On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at 08:26:29PM +0200, Felix Homann wrote: > > I'll decide for myself what I talk about. For someone who > > gets paid to appear in commercials and therefore disqualifies > > himself as an objective reviewer that may seem strange, but > > that's how it is. > > (For personal curiosity reasons: I didn't know you're doing > commercials. What kind of commercials are you in?) None. I should have written '*To* someone who appears....'. If your website is anything to go by, *you* appear in commercials for science toys. Not as some anonymous actor, but as someone who runs a science show and is probably known for that. There is of course nothing wrong with that, and it certainly doesn't imply you're dishonest. But it disqualifies you as an objective reviewer of such products - if I were a potential consumer of these things I would no longer trust your opinion, even if you are an expert on these things. Now if you care so little about your reputation, then I don't think you are in a position to comment on anybody else's integrity. Ciao, -- FA A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia. It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow) _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
