You're still applying ad-hominem and I truly don't understand why. You don't have to be on this platform for 2 weeks to realize there's something fishy about VTT, and it doesn't take much longer than that to investigate the record as it sits. It's the internet, everything has a date. I've seen
recent (last 6-12 months) facebook and forum posts that help to build this opinion, (on top of issues like GC V1.0s) and I'm not sure why you're so intent on putting words in my mouth.
I have never mentioned RB and VTT's issues and they have nothing to do with the opinion that VTT is unprofessional when it comes to interacting with their customers.
Begs the question,
why did you keep responding?
You could have participated in a discussion about the importance of vendor reputation, but instead
you got nowhere.
My points are clear and everyone's need to call "SpEcUlAtIoN" doesn't address them, it just makes the point stronger. Further, it's hilarious that you're calling fallacies on me. The initial fallacies started with ad-hominem and false dichotomies, both directed at me, for noting that
"Maybe we should be weary of VTT's products given the issues that have cropped up and the general lack of professionalism." Nobody who has spoken against me personally (panzerfaust, fmorelli) wants to address this simple point. If you're not addressing my point, then why are you responding directly to me?
Can anyone explain to me how context and reputation doesn't matter in this case (crank hub failure)?
I'm still all ears, 5 nonsense replies later.
And I'll paste it here once more:
I'd love to be wrong on my hunch that the hub slipped because VTT's solution failed. I WELCOME IT. But it's interesting to see that the other side wants to forget about years of shoddy customer service and arrogant attitudes because "ThAt'S bIaSeD sPeCuLaTiOn!" Well, isn't it funny that there's so much bias to forget about the relevant context