Technical Roundtable Forum

[cledford]

Another thought...

It might be a good idea to think Consumer Reports - the magazine. From what I've heard they accept no advertising from the products they review - so as to not appear compromised by advertising dollars.

The complete opposite can been seen in Paintball magazines. They do reviews all of the time, and never say a discouraging word about ANY product - because the are making money off those same manufacturers through advertisements. Very often the product "reviews" are little more then rewritten press releases with very little (or none) real testing of the claims.

I think we can raise the bar here - and maybe even SET STANDARDS moving forward for how new products are evaluated. We might be making paintball history - even when it seems all of the "big" advances have already been done.

Manufactures can help us conduct the tests, but we'll have to be able to do them independently for them to hold water.

-Calvin

[sniper1rfa]

hmmph, as long as I can participate, im happy.... naturally.

[rudy]

here is my opinion
everyone should be able to post/comment. and absolutely no one should be allowed to edit/delete post. spelling mistakes or other wise. I have been in plenty of discussions in other fields then paintball. I know that editing / deleting post is a great way people cover up false claims and erase information that proved them wrong. I think this forum will only work well under those conditions.
as far as manufacturers they are quite often the only ones who can afford the equipment to actually test but we will just have to ask for data, expiremental procedure and everything that would go into proving an expirement is not flawed. anything less then that we will know not to weigh to much on.

[314159]

i wouldn't mind having Pand0ra in on this

[Cristobal]

I think there is a bit of confusion as to how exactly the proposed "round table" would work (I would be included in this category).

As far as I can tell, the round table board is here to provide a forum dedicated to performance reviews/dissections of manufactures' claims -- rather a truth-in-advertising forum to cut through [what would seem to be many] myths propagated in paintball. Making a dedicated place for this pursuit makes a lot of sense and I applaud the idea.

When it comes to the "Round Table Board" itself, things get a little confusing. I've seen a lot of great names thrown in for people who would be good contributors for this sort of endeavor and in many cases have the equipment to carry out rigorous testing. I'm not sure however, that everybody who might be a valid contributor necessarily must be on the board. Let me put forth my understanding of how things might work: From what I can tell, the "round table board" would be comprised of a relatively small group of core members who would (for lack of a better word) moderate the activities of the forum. They set the mission statement of the forum and provide and enforce guidelines for how experiments and testing should be done, in order to fulfill the mission statement.

When it comes to an open or closed nature, I vote for open, so that we have a free and unimpeded flow of ideas. There is a reason for working in teams in engineering -- the more minds that are able to look at a problem and bounce ideas off of each other the better the end result should be. (Provided, of course that there's leadership in place to ensure a successful end product). This is exactly what I see the "board" members as doing. They provide the leadership for the forum. If someone who has never posted on AO before wants to come in and run some tests on product X, then I say let them go right for it. But first, if you've got an idea for a test you want to run -- and have your results "published" on this forum -- then post here with your ideas because almost certainly someone is going to be able make some helpful comments. In this case the board members serve rather like "editors" and make sure that test methodology and procedure are sound and befitting of the lofty aims of the forum If the board members decide that product X is something the forum wants to look into officially then they can organize the resources on hand to make an even bigger investigation, or help the individual who proposed the testing of X conduct their investigation. Even if the forum doesn't want to officially endorse an investigation, I see no reason why the individual who proposed it could post the results here for critique, provided they have followed procedures in keeping with the rigors of the forum and whatever specific requirements the board might have set down.

In short, I think the actual "round table board members" should be individuals who have the time, commitment, and technical know-how to oversee the forum. I don't see anything wrong, however with having technically savvy "contributing editors" helping to write reports and conduct experiment on a regular or occasional basis. I myself would not want to be part of such a board, because I simply don't have the time, but I wouldn't mind helping and contributing (either in procedure or critical review) to various projects that lie within my field of understanding and my resources.

For a particular investigation, which might or might not involve various manufacturers, the board members could review the procedure and results and choose whether or not to grant it a sort of round table "seal of approval" which would signify that they felt it free from bias and of solid scientific value.

Whew! That's a lot of typing... If I've completely missed the point of the forum then please set me straight.


Also, when it comes to posting, I would say that anyone should be allowed to post and contribute to discussion threads, but that posts should be moderated for sufficient technical content. Given a little bit of time, the forum should sort itself out where people know what's expected when they post, and what would be frivolous or not of substance.

I would agree as well that posts should not be edit-able or delete-able. If someone makes claims, I don't want them to be able to got back and change them. I also don't want to see whole threads "disappear" like has happened elsewhere. Not allowing editing makes for a problem if you mis-type something. My suggestion is two-fold: in good scientific fashion, check what you write before you post! (now watch someone is going to point out all the errors in what I've just typed ); and second, if possible it would be great if the software allowed editing, but only in a new field below the original text, and which would leave it un-altered.

Ok, I'm done for now :)

[paintbattler]

Re: I second...

Originally posted by cledford
Butterfingers and Manike.

yeah but add tunaman

[ShinyGuy]

I think Cristobal hit the nail on the head. Lets keep the forum fundimentally open but have Editors instead on Moderaters.

[rudy]

I like the idea of only allowing editing to take place in a separate below the original box. or just post another message correcting yourself.

[Vegeta]

I also would like to see 31459... well... Pi.. in on this :).

I have a bit of technical knowledge on the operation of valves and solid state electronics/operation of solenoid/servos.

[manike]

I accept :) I'd also like to second Have Blue, Doc Nickel and Curt, all people I have known for quite a while and whom I really respect for their knowledge and understanding.

I'm currently a bit screwed for Net acess, my laptop decided to have melt down two days ago and I have lost a huge amount that I am trying to catch up with and sort out (including the further manik-e-mag work and original model/code! gutted) So access for me is going to be a little limited unless the laptop guy pulls some miracles this morning. Fingers crossed.

I also don't think letting manufacturers be involved should be an issue, as long as they don't hype their products. If they have valid evidence to back up their claims then that's the kind of stuff we want to see here. Just don't let it get into a 'head banging against wall' situation like over on PBN. I know for sure that If I had seen any evidence on some of WAS's claims I wouldn't be calling him.

Manufacturers should only be able to provide data on products of their own, not conjecture. Other people in the field should be able to pick that information apart (even if they have competing products).

Editors to cut out the waffle would be a nice touch...

manike

[Temo Vryce]

Well i don't have any nominations and everyone that should be seconded has been. I just wanted to wish you guys good luck with this. I hope it worls well because it's time that someone Dropped the Hammer and cleared up the hype that some manufacturers have been spreading.

[P8ntballerAK]

ME!!!

Ya I know I am not the most avid paintball player. But I do run the Alaska State Association of Paintball players. I have an extensive backround in electronics and one of my best skills is reverse engineering. I might not level on the technical side with the other guys but the few things i do have make me uniqe in many aspects.

1)First of I have some of the best troubleshooting and customer service skills that I have seen in the current computer market.

2)I don't like to take anything to heart unless its a well known proven fact and I try it for myself, I am a true member of the "take it as a grain of salt" club.

3) this is probably my most annoying and best sttribute yet, those of you who have seen me know it. I ask questions, lots of questions. I want to know every little detail about something and It often annoys people to no end. This is perfect for this board because it will help me bring to light some of the matters that the other people might be over looking.

I am a tinkerer at hart, logic and hands on skills is how I test most of my projects, I specialize in motorcycle mechanics, network development, computer troubleshooting and repair, and high powered electronic devices(ie: tvs, monitors, 220 appliances) and such. I went to school only for the computer skills I have developed, the rest I learned on my own.

thats pretty much it unless there are questions

[pbjosh]

Well,

I welcome any questions, and my brain and toys are in general free for testing.

I do not Manufacture anything at the moment, but I do sell and distribute. I do Design, tinker, and draw a ton of stuff up in AutoCAD.

I don't have a ton of time, but if nobody minds I can offer my testing and therories.

I personaly like to test and try, have some great #'s from using the Racegun grip to test stuff.

Josh

[shartley]

READ Before you Post in this Forum
There have lately been some threads started in this forum that don't belong here or even Deep Blue for that matter. This forum is only for highly technical discussions and at the moment a project is under way, so only project team members should be posting. Do NOT post questions in this forum about random paintball topics. I will delete them.

[xmetal2001]

I totally agree with Shartley. I just cant type that many words
:)
Didnt think i'd ever say that.