On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 10:30 PM, Eric Walker <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 2:03 PM, H Veeder <[email protected]> wrote: > > The harm is not they don't meet expectations. The harm is that they >> provide no explanation whenever they fail to meet expectations. >> Playing with people's emotions is not harmless game. >> > > Personally, I do not mind unguarded statements about what a company is > going to deliver. If it turns out not to happen, I chalk that up to > flamboyance, wishful thinking and trying to bring something about, almost > as if by conjuring it up by saying it. > > I don't care about commericial claims either, however on two occasions they have created expectations that independent assessments of their technology were forthcoming by a certain date. The date passed and no reports emerged and no explanation was given. Just silence. harry > My main objection is to anything that is relevant here is to the > possibility of misdirection. I kind of want to say that misdirection is a > different beast than fraud. Misdirection has overtones of manipulation, > and fraud has clear legal and ethical implications. And I don't say that > Defkalion are guilty of misdirection. I only say the possibility has > occurred to me on more than one occasion for one reason or another. The > thought has occurred to me in connection with Rossi as well. I'm reminded > of the Wild West in the U.S., when people did all kinds of funny things, or > of the wheelers and dealers in turn of the century New York City. It's > just a feeling that you have to keep your eyes open and not let yourself be > hoodwinked. > > Commercial entities in the LENR space have control over how much they > provoke this reaction in people. In me, it has not yet caused me to wonder > whether they have a process that is basically working, only whether a > straight account of what they've learned has been given. But for some > other people that we know, it can turn a person into a full-on critic or an > opponent. This is the kind of thing that Feynman was probably reacting to > with Papp, who we all know was a colorful character. It is a reaction that > is largely avoidable, and companies should consider taking steps to > mitigate it by assuming observers are intelligent and will identify any > gimmicks or shortcuts or weird details. > > Eric > >
