[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] Buying Quality

To: David Gilbert <>, "" <>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Buying Quality
From: Al Kozakiewicz <>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 15:24:14 -0500
List-post: <">>
All you need to know about the eHam reviews that that the Tak-tenna garners a 
4.6/5.  For those that don't know, the Tak-tenna is basically a reactive dummy 
load that causes the feedline to radiate, thus forming an "antenna".

Al's rule: People are stupid and they rarely admit mistakes, even to 
themselves.  Because of this, 99% of positive reviews are rubbish at best.  For 
every factual positive review, there are a dozen or more that are either 
deliberately misleading or written by someone so dense they wouldn't recognize 
an objective fact if it crawled out of their butt and bit them on the cheek.

Since it's Christmastime, you may have noticed an especially charitable view of 
my fellow man on my part.....

I always read the negative reviews for consistency.  Idiots are even more 
motivated to share their experiences with others than the positive variety.  An 
outlier may be just that, but when you read the same problem from multiple 
sources and you're sure it's not due to a misapplication, assume it's for real.

From: [] On 
Behalf Of David Gilbert []
Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2011 1:46 PM
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Buying Quality

The numerical ratings on are notoriously useless, but if you
scour through the individual comments, looking for those that at least
sound like they came from someone knowledgeable and objective, you can
still sometimes get a decent picture of a product or service.  The QST
reviews have some good technical information but I have yet to see a
truly honest assessment of a poor product there.  if you can't decipher
the measured technical data, look elsewhere for an objective judgement
... especially for things like workmanship or reliability.

TowerTalk mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>