Apogee GTZ

The problem that arises is that when the reviewer is paid by the company he is then indebted to them whether he wishes to be or not.
If he is paid by the end users then he can be impartial.
No company in the world is going to continue paying a reviewer that is dumping on their products whether deserved or not.
You have to keep cash from the companies away from the reviewers or you set up a situation where he then becomes their unofficial employee.
Money corrupts the whole process here as it does everywhere else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SiGfever

What I meant was it might not be a bad idea for a manufacturer to hire an independent to test their product with all the information going to the paying company. Then it would be up to the company to release that information to the public to validate their product. just my $.015

---

Ok, let's see if I get that right. I manufacturer pay for validation data. If it's no good, I don't publish it, if it's good, then I publish it, but since it was paid for, nobody believes in it, right? Not to sound harsh, but that's exactly what would happen.

So isn't it a much cleaner approach to let independants be funded by their direct beneficiary?

I'll just chime in and say that Martin has a paypal donation button on the flow rate estimator page.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

The problem that arises is that when the reviewer is paid by the company he is then indebted to them whether he wishes to be or not.
If he is paid by the end users then he can be impartial.
No company in the world is going to continue paying a reviewer that is dumping on their products whether deserved or not.
You have to keep cash from the companies away from the reviewers or you set up a situation where he then becomes their unofficial employee.
Money corrupts the whole process here as it does everywhere else.

---

Amen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gabe

Ok, let's see if I get that right. I manufacturer pay for validation data. If it's no good, I don't publish it, if it's good, then I publish it, but since it was paid for, nobody believes in it, right? Not to sound harsh, but that's exactly what would happen.

So isn't it a much cleaner approach to let independants be funded by their direct beneficiary?

---

Yes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by majestik

I'll just chime in and say that Martin has a paypal donation button on the flow rate estimator page.

---

Now that is a good idea but I'll bet you dollars to dimes that he doesn't see $100.00 /month..
People just WILL NOT pay for what they feel they should get for free no matter if they are right or wrong.
Look at Bok's Free Dc stats page, used by thousands but how many donate?
VERY few.
I sent him $25.00 twice and thats probably 30% of what he's received this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gabe

Ok, let's see if I get that right. I manufacturer pay for validation data. If it's no good, I don't publish it, if it's good, then I publish it, but since it was paid for, nobody believes in it, right? Not to sound harsh, but that's exactly what would happen.

So isn't it a much cleaner approach to let independants be funded by their direct beneficiary?

---

Yes I see your point. Too many people would believe that the tester was "Paid off" and the testing could not be trusted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

Yes


Now that is a good idea but I'll bet you dollars to dimes that he doesn't see $100.00 /month..
People just WILL NOT pay for what they feel they should get for free no matter if they are right or wrong.
Look at Bok's Free Dc stats page, used by thousands but how many donate?
VERY few.
I sent him $25.00 twice and thats probably 30% of what he's received this year.

---

very sound observation..

but I'm practical, so let's push this one step further

Either things go back to the way they are.. a few independants doing this as a hobby, for glory or fun, and/or some free hardware, or {suggestion} we take a tight knit community like XS interested in uncompromised data, and set up a fee based section of the forum to publish that data.. There are many practical issues with that, but it could be a way to get it done..

Someone rightfully suggested that reviewers should be compensated. Everybody agress (I think) that manufacturers cannot/should not/must not be involved. So how does it get done?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gabe

very sound observation..

but I'm practical, so let's push this one step further

Either things go back to the way they are.. a few independants doing this as a hobby, for glory or fun, and/or some free hardware, or {suggestion} we take a tight knit community like XS interested in uncompromised data, and set up a fee based section of the forum to publish that data.. There are many practical issues with that, but it could be a way to get it done..

Someone rightfully suggested that reviewers should be compensated. Everybody agress (I think) that manufacturers cannot/should not/must not be involved. So how does it get done?

---

Just speaking for myself but I think there are many that feel this way;
People who review are generally "into" the hardware, it is a hobby but lets face it, it can be an expensive one.
We all have different financial abilities. Some guys can go and buy the state of the art twice a year but most of us can not and I surely can't.
What I have is time and investing that time to do a good in depth review of an item with the "payoff" of that item to me is a fair trade.
Now when I reviewed those HS and found them to be horrible as shipped I said to the company "Do you want me to ship them back to you?"
They said no.
I would have said the same to you had I found your kit to be crap but everything I said in that review was the God's truth or I wouldn't have put my name on it. To me it is that black and white and I'll say it here again, whoever wrote that manual in that kit is a resource not to be lost.
Now some here will think that I'm kissing your backside here but that is not me.
When I see a great product the little kid still inside this 56 year old body wants to share that with his friends so they can benefit from what I've learned. Yes, black and white.

Wow, I must be on some massive ignore list. Either everyone is dense or I am placed in 'Tachy goes to coventry'. Reviewers should NEVER BE PAID, period end of story. What Movieman described is what people should be paid for, he should have been PAID for his insight, non public testing, advice etc, etc, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

Instead of posting a negative review I sat down and wrote out all the needed "fixes" that were needed and mailed to the manufacturer. As these were pre-release they incorporated the fixes I sent and the final shipped product is an excellent one.
This is where I think a reviewer can be usefull.
The product is out of the lab and into a real world situation.

---

And you should have been paid for this. This is my opinion. You did NOT publicly review this piece, you improved it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

Just speaking for myself but I think there are many that feel this way;
People who review are generally "into" the hardware, it is a hobby but lets face it, it can be an expensive one.
We all have different financial abilities. Some guys can go and buy the state of the art twice a year but most of us can not and I surely can't.
What I have is time and investing that time to do a good in depth review of an item with the "payoff" of that item to me is a fair trade..

---

right, I was just discussing the same thing with another member, and he made the very same observation.

which is one more reason to find creative ways to compensate reviewers without alienating their independance. We need good reviewers!

suggestions welcome on how to achieve that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gabe

right, I was just discussing the same thing with another member, and he made the very same observation.

which is one more reason to find creative ways to compensate reviewers without alienating their independance. We need good reviewers!

suggestions welcome on how to achieve that.

---

The first and biggest hurdle is trust, on both sides.
Also a feeling that we can work together talking straight to one another.
My feeling is that when a company has sent something to me they are taking a gamble that I will be honest with them and maybe I'm old fashioned but that trust means a lot to me. Lets face it, who the hell am I?
To honor that trust I owe them my best and that is why I spent that day reworking those heatsinks.
Niksub said I should have been paid for it but in a way I was.
The guys here who bought those heatsinks benefited from that sunday I spent and that's enough for me.
The company also benefited in that they sold a better product and thats my thanks to them for their trust in me.
It's a two way street or it should be seen that way, not an "us" and "them" mentality.

im kinda disappointed, still now internals? :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RealRedRaider

I second the motion to create a fee based area of the forum, I'll be the first member, but you would need at least (3) credible testers for checks and balances...

The manufacturers should pay into this fund and who they are and what they contributed should be kept from the testers. The products should also be provided to XS testers by the manufacturers. If the manufacturer believes in their product, then they shouldn't be afraid to let it be tested by Independents. Believe me, the wheat will be seperated from the chaff rather quickly...

---

We'd be happy to contribute into a "blind" fund.

These are tough economic times for all, especially most manufacturers.
The current fuel costs are killing companies and workers alike.
People's discretionary income, if they have any, is being eaten up by these costs. Add in that if you live in a cold climate as it is here in the winter your trying to plan ahead for $5.00/gallon heating oil.
Just my little 48x26' 2200 sq ft split takes 600 gallons of oil a year to heat.
Three years ago that was $1.00 a gallon, now it will be $5.00
That's $3000.00 for what was $600.00 in just 3 years my friends.
Add in that everything is WAY up because of transportaion costs and you come down to the fact that to ask the manufacturers to kick into a kitty is just piss poor timing.
To me the status quo is the smart way. All thats needed is that the people who do the reviews are people you trust to post the truth.
Same as benchmarks, you know whose are legit and whose are BS.

Would be happy to pay monthly membership fees.. delighted to just be here... but that will exclude a large segment of XS members from privileged info. Is that wise ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IanY

Would be happy to pay monthly membership fees.. delighted to just be here... but that will exclude a large segment of XS members from privileged info. Is that wise ?

---

There's a good point. How many clubs charge a membership fee? (rhetorical Q:p:). XS is a kind of club. I don't see why certain parts of the site couldn
t be fee-based. I'm sure not everybody will agree tho!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RealRedRaider

Thanks GABE for being a stand-up guy.

A blind fund makes sense. Manufacturers, IMO, need to quit passing everything on to the consumer. It's a sign of greed, when manufacturers continually refuse to cut a minute amount of profit, that they might better service the consumer.

The manufacturers that turn out consistently high performing/quality products, such as yourself, should welcome the opportunity afforded them.

Its easy to see, which manufacturers have given Martin pre-release/current production samples to test and which have not. NaeKuh has provided equipment to Martin, he personally purchased, that has helped manufacturers sell more product. Is this the way it's supposed to be?

Sorry, I felt compelled to express my views, especially since I understand both the side of the manufacturer and consumer.

edit: post was being typed when yours went up MovieMan, but these are my feelings that I feel need to be expressed.

---

Not a problem. We all have different viewpoints.
Yours is different from mine but just as valid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IanY

Would be happy to pay monthly membership fees.. delighted to just be here... but that will exclude a large segment of XS members from privileged info. Is that wise ?

---

Good point. Like the rest of society XS is probably made up of 5% wealthy, 80% middle class and 15% that are fairly poor and I'm just speaking of the US members. I'm not knowledgeable enough to speak on the rest of the worlds economy.

This is an incredibly interesting situation.

May I suggest another form of compensation? What about test materials? I don't mean CPUs and boards, I mean calibrated thermometers, die simulators, etc. These items, if provided by the manufacturers, and verified by an independent authority, would provide a solid baseline, as well as discourage cheating. The entusiasts are often the best qualified to test, but we've seen the makeshift (good and bad) test tools that many reviewers have. I've seen DIY die simulator threads, manometers, adjustable PSUs, everything-but with no standards in testing, is it ever apples to apples? I understand that some things are always constants, but if you had the instruments calibrated by an outside, neutral party, isn't that fixing most of the rest?

I dunno whether anyone will think I'm full of it or not, but I just wanted to throw that out there.

I have tried to look at it that the testing should be uncompensated but how long can that last?

My main concern is that people such as Martin, nik, and mcoffey will get tired of all the expense and long hours of tedious testing and will go by the wayside. These independent guys have a lot of burden to carry. The testing that they do makes manufacturers money by highlighting the best products. Independent testing labs survive all over the world by doing quality work at a fair price. They supply data that is not perceived as compromised because of being paid for their work. Why should watercooling products be any different. It is not a little known product anymore and is becoming more mainstream everyday.

Telling me that I should have to pay for testing to prove that someone's product does what they claim is absurd. Manufacturers should not only supply their test data but I would think they would love to have an independent validate their findings. If the testing shows flaws then it is up to honest merchants to fix the issues before going to market.