is a perfect example of bloviating on about free speech and "gasp" I'm so surprised said person thinks Trump=anti-free....everything. 



R-T-B said:


> Exactly.
> 
> 
> 
> I pity all of us after what happened last election.



Been here done this with you in past post, complain to the founding fathers and the last 2 centuries any ruling party had to change the rules...no one had an issue with them, till they lost.  Get over it. 



dorsetknob said:


> Guess the founding fathers ( almost all Lawyers ) didn't want the people to have rights just the impression of rights



Again, same person who initially thinks free speech should entitle you to do whatever you want with no consequence and a business has no rights whatsoever.  No surprise first reaction is to blame the founding fathers for our lack of rights as if those who gave us this country and our rights ironically should pay for...giving us those rights? Yeah, ok.  Also again, don't pity us, we elected someone under the rules of our constitution you had 8 years prior to pity us for suffering in stagnation.


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 2, 2017)

> Been here done this with you in past post, complain to the founding fathers and the last 2 centuries any ruling party had to change the rules...no one had an issue with them, till they lost. Get over it.



I would have had an issue if Hillary won, and that's documented here.  And I've always had an issue with the electoral college.  I believe that's documented in another forum profile of mine but I can't be assed to dig it out.

Please stop trying to make this partisan, as well as drive it OT.  Bottom line and my only point there?  That election sucked.  I don't think anyone sane can say it was awesome with a straight face.


----------



## dalekdukesboy (Jan 2, 2017)

R-T-B said:


> I would have had an issue if Hillary won, and that's documented here.  And I've always had an issue with the electoral college.  I believe that's documented in another forum profile of mine but I can't be assed to dig it out.
> 
> Please stop trying to make this partisan, as well as drive it OT.  Bottom line and my only point there?  That election sucked.  I don't think anyone sane can say it was awesome with a straight face.



Honestly, many will disagree with you there.  Also I am not the one who keeps whining and railing on about it, so who is the one who won't let it go and drop the partisanship?  If you would have had an issue with Hillary then hope for the best with Trump no one else could win, Hillary may not even be standing in 4 years.  

Hard for me to be "OT" when I simply replied to things other people said and you were merely 1 of 4, so that line doesn't work and only implicates yourself in being "OT" in the first place for me to respond to an election quip when this wasn't about that whatsoever. However it is in the fact that peoples' warped sense of political facts vs. fiction and rights vs privileges etc is very relevant and I simply tied that all together with my points.


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 2, 2017)

dalekdukesboy said:


> Honestly, many will disagree with you there.  Also I am not the one who keeps whining and railing on about it, so who is the one who won't let it go and drop the partisanship?  If you would have had an issue with Hillary then hope for the best with Trump no one else could win, Hillary may not even be standing in 4 years.
> 
> Hard for me to be "OT" when I simply replied to things other people said and you were merely 1 of 4, so that line doesn't work and only implicates yourself in being "OT" in the first place for me to respond to an election quip when this wasn't about that whatsoever. However it is in the fact that peoples' warped sense of political facts vs. fiction and rights vs privileges etc is very relevant and I simply tied that all together with my points.



Technically, it was dorsetknob that started with the Trump talk.

I'm just reminding us to stop.  It's getting out of hand.

PS:  If you really think I'm partisan, check out this post prior to the election results being known (Hillary was still scheduled to "Win"):

https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/members/dorsetknob.8331/#profile-post-15230

I stand by what I said.  Anyone thinking an election resulting in a country this divided is a "good one" should get their head checked.


----------



## RejZoR (Jan 2, 2017)

Lol, what a bunch of idiots. They think removing that negative review will solve the PR disaster they've just created. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA XD


----------



## dorsetknob (Jan 2, 2017)

R-T-B said:


> PS: If you really think I'm partisan, check out this post prior to the election results being known (Hillary was still scheduled to "Win"):
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/members/dorsetknob.8331/#profile-post-15230


A completely ambiguous impartial comment FROM A BRIT  that neither favored hilly or trump or disparaged either of those two
And neither did the couple of reply's


----------



## Ungari (Jan 2, 2017)

EarthDog said:


> As a reviewer, it's a bit disconcerting to hear that point of view... if you get a free product you're automatically a shill. W1z doesn't buy gpus unless they don't send them.. mobos, cpus.... all sent from companies. Anand, Tom's... etc. In fact, I don't know one review site which purchases all or even a lot of their hardware/games they review... that's asinine (and quite costly).



The reason why many believe that reviewers who get free products are shills is because there are often conditions stipulated by the company on how their product is to be tested.
In the case of Nvidia, a review guide was leaked that detailed which tests, games, and game settings were to be used by the reviewer. These were chosen to demonstrate Nvidia GPUs in the best possible conditions while putting AMD Radeon at a disadvantage. Any reviewer that receives a review sample from Nvidia is clearly then not independent, and it shows.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jan 2, 2017)

Ungari said:


> Any reviewer that receives a review sample is then clearly not



So @W1zzard, who receives review sample GPU's, and who many, and IIRC even you, have complained he doesn't update his test library of games often enough, is really working for the GPU companies?  Because that is what your logic is saying. If he was, the games selection would reflect their preferences and change often.

Or how about @RCoon who got all the games as free samples that he reviewed for 2 years, and who a number of times gave negative game reviews? Was he on the take too? 

I've read some of @EarthDog's reviews on another site as well.  As he stated, he gets provided samples, and I can say his reviews are not all the most flattering.  

Really what your statement says is that no one has any integrity, which is unfair to say, and rather petty.


----------



## Ungari (Jan 2, 2017)

rtwjunkie said:


> So @W1zzard, who receives review sample GPU's, and who many, and IIRC even you, have complained he doesn't update his test library of games often enough, is really working for the GPU companies?  Because that is what your logic is saying. If he was, the games selection would reflect their preferences and change often.
> 
> Or how about @RCoon who got all the games as free samples that he reviewed for 2 years, and who a number of times gave negative game reviews? Was he on the take too?



Receiving free games for review is acceptable if there are no conditions stipulated as to how it is to be reviewed, and also since games reviews are subjective and not based on technical metrics, unlike GPUs.


----------



## 64K (Jan 2, 2017)

Ungari said:


> The reason why many believe that reviewers who get free products are shills is because there are often conditions stipulated by the company on how their product is to be tested.
> In the case of Nvidia, a review guide was leaked that detailed which tests, games, and game settings were to be used by the reviewer. These were chosen to demonstrate Nvidia GPUs in the best possible conditions while putting AMD Radeon at a disadvantage. Any reviewer that receives a review sample from Nvidia is clearly then not independent, and it shows.



I don't agree, at least not where W1zzard's reviews are concerned. Check out his reviews of 1070s and 1080s. All of them got a thumbs down for high price. They perform very well but he didn't pull any punches about the prices.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jan 2, 2017)

Ungari said:


> not based on technical metrics, unlike GPUs.



Go read some of his game reviews. Half of each review is technical metrics.  

I noticed you didn't deny anything about the W1z.  It's easy to be critical of reviewers when you don't do them.


----------



## Ungari (Jan 2, 2017)

64K said:


> I don't agree, at least not where W1zzard's reviews are concerned. Check out his reviews of 1070s and 1080s. All of them got a thumbs down for high price. They perform very well but he didn't pull any punches about the prices.



Nvidis's review guide doesn't stipulate opinions concerning price, only conditions for benchmarking the products.


----------



## 64K (Jan 2, 2017)

Ungari said:


> Nvidis's review guide doesn't stipulate opinions concerning price, only conditions for benchmarking the products.



You just thrive on Nvidia conspiracies. I won't deny that Nvidia has pulled some shit in the past but so has AMD.


----------



## Ungari (Jan 2, 2017)

rtwjunkie said:


> Go read some of his game reviews. Half of each review is technical metrics.



I'm not talking about about features in the settings and such.
What is meant by technical metrics are measurements that can be compared to other products, such as is done in GFX cards with FPS, Temperatures, etc.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jan 2, 2017)

Ungari said:


> Nvidis's review guide doesn't stipulate opinions concerning price, only conditions for benchmarking the products.



And this is exactly why I say you are full of $#¥t.  You have complained about "old" game choices, etc in W1zzard's reviews. So obviously he is not being told what to do by NVIDIA. I wish you'd make up your mind about which way these conspiracies fall.


----------



## Ungari (Jan 2, 2017)

rtwjunkie said:


> And this is exactly why I say you are full of $#¥t.  You have complained about "old" game choices, etc in W1zzard's reviews. So obviously he is not being told what to do by NVIDIA. I wish you'd make up your mind about which way these conspiracies fall.



The game choices and settings that were used are not in conflict with Nvidia's review guide.


----------



## W1zzard (Jan 2, 2017)

NVIDIA's reviewrs guide (61 pages for GTX 1080), has 1 page that lists "Recommended Games/Benchmarks", which include Ashes and Hitman for DX12 for example. The next page has "Power, Temp, and Acoustic Testing", which includes info on why Furmark and OCCT aren't giving a precise picture of real-game activity.

To me it looks rather like some tips for newbies.

I've never had any company force me into testing or not testing any specific game.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jan 2, 2017)

Updated the first post with some new info.  Co-Owner Rick, the one that was responsible, is "leaving the company to pursue other interests".  Which we all know is press speak for "we shitcanned his ass".


----------



## dalekdukesboy (Jan 2, 2017)

rtwjunkie said:


> And this is exactly why I say you are full of $#¥t.  You have complained about "old" game choices, etc in W1zzard's reviews. So obviously he is not being told what to do by NVIDIA. I wish you'd make up your mind about which way these conspiracies fall.



I believe this is same guy who argued with you/me in prior post claiming Hillary and Trump were the same and government was all out to get us from both sides....so don't really expect anything consistent or logical other than you correctly saying he's stuck on conspiracy theory 24/7. 



W1zzard said:


> NVIDIA's reviewrs guide (61 pages for GTX 1080), has 1 page that lists "Recommended Games/Benchmarks", which include Ashes and Hitman for DX12 for example. The next page has "Power, Temp, and Acoustic Testing", which includes info on why Furmark and OCCT aren't giving a precise picture of real-game activity.
> 
> To me it looks rather like some tips for newbies.
> 
> I've never had any company force me into testing or not testing any specific game.



So Wizz, generally speaking from your testing of newer games do you have older systems to compare or use to even see how well older hardware does vs newer with games?  Definitely a hot topic on here whenever it comes up people arguing what you "need" to play games and what level of hardware minus gpu really bottlenecks modern gaming.


----------



## W1zzard (Jan 2, 2017)

dalekdukesboy said:


> So Wizz, generally speaking from your testing of newer games do you have older systems to compare or use to even see how well older hardware does vs newer with games?


All cards are tested on the same configuration. I don't keep old systems/configs around, or I could build a house out of computers.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jan 2, 2017)

newtekie1 said:


> Updated the first post with some new info.  Co-Owner Rick, the one that was responsible, is "leaving the company to pursue other interests".  Which we all know is press speak for "we shitcanned his ass".



So basically, he's bad for business!   Hopefully they move forward more customer-oriented.


----------



## dalekdukesboy (Jan 2, 2017)

W1zzard said:


> All cards are tested on the same configuration. I don't keep old systems/configs around, or I could build a house out of computers.



Yes I kinda realized that, I just asked out of curiosity if you or anyone you knew did such things due to possibly just having old hardware around or benchmarking such things for shits and giggles. Some people have that proverbial houseful of hardware and that's precisely why I asked you the question.  If you don't, plenty of people you know do or have something in that vicinity.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Jan 2, 2017)

newtekie1 said:


> Updated the first post with some new info.  Co-Owner Rick, the one that was responsible, is "leaving the company to pursue other interests".  Which we all know is press speak for "we shitcanned his ass".



 Yeah I heard rick got a new job already ,   More suited to his personality


----------



## dalekdukesboy (Jan 2, 2017)

jboydgolfer said:


> Yeah I heard you got a new job already ,   More suited to his personality



Funny but pretty messed up meme.  Not sure which is more disturbing the baby's messed up looking nose or someone punching a baby...Obviously the latter is worse but together I admit both make the creepy intensity of this meme skyrocket.


----------



## W1zzard (Jan 2, 2017)

dalekdukesboy said:


> benchmarking such things for shits and giggles


I wish I had time for that. Spent all holidays benching for a Kaby Lake-specific article. Now busy rebenching on new cards, new drivers, new games.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Jan 2, 2017)

dalekdukesboy said:


> Funny but pretty messed up meme.  Not sure which is more disturbing the baby's messed up looking nose or someone punching a baby...Obviously the latter is worse but together I admit both make the creepy intensity of this meme skyrocket.



It's Will Ferrell punching a baby from the movie campaign trail. Just an exaggeration not intended as offensive at all.... just a jab at this Rick guy's personality or rather lack there of 

 And the babies face is messed up because it's mid 2000's  CGI


----------



## dalekdukesboy (Jan 2, 2017)

W1zzard said:


> I wish I had time for that. Spent all holidays benching for a Kaby Lake-specific article. Now busy rebenching on new cards, new drivers, new games.



True, I doubt you had much time but may have done a run or two with stuff hanging around.  Or as I said you knew of contacts who had done such things and posted it etc.  I think I'd get tired of benchmarking quite quickly if I were you.  I am on a laptop for last few weeks because I have broken switch on my old case so new system is being swapped into new case etc...but I've done only a few steps every so often with 2 cases sitting there because I'm just tired of how often I've fiddled with the hardware and taking it in and out.  Get's old quick.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 2, 2017)

My question to this entire thread is WHO THE F#$K STILL USES A HAM RADIO?! What year is this 1963?


----------



## dorsetknob (Jan 2, 2017)

TheMailMan78 said:


> My question to this entire thread is WHO THE F#$K STILL USES A HAM RADIO?! What year is this 1963?



Duh   Amateur Radio Enthusiasts


----------



## dalekdukesboy (Jan 2, 2017)

dorsetknob said:


> Duh   Amateur Radio Enthusiasts



That's like saying who uses record players/turntables anymore....tons of people particularly enthusiasts hence why record sales on new albums has grown exponentially over last few years as they make a comeback for various audiophile reasons, one being many claim records have a sound quality and "warmth" digital music however clear and good simply can't replicate properly. See below story or at least title and date I attach, tell me that doesn't make the point. 

*Vinyl Record Sales Are At A 28-Year High*
Chris Morris
Updated: Apr 16, 2016 12:11 PM Eastern
http://fortune.com/2016/04/16/vinyl-sales-record-store-day/#
http://fortune.com/2016/04/16/vinyl-sales-record-store-day/


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 2, 2017)

dalekdukesboy said:


> That's like saying who uses record players/turntables anymore....tons of people particularly enthusiasts hence why record sales on new albums has grown exponentially over last few years as they make a comeback for various audiophile reasons, one being many claim records have a sound quality and "warmth" digital music however clear and good simply can't replicate properly. See below story or at least title and date I attach, tell me that doesn't make the point.
> 
> *Vinyl Record Sales Are At A 28-Year High*
> Chris Morris
> ...


That's because most people are using digital and not analog amps. People think its the vinyl. They don't understand the sound is from the amp. There is a reason older amps from the 1960's sound 100x better than todays digital amps.
Also Vinyl Records are at an all time high because of hipsters and their perpetuance for the stupid.


----------



## Mr.Scott (Jan 2, 2017)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Also Vinyl Records are at an all time high because of hipsters and their perpetuance for the stupid.


That doesn't make it any less true.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Jan 2, 2017)

TheMailMan78 said:


> My question to this entire thread is WHO THE F#$K STILL USES A HAM RADIO?! What year is this 1963?


 bald men  everywhere


----------



## Ungari (Jan 2, 2017)

TheMailMan78 said:


> My question to this entire thread is WHO THE F#$K STILL USES A HAM RADIO?! What year is this 1963?



When the power grid goes out, your only source of information will be from HAM Radio.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 2, 2017)

Ungari said:


> When the power grid goes out, your only source of information will be from HAM Radio.


Who am I calling Ghostbusters? I won't care at that point. I'll be to busy surviving/looting.


----------



## dorsetknob (Jan 2, 2017)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Who am I calling Ghostbusters? I won't care at that point. I'll be to busy surviving/looting.


Ham Radio and walki talkies in your EOD bunker or still got the CB in the pick up ???


----------



## Ungari (Jan 2, 2017)

dorsetknob said:


> Ham Radio and walki talkies in your EOD bunker or still got the CB in the pick up ???



Breaker, Breaker! This here's the Rubber Duck...


----------



## dalekdukesboy (Jan 2, 2017)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Who am I calling Ghostbusters? I won't care at that point. I'll be to busy surviving/looting.



Maybe, but going by The Walking Dead radios and any form of communication comes in rather handy to give you upper hand when enemies are coming . Also can communicate useful information while raiding/looting to home base.


----------



## dalekdukesboy (Jan 2, 2017)

TheMailMan78 said:


> That's because most people are using digital and not analog amps. People think its the vinyl. They don't understand the sound is from the amp. There is a reason older amps from the 1960's sound 100x better than todays digital amps.
> Also Vinyl Records are at an all time high because of hipsters and their perpetuance for the stupid.



As someone later pointed out vinyl records are selling largely due to sound and yes some from hipsters and just style etc but that doesn't explain the majority of the spike in sales.  Also I only have old speakers none of which could possibly be digital in any way and it is my only frame of reference and I can safely tell you the vinyl and how it plays is vastly different than any CD I pop in.  Not saying newer all digital stuff sounds crappy or not I really have no frame of reference but on old equipment I can definitely tell you the medium simply has a different sound altogether, minus the pops/hisses and imperfections of the record.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jan 2, 2017)

TheMailMan78 said:


> My question to this entire thread is WHO THE F#$K STILL USES A HAM RADIO?! What year is this 1963?



We'll be thanking them when Skynet becomes active.


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 2, 2017)

TheMailMan78 said:


> My question to this entire thread is WHO THE F#$K STILL USES A HAM RADIO?! What year is this 1963?



A lot more than you'd expect.


----------



## revin (Jan 3, 2017)

Wow this just came up after 2PM CST
It's gone *World Wide*
This company just gave us a masterclass in bad customer service !


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 3, 2017)

dalekdukesboy said:


> Maybe, but going by The Walking Dead radios and any form of communication comes in rather handy to give you upper hand when enemies are coming . Also can communicate useful information while raiding/looting to home base.


I work alone son.


----------



## dalekdukesboy (Jan 3, 2017)

revin said:


> Wow this just came up after 2PM CST
> It's gone *World Wide*
> This company just gave us a masterclass in bad customer service !



I think it's safe to say as I and many implied this company will now definitely pay a huge fiscal price as well as an embarrassing public price humiliated in spectacular style.  Serves them right, and it makes you feel good that regardless of what they have the "right" to do, that they still were completely wrong in any smart business or interpersonal or moral sense and paid the capitalistic price for it. Bravo.


----------



## dalekdukesboy (Jan 3, 2017)

TheMailMan78 said:


> I work alone son.



Then you'd die alone, son.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 3, 2017)

dalekdukesboy said:


> Then you'd die alone, son.


I was raised in the wastes.


----------



## Beastie (Jan 4, 2017)

TheMailMan78 said:


> That's because most people are using digital and not analog amps. People think its the vinyl. They don't understand the sound is from the amp. There is a reason older amps from the 1960's sound 100x better than todays digital amps.
> Also Vinyl Records are at an all time high because of hipsters and their perpetuance for the stupid.


 Today's amps sound just great compared to 1960's amps if compared by adjusted cost.


----------



## AsRock (Jan 4, 2017)

dorsetknob said:


> A completely ambiguous impartial comment FROM A BRIT  that neither favored hilly or trump or disparaged either of those two
> And neither did the couple of reply's



Not as it matters anyways, who ever wins will surly just put the country in more dept.

But anyways, it is sad for a company to do this and  should be known of to all so others don't get screwed by them too.  Regardless if the guy got it for free or not he got in touch with them to try to solve the issue to get screwed again.

I hope the guy keeps shouting and encourages more to do the same, just hope they make sure what they are shouting are facts so the shit don't back fire.


----------



## dalekdukesboy (Jan 4, 2017)

Beastie said:


> Today's amps sound just great compared to 1960's amps if compared by adjusted cost.



Um. Maybe I misunderstand you but in this case "value/cost" isn't relevant just the end sound/product is no? Maybe you're joking but even then not sure what that means except todays amps are pretty shit unless they are simply cheaper relative to the dollar than the old amps.  Admittedly not sure what year any of my stuff is from but most of my speakers are 60-80's if I had to guess...no tags from when Dad bought or garage sale they came from.


----------



## Frick (Jan 4, 2017)

dalekdukesboy said:


> Um. Maybe I misunderstand you but in this case "value/cost" isn't relevant just the end sound/product is no? Maybe you're joking but even then not sure what that means except todays amps are pretty shit unless they are simply cheaper relative to the dollar than the old amps.  Admittedly not sure what year any of my stuff is from but most of my speakers are 60-80's if I had to guess...no tags from when Dad bought or garage sale they came from.



Stuff that survives that long is generally good stuff, expensive. We think everything from that era sounds great because the crap was trashed a long time ago.


----------



## fourletterfame (Jan 4, 2017)

I don't know what I find more disconcerting. 

The company and their approach to customer service.

Or the number of people here who didn't know what the first amendment was for...


----------



## revin (Jan 4, 2017)

Beastie said:


> Today's amps sound just great compared to 1960's amps if compared by adjusted cost.


There are very few amp's in todays digital domain that sound any where as good as older analogue the exception is today those cost are very high.
Even the play on spec's again today showing that they have reverted to the game of trying to fool consumers.
100w@1khz .1%thd 6 ohms, 120@1khz 1% 8 ohms 10% more distortion just driving most common speaker loads ....................or better yet 1125 watts total  
Where'd the day's go that 1xx w@20-20 .0x thd  or even the better units .00x ! Very hard to find 
Yea bring back those day's. I took back a receiver that has very similar spec's to my VSX-39TX.
EVERY time I listened with my RSe's it sounded harsh like shit, but with the 4 Polk 75's it was just ok but still it was lacking even running both at the same time on 1 pair each there was a difference.
Sure a .1 amp will sound ok, but nothing like the older units especially when you get into higher volume.
I remember when they used one of Mark Levinson's amp's to tig weld with !


----------

