Topic: [Guide] Dogie's Comprehensive Manufacturer Trustworthiness Guide [1st Feb 2016] - page 9. (Read 131287 times)

No, you didn't.

What you omitted:


Even by your criteria:

- We didn't take pre-orders since November.
- We don't rely on pre-order for our next gen. I can't even begin to count the number of times I've said it. It's not our main business model. I even took the time to explain to you our business model for our next gen.

Yet, you keep claiming that "you continue to do as your main business model"

This is simply a lie and you know it.

Well, yes I did. You claimed:





I proved all the above to be false. I evidenced a mirror image discussion with BFL about the SAME CRITERIA and the SAME IMPLEMENTATION in SEPTEMBER, 3 months before you claim I made them up from scratch for you in DECEMBER.

No, you didn't - categorically and irrefutably disprove my claims.

LOL what? I categorically and irrefutably disprove your claims and you deny the posts' existence? Is this another conspiracy? Did Theymos plant pages of posts back in time?

Keep lying and BS-ing.


Going to watch house of cards.

Cool. If you still have some time on your hands, you can read about a week before and after this post to see that the criteria was not changed, was not changed just for you and that you were not even the first company for the methodology to be applied to.

Until your next round of lies.

Then we're cool then?

That's okay, you can keep lying about not changing your ranking criteria specifically for us.

That's okay, you're free to hide behind it all you like.

No matter how many times you'll ask, I won't release you from your NDA, which you gladly signed.
You insist on keep lying about changing your criteria specifically for us, I keep insisting on the NDA.

Yet I'm the one ignoring the topic, right?



Then you'll have no problem releasing me from the NDA, right? Or are you going to hide behind it again?

The amount of BS and lies one person dog can write poop.



I believe our NDA is actually doing you a favour. It prevents you from further humiliating yourself.

There is nothing to 'admit' to. He's suggesting that because he ..... [the issue HE is hiding behind an NDA on, not me]... that he believes:

1) I opposed spamming threads as marketing, which I did, and still do. For all companies.
2) Asked an incorrectly moved thread discussing said topic to meta so we could have an adult discussion about the above issue, which I did and would do again? If it was not appropriate then the thread would have died immediately, instead it grew to 7 pages and spawned important discussion between the mods.
3) Reported his posts, which is both untrue and irrelevant. As much as he wants to believe his 1 word posts were deleted as part of some conspiracy, I am not a moderator.
4) Reported someone posting 5 threads in a manner that should have just been one thread? Yes, and would do it again because I was not the only person to report them. And I reported one post asking for a mod to see what he though. The mod decided that it was inappropriate and there were multiple ways in which it should have been done in one thread.

My reply in regards to he 'also believes in ghosts' is in response to that he believes the above are all in some huge conspiracy against him and his company [including the mods], when it was and still is one of the highest scoring companies of all time, and is poised to be the first company ever to get a perfect score if he follows through on his word. He's still not revealed the reason why exactly he wants that to happen prematurely though, also hiding behind an NDA on that one.

Anything else?

If someone is interested, here are our posts exchange after Dogie changed the pre-order criteria in December listing of his guide:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9875277
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9877118
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9877499
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9877629
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9877670
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9883514

this isn't about a "scam" its about your lies, per Guy. stick to the topic Guy is hammering you on. 

Also, appeal to mockery/ridicule is preposterous: claiming "believe in ghost" is a pathetic attempt on your part, appeal to ridicule is irrelevant to the issue Guy is raising.  address the lie issue Guy has brought up and then you can talk about all the ghost stories you wish.
man up already and suck it up.  you will gain respect here by admitting mistakes and fixing them, ignoring them and continuing your style continues to negatively reflect on you.

Yes, a little.  I'm using some S3 are heat in the winter since I've gotta heat my house anyway...

And the prisma provided a nice fire for more warmth as well...

Revealing the reasons behind our score is not off topic. Anyway, I've posted enough for this round of lies. I guess we'll meet again in April.

Then you probably believe in ghosts as well. You're free to start a scam accusation thread but its becoming off topic here.

Yes, your unethical behaviour is on trial here.

Until December, your description for preorders was:
Preorders are a recipe for disaster and puts all the risk on the buyer.
Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20141022200447/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=456691

When it was time to remove our pre-orders ranking (we stop doing pre-orders in November), the description was changed:
Preorders are extremely bad for the industry and put all the financial risk on the buyer. This criterion does not act as a snapshot, but a longer term (both past and future) "does
this company engage in preorders". A company who's business model relies on preorders to fund development and new generations is still considered to utilise preorders even if
they intermediately sell some products from stock. Transitional scores may be used when companies have promised the exclusion of preorders but have yet to prove their business
model can operate without them.
Source: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5035158

I told, endless times, that we won't take pre-orders on our 3rd gen due to the design risk.
It falls on deaf dogs ears.
 
In addition:

- You opposed the SP20 legendaries reviews we did for some reason, very loud
- You asked a moderator to move a thread called "Spondoolies Spam" from trash to meta, after we launched the SP20 legendaries reviews
- You've unjustifiably reported some of my posts in some of the legendaries reviews threads
- You reported Philip's poll questions threads and tried to kill the hardware manufacturer's poll

All of that, I believe, is because of our unrelated dispute.

Guy