No, nothing about that.
On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 11:30 PM, Jojo Iznart <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for the clarification Frank. Did the tester indicate to you > privately the reason for the delay, even if it is something they don't want > to say in public? > > > Jojo > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Frank Acland <[email protected]> > *To:* [email protected] > *Sent:* Thursday, August 21, 2014 11:45 AM > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Polarized ECat Testers > > Sorry, I just found this thread -- I didn't realize there was such > controversy going on. > > The term 'polarized opinions' was in reference to people on the outside -- > not among the testers. > > Frank > > > On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 9:26 PM, H Veeder <[email protected]> wrote: > >> It seems there are polarized opinions on the meaning of 'polarized >> opinions'. >> From the standpoint of an optimist it could mean the polarized opinions >> of the outside world, but from the standpoint of a pessimist it could mean >> the polarized opinions of the testers. Someone could ask Frank Acland to >> clarify the meaning. >> >> Harry >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 10:05 PM, Jojo Iznart <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Dave, you and I picked up on the most important phrase that others >>> seems to have missed - "Polarized Opinions". This by itself has got to >>> refer to opinions of the testers, not the outside world. For why would the >>> polarized opinions of the outside world suddenly make a difference in the >>> release of the TIP2 report? The outside world opinion has always been >>> polarized since the beginning, why make a difference now? especially in the >>> context of the TIP2 release date? >>> >>> >>> Jojo >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> *From:* David Roberson <[email protected]> >>> *To:* [email protected] >>> *Sent:* Thursday, August 21, 2014 5:28 AM >>> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Polarized ECat Testers >>> >>> Jojo, I hope you are wrong about your conclusion. It does concern me >>> by the expression of "Polarized opinions". Best case is for them to be >>> referring to how the device operates instead of how well it works. >>> >>> Dave >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Jojo Iznart <[email protected]> >>> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> >>> Sent: Wed, Aug 20, 2014 11:29 am >>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Polarized ECat Testers >>> >>> Sure, you can be optimistic and read it that way; but it seems clear in the >>> context of the statements, that the "Polarized opinions" is the reason. >>> Reason for what? reason for not giving pre-statements about a timing or >>> content of the report. Why would any polarized outside opinion be the >>> reason for any delay in the timing of the release? or affect the content of >>> the report? >>> >>> It seems clear. The testers can not agree on what to write. This can only >>> mean some think it is positive, some think it is negative. They can't agree >>> like a hang jury. >>> >>> >>> >>> Jojo >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Alan Fletcher" <[email protected]> >>> To: <[email protected]> >>> Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2014 11:20 PM >>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Polarized ECat Testers >>> >>> >>> > From: "Jojo Iznart" <[email protected]> >>> > Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2014 8:07:08 AM >>> > http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/08/20/e-cat-report-watch-thread/ >>> > As reported in e-catworld. It seems the TIP2 testers are having a lot of >>> > disagreements; hence the delay in the release of the report. This does not >>> > bode well for the ECat. I have been one of a few that think too many >>> > warning flags have been seen lately regarding the ECat. Chances of it >>> > being a Scam has increased. >>> > >>> > I don't read it that way --- >>> > >>> > "The response I received was that they realize there is a great amount of >>> > interest in the report, but that because of polarized opinions surrounding >>> > the LENR and E-Cat, it was not advisable to give any pre-statements about >>> > the content of timing or the report." >>> > >>> > The "polarized opinions" are those in the outside world, not within the >>> > team - which wants to get it right. And, quite correctly, say "nothing to >>> > nobody" until the report's out. >>> > >>> >>> >>> >> > > > -- > Frank Acland > Publisher, E-Cat World <http://www.e-catworld.com> > > > -- Frank Acland Publisher, E-Cat World <http://www.e-catworld.com>
