In Reply to: RE: Letters section of TAS has conflict of interest posted by josh358 on January 4, 2011 at 09:17:46:
Whatever works for you, I guess. I don't generally question the honesty of subjective reviewers, just their methodology, which I consider to be highly unreliable.
-----
"A fool and his money are soon parted." --- Thomas Tusser
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Letters section of TAS has conflict of interest - Pat D 17:31:25 01/05/11 (14)
- RE: Letters section of TAS has conflict of interest - josh358 17:51:20 01/05/11 (13)
- Well, Ya know, Josh, measurements . . . - goldenthal 22:23:19 01/17/11 (1)
- Noting wrong with measurements, but - josh358 06:50:02 01/18/11 (0)
- RE: Letters section of TAS has conflict of interest - Pat D 18:54:24 01/05/11 (10)
- Re Test Records . . . Yes. And - goldenthal 22:29:23 01/17/11 (0)
- RE: Letters section of TAS has conflict of interest - josh358 19:17:44 01/05/11 (8)
- RE: "Otherwise, the reader is likely to conclude . . ." - goldenthal 22:35:28 01/17/11 (1)
- Sure, but - josh358 07:19:55 01/18/11 (0)
- RE: Letters section of TAS has conflict of interest - Pat D 09:12:52 01/06/11 (5)
- RE: Letters section of TAS has conflict of interest - josh358 10:28:52 01/06/11 (3)
- RE: Letters section of TAS has conflict of interest - Pat D 12:04:39 01/06/11 (2)
- RE: Letters section of TAS has conflict of interest - josh358 12:23:07 01/06/11 (1)
- RE: Letters section of TAS has conflict of interest - goldenthal 22:38:08 01/17/11 (0)
- It wasn't a setup issue - DAP 10:24:30 01/06/11 (0)