I did state facts; and gave a real world opinion... you obviously did not understand the context of what was said form both parties prior to my statement that seems to have hit a sensitive nerve. I suggest trying to understand the flavorful manner of which I write. It's not simple 3-5 letter words and foul mouthed rants. Do some legwork if you desire to validate. Just a few clicks away.
Calling a thread "snake oil"; which is another way of saying "false claim": is not belittling someone. It's literally describing a thread with a metaphor to describe the false claims that were made. Might I suggest a link:
Here. It's a good way to understand these things. (now that right there is actually belittling someone,
only if I know for a fact you do know how to use google). Please don't cut off your nose to spite your face. It doesn't hurt the others, it just affects how they perceive you.
I called him a troll for leading people on twice... and specifically for using the term two weeks. Do the math if you have been on this site long enough (maybe not? I don't care to look at this point). It should be easy for any veteran of this site to understand why it would be said: (BF public sales anyone?). I, also in the same paragraph, describe that if anything real hits the table he can PM me
if he desires. I also didn't state that it was the opinion of everyone. (are you gonna misinterpret and try and twist the 'many people' phrase now?) This paragraph should be blatantly understandable to the laymen veteran of this forum.
Again:
Sorry that being real, honest and upfront about the above mentioned issues was considered an attack. Imagine if people actually followed through with what they said on this site: The site would be perfect and everyone would be painting rainbow unicorns; as well as rich beyond their wildest dreams. Well, nearly.
I never once downed a project that wasn't an answer to the OP. I supported it.
I didn't down him for his project, I downed the method of sharing and lack of congruence (which does happen, but not usually repeatedly).
If you can't handle bad feedback, why care about good feedback?
This is why nowadays things like this and politics go horribly bad real quick: people get too hurt about a simple opinion; which is usually supposed to give inspiration to another viewpoint which is affecting one or many people and pointing towards a problem. If you can't work with bad feedback in the slightest for a rudimentary action such as proper information delivery: how can you be expected to improve or sell a product/service?
By the means of sharing it, it seems like it won't be open-source... so this concept/manner of thinking is very much applicable.
Anyways if it is open-source; what kind of logic is it to be secretive about something that's going to be public anyways?
Wouldn't the public help and input make a better project/product in the end?
On topic reply to the OP and others clicking here wondering about the 1-3 risers:
I have tried 1-3 splitters on many new and old boards (intel and AMD)... and they have generally worked like a charm with any PCIE capable board. At the very least, I have always been able to get 4 cards minimum working on a board with only 2 slots and an embedded CPU in a mini-ITX lenovo format. I haven't tried more than 5 GPU on many of those boards though, because the rigs were all smaller (4-5 gpu). The customers didn't want to spend that much on a 6+ card machine back then... plus wattage requirements were a bit steeper. YMMV.