In Progress Request: allow all manufacturers and vendors to post in Radenso section

RedRocket

Lidar Shootist
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2012
Messages
4,289
Reaction score
4,928
Location
USA
Unfortunately, until testers build a microwave lab you do not have the tools to get to the level of truth necessary. Until I posted, nobody knew what MRCT, MRCD, Redflex, BSMs, or Bushnell even looked like. Everyone thought that traffic drones were all CW. Etc, etc, etc.

For fifteen years, manufacturers told you that BSMs were inevitable because they used K band "just like police radar." Testers had zero way to know that this was a lie.

It just depends on what you care about. The truth or lack of conflict.
While that's true- it is possible to come close to a level of truth, the Techie types here do not have access to a microwave Lab,an Anechoic chamber or a highend Spectrum Analyzer, there are some sharp backyard testers w/ the talent to conduct real world testing schemes "in the field" to explore dynamic range & sensitivity detection results via close proximity of BSM emitters on distant weak signal down-range Police radar signals.
For myself, I prefer to see the REAL numbers only your Lab equipment can provide relating to Dynamic Range (in DB) & Noise Floor (in -dBm) sensitivity.
 

Vortex

Making Videos
Observer
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
18,990
Reaction score
43,409
Location
Washington State
Based on what everyone is saying, it sounds like the goal here is to have accurate and correct information about anything and everything related to CM’s without creating a bunch of unwanted drama and conflict. It’s possible to share information and address misinformation without being confrontational or attacking someone.

Granted that’s not always easy and people’s feelings will likely get hurt when they’re called out for being wrong, but we can still strive to share accurate information while also being considerate instead of oppositional, you know? Basically, share collective wisdom and correct bad information when appropriate, but don’t be a jerk about it. Does that sound like a healthy balance?
 

KASHER1979

RDFORUM OWNER
Administrator
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2013
Messages
9,613
Reaction score
9,682
Let's also remember there have been instances where something is knocking it out of the ba
Based on what everyone is saying, it sounds like the goal here is to have accurate and correct information about anything and everything related to CM’s without creating a bunch of unwanted drama and conflict. It’s possible to share information and address misinformation without being confrontational or attacking someone.

Granted that’s not always easy and people’s feelings will likely get hurt when they’re called out for being wrong, but we can still strive to share accurate information while also being considerate instead of oppositional, you know? Basically, share collective wisdom and correct bad information when appropriate, but don’t be a jerk about it. Does that sound like a healthy balance?
It’s really that simple. Thank you.
 

Jon at Radenso

Manufacturer
Advanced User
Premium Member
Manufacturer
Joined
Oct 9, 2012
Messages
1,534
Reaction score
10,831
Age
31
Based on what everyone is saying, it sounds like the goal here is to have accurate and correct information about anything and everything related to CM’s without creating a bunch of unwanted drama and conflict. It’s possible to share information and address misinformation without being confrontational or attacking someone.

Granted that’s not always easy and people’s feelings will likely get hurt when they’re called out for being wrong, but we can still strive to share accurate information while also being considerate instead of oppositional, you know? Basically, share collective wisdom and correct bad information when appropriate, but don’t be a jerk about it. Does that sound like a healthy balance?
Yes, and I would like to be able to have manufacturers do so in my section. There have already been five or six posts I have seen today in other sections that I could constructively contribute to - for example, this one: https://www.rdforum.org/index.php?threads/94375/#post-1361674

I have the same manufacturer and my products work the same way. Hell, I could literally ask the engineer who built it and report back. But I can't because I've been barred from that section, so the community loses.

The idea behind my request was to make sure that nobody else is dissuaded from commenting in the Radenso section - I am sure other manufacturers and vendors could bring things to the table that I would wind up implementing.

This is a separate issue from whether or not other manufacturers want me posting in their section. If I have no problem with everyone posting in mine, I am really not sure what would be the point of disallowing that - except to try to save face of other manufacturers who are scared of open discussion?

I have never reported another manufacturer or vendor for posting something in my section, so let's not create rules to solve problems that don't exist.

Frankly, there has only been one manufacturer in the radar space that has even requested this rule to be enforced - and I think we all know who that is. Uniden hasn't. Radenso hasn't. Valentine hasn't. NetRadar hasn't. Stinger hasn't. Whistler hasn't.
 
Last edited:

cihkal

Pure Energy
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2014
Messages
3,628
Reaction score
6,543
Based on what everyone is saying, it sounds like the goal here is to have accurate and correct information about anything and everything related to CM’s without creating a bunch of unwanted drama and conflict. It’s possible to share information and address misinformation without being confrontational or attacking someone.

Granted that’s not always easy and people’s feelings will likely get hurt when they’re called out for being wrong, but we can still strive to share accurate information while also being considerate instead of oppositional, you know? Basically, share collective wisdom and correct bad information when appropriate, but don’t be a jerk about it. Does that sound like a healthy balance?
Absolutely! Seems like the best "scope" to me.

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk
 

Deacon

TXCTG
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2016
Messages
9,769
Reaction score
12,899
Location
Hill Country, TX
It’s disappointing that there would be a manufacturer who’d try to restrict participation of any other manufacturer. I get the impression that forbidding that participation is a fundamental condition of the requesting manufacturer’s involvement in this community. If we don’t ensure they’re the only one who gets to participate in the discussion section for their brand, then they’ll take their ball and go home.

It’s sad, because they already have their own heavily patrolled and actively enforced forum they host where mention of any other brand is strictly forbidden. Which, fine, whatever, it’s their forum so their call if they want to be that way. But this forum isn’t for them, isn’t for any other manufacturer, either. It’s for us, the community of CM users, from casual to enthusiast. I think it benefits all of us when manufacturers participate, and when done well it tremendously benefits the manufacturers themselves.

I think a rule forbidding the participation of any manufacturer in any section isn’t helpful. It’s giving up, a management by policy approach instead of simply enforcing the existing rules against trolling or flame wars, etc, that should be enforced across the board, manufacturers included. And if a manufacturer wants to condition their involvement in our community on us catering to them by barring the involvement of others, I don’t think that’s a worthwhile exchange. They can either live with it or go back to their own heavily controlled safe space where they alone control their own narrative and bar any others who don’t toe their line.

This is just my opinion. It doesn’t really affect my participation either way.
 
Last edited:

KASHER1979

RDFORUM OWNER
Administrator
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2013
Messages
9,613
Reaction score
9,682
It’s disappointing that there would be a manufacturer who’d try to restrict participation of any other manufacturer. I get the impression that forbidding that participation is a fundamental condition of the requesting manufacturer’s involvement in this community. If we don’t ensure they’re the only one who gets to participate in the discussion section for their brand, then they’ll take their ball and go home.

It’s sad, because they already have their own heavily patrolled and actively enforced forum they host where mention of any other brand is strictly forbidden. Which, fine, whatever, it’s their forum so their call if they want to be that way. But this forum isn’t for them, isn’t for any other manufacturer, either. It’s for us, the community of CM users, from casual to enthusiast. I think it benefits all of us when manufacturers participate, and when done well it tremendously benefits the manufacturers themselves.

I think a rule forbidding the participation of any manufacturer in any section isn’t helpful. It’s giving up, a management by policy approach instead of simply enforcing the existing rules against trolling or flame wars, etc, that should be enforced across the board, manufacturers included. And if a manufacturer wants to condition their involvement in our community on us catering to them by barring the involvement of others, I don’t think that’s a worthwhile exchange. They can either live with it or go back to their own heavily controlled safe space where they alone control their own narrative and bar any others who don’t toe their line.

This is just my opinion. It doesn’t really affect my participation either way.
The impression you are getting isn't correct. The rule existed to not post in others sections before this Manufacturer you mentioned even came on here. They simply asked that we enforce the rule that we already had in place.... So either we ditch that rule all together or we have to enforce it.

But no they didn't say anything like that they wouldn't participate unless we do this etc etc.

It was our rule..... Something we came up with , with zero influence from any manufactorers. We are currently talking about this and ways to adjust and make it better since we do listen to the community and take into account all that is happening and tweaking as we go along. But what you are hinting at or saying here is just not correct.

But this forum isn’t for them, isn’t for any other manufacturer, either. It’s for us, the community of CM users, from casual to enthusiast. I think it benefits all of us when manufacturers participate, and when done well it tremendously benefits the manufacturers themselves.
Now this you are completely 100% right about and I couldn't agree with you more. :)
 
Last edited:

Deacon

TXCTG
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2016
Messages
9,769
Reaction score
12,899
Location
Hill Country, TX
You are actually wrong about all of this.
No, Kasher. I’m not wrong about my opinion or the reasons why I hold it. No matter how you might nitpick it, as I said it’s still disappointing that there would be a manufacturer who’d try to restrict participation of any other manufacturer.

I’m well aware the rule existed before, even if it wasn’t really enforced. I never said otherwise. I tried to made it clear that I think it’s a poor rule and why.

I’m well aware it wasn’t laid out plainly that participation was conditioned on barring others. That’s why I specified that “I get the impression” as I’m taking their request in context with the rest of their behaviors. You may disagree with my impression, but flatly calling me wrong about all of it is needlessly aggressive.
 

KASHER1979

RDFORUM OWNER
Administrator
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2013
Messages
9,613
Reaction score
9,682
No, Kasher. I’m not wrong about my opinion or the reasons why I hold it. No matter how you might nitpick it, as I said it’s still disappointing that there would be a manufacturer who’d try to restrict participation of any other manufacturer.

I’m well aware the rule existed before, even if it wasn’t really enforced. I never said otherwise. I tried to made it clear that I think it’s a poor rule and why.

I’m well aware it wasn’t laid out plainly that participation was conditioned on barring others. That’s why I specified that “I get the impression” as I’m taking their request in context with the rest of their behaviors. You may disagree with my impression, but flatly calling me wrong about all of it is needlessly aggressive.
I corrected my post to clarify before you posted this. lol

No, Kasher. I’m not wrong about my opinion or the reasons why I hold it.
I never said you were wrong about that. Only wrong about the assumption that Escort said to enforce this or they are going home. That never happened. THey came on here on their own , and we welcome all Manufactorers to participate if they choose to. The rule was there already, so they had nothing to do with that.

But you'll debate me until the cows come home. lol

I just didn't want what you were saying to make it seem as though we are Biased and doing Escort favors because that's NOT what is happening. We were just enforcing our own rule that we ourselves made for a reason.
 
Last edited:

STS-134

Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2014
Messages
8,789
Reaction score
8,709
Location
Saratoga, CA
what we care about is when we put it on our WS how it performs. If we drive around and get no false alerts and range is stellar etc etc. then there isn’t anything else that is important to us.
I think there are plenty of us here who care as much about how something was implemented as we care that it was implemented. The technological details of how something was accomplished can tell you a lot about the capabilities of the unit, as well as how future-proof it is. If it's taking them a week to write some custom code to filter out a single new BSM system, and the code is completely disorganized and hard to maintain, I can probably guess that this system doesn't have too much of a future. If on the other hand something is implemented in such a way that all they have to do is record a pattern and it essentially programs itself, then that's another story entirely.
 

PointerCone

M3 Kng
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2011
Messages
22,132
Reaction score
21,981
Here's my .2 cents. I do care about how things work and also the WHY of working. Fundamentally, the issue is one of this: Who (or who doesnt) have the tools to call out another manufacturers BS that we as enthusiasts may want or need to know. In other words, does the enthusiast want to know how and why a particular unit works well. Some do, some don't. Your casual user could shive a git less. Your enthusiast, he/she wants to know it all, the who , what , when, where, why and how. I guess we could get it ALL and sort it out or leave it for more advanced member who do shive a git.

On the issue of Free Speech on the forum, which is ultimately what we're alluding to here. ALL speech should be free until it gets to lies or falsehoods, half-truths etc. How do we know what are lies? We vet them through technical analysis and ultimately enthusiast testing. And NO, ER, we are NOT just a bunch of backyard testers who know nothing. If Cobra tells us they are introducing the longest range, most sensitive detector ever (sound familiar ER Max??), then we will call out the falsehood and test it objectively, as we always have for over 10 years now. Results talk, BS walks, its that simple.
 

WGSNewnan

PSL +5
Intermediate User
Joined
Sep 10, 2013
Messages
231
Reaction score
297
all i know, after being involved with these cm forums for darn near 20 years is - its always better when escort is not involved. them and veil guy. regardless of why anybody feels the need to have them around - their products dont work and the drama ensues. ALWAYS!
 

PointerCone

M3 Kng
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2011
Messages
22,132
Reaction score
21,981
It’s disappointing that there would be a manufacturer who’d try to restrict participation of any other manufacturer. I get the impression that forbidding that participation is a fundamental condition of the requesting manufacturer’s involvement in this community. If we don’t ensure they’re the only one who gets to participate in the discussion section for their brand, then they’ll take their ball and go home.

It’s sad, because they already have their own heavily patrolled and actively enforced forum they host where mention of any other brand is strictly forbidden. Which, fine, whatever, it’s their forum so their call if they want to be that way. But this forum isn’t for them, isn’t for any other manufacturer, either. It’s for us, the community of CM users, from casual to enthusiast. I think it benefits all of us when manufacturers participate, and when done well it tremendously benefits the manufacturers themselves.

I think a rule forbidding the participation of any manufacturer in any section isn’t helpful. It’s giving up, a management by policy approach insteavoluntarilyd of simply enforcing the existing rules against trolling or flame wars, etc, that should be enforced across the board, manufacturers included. And if a manufacturer wants to condition their involvement in our community on us catering to them by barring the involvement of others, I don’t think that’s a worthwhile exchange. They can either live with it or go back to their own heavily controlled safe space where they alone control their own narrative and bar any others who don’t toe their line.

This is just my opinion. It doesn’t really affect my participation either way.

Didn't they voluntarily elect 3 years ago to take their ball and go home??? NO ONE asked them to leave. No one set conditions. No one did anything other than ask relevant questions about their units. Apparently that was too much. Now that their forum is a ghost own and this one thrives and survives, the rules must change?? Nah, if this is the case. I'll take a pass on that idea.
Post automatically merged:

all i know, after being involved with these cm forums for darn near 20 years is - its always better when escort is not involved. them and veil guy. regardless of why anybody feels the need to have them around - their products dont work and the drama ensues. ALWAYS!
I can't say their products don't work. I can ONLY say that they left on their own angry volition and now that things are not so good "over there" they want to participate again? This is a question, not a statement.
 

mb300sd

PSL +200
Intermediate User
Premium Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2012
Messages
525
Reaction score
443
Location
GA
@Jon at Radenso about testers not having RF labs - did anything ever come from your mention of a simple downconverter design for SDRs? I tried to piece one out myself from discrete mixers and oscillators, and anything speced for K band, not even Ka, was pretty damn expensive on ebay. I'd love an excuse to finally buy that bladeRF I've been staring at and head out to a testing meet.
 

Discord Server

Latest threads

Forum statistics

Threads
79,902
Messages
1,215,693
Members
20,227
Latest member
Pinhook
Top