Daniel Rocha <[email protected]> wrote: There is nothing abnormal here. Before signing a contract, they'd better > certify that what DGT had was legit. Or just don't sign. >
I agree! I wouldn't have signed. Or, as I said, when Gamberale was in Vancouver he should have test the flow rate. You said even a plumber could do that. So, before signing they were naive > and just got slightly below the level of expertise of a plubler after the > signing and just a bit above after the demo. This doesn't make sense. > You are right. It does not make sense. I agree they were naive. As I said, they failed to perform due diligence. > Look, Gamberale is not naive. > He seems naive to me. > Or if he was, he should know better, since this probably wouldn't be his > first time with him dealing with dishonesty. > Yes, that is the definition of naivete. Some people never learn, even from experience. They are cheated time after time, even in old age. > For example, when he dealt with Blacklight. He pulled out of before the > final version of the paper before was sent to the journal (which was > rejected). Even though, Blacklight kept citing his name in further papers > and in the patent . . . > Perhaps he is unaware of that? Perhaps he has not noticed they are using his name? Maybe he does not read Blacklight's publications, so he did not notice. They are obscure. - Jed
