Comment by willis936
4 years ago
I see they don't want a "thing", but that hardly seems to be a reason to not name names. Is there some special status of companies that the non-conformant status of their devices should be private?
It turning into a "thing" sounds like a net win for consumers.
> I see they don't want a "thing", but that hardly seems to be a reason to not name names.
I see you've never experienced the shit-storm of abusive messages sometimes received from fans when you say something bad about the products from a company they are unreasonably attached to. Or the rather aggressive stance some companies themselves take when something not complimentary is said. Or in the middle, paid shills (the company getting someone to pretend to be one of those overly attached people).
That might be what is meant by "a thing" here.
Everything you listed are external chilling factors.
You would blame the person neutrally shining the flashlight for the obscene response of others? Simply identifying a list of tested drives should not cause fear for someone's wellbeing. Anything otherwise is a successful stifling of knowledge.
> You would blame the person neutrally shining the flashlight for the obscene response of others?
Absolutely not, you seem to have misread me there.
I'm saying I understand the bad results not being published to avoid the potential for the obscene response from others.
Publishing the good results is enough of a public service. More than required, in fact. The test results could have been kept to themselves as nothing is owed to the rest of us.