In Reply to: RE: 10 Audio is an excellent example of why reveiwers should not write bad reviews. posted by John Atkinson on June 24, 2012 at 07:34:44:
Highly unusual perhaps but why an error? Someone could legitimately have something to hide. :^)
The OP initially said, "From a recent review on 10 Audio by I believe Jerry Siegel...".
Any subsequent presumptions in lieu of further corroboration were in error. IMO.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Agree with exception to the omission of authoring being an error. - soulfood 08:46:55 06/24/12 (12)
- RE: Agree with exception to the omission of authoring being an error. - John Atkinson 11:38:57 06/24/12 (11)
- RE: Agree with exception to the omission of authoring being an error. - soulfood 11:47:23 06/24/12 (10)
- RE: Agree with exception to the omission of authoring being an error. - John Atkinson 14:59:21 06/24/12 (9)
- RE: Agree with exception to the omission of authoring being an error. - soulfood 15:52:44 06/24/12 (8)
- Names... - RGA 17:08:44 06/24/12 (7)
- RE: yes - Cpk 07:10:08 06/25/12 (0)
- RE: Names... - soulfood 18:55:26 06/24/12 (5)
- LOL - Nothing to gain! Absolutely!!! - JerryS 13:21:49 06/28/12 (0)
- Considering that all 10 Audio reviews are done by Jerry S, what are his "questionable review standards" ? nt - Rick W 09:33:11 06/25/12 (3)
- It depends. Is 'considering' a fact or the same as 'if'. -nt - soulfood 11:58:28 06/25/12 (2)
- Maybe you should check the site out before opining about his review standards. nt - Rick W 12:52:27 06/25/12 (1)
- Maybe, thanks. -nt - soulfood 13:11:52 06/25/12 (0)