Thanks for the correction...seems we both were responding to Zevious's post....I'll be sure to watch it just for you Joe:-lol

"Are there unreasonable or false claims? You bet! But, if you don't believe someone, take a moment to do some background research yourself so that you have more to offer in response than just unproven counterclaims of your own."Holger you've hit the "nail on the head" so to speak:-)The fact that some jump to negative, accusatory, and seemingly paranoid conclusions with absolutely no evidence other than stating that this is their "opinion" flies in the face of reasonable flight simmers everywhere:-)Without factual evidence for such accusations one could put themselves in an unenviable legal position as well:-)

>See, you call that "whining." To me and most of the rest of>us, it's simply a dev offering a reasonable explanation in>response to a posted criticism/complaint. If you don't like>the answer or don't believe it to be true, fine, but don't try>and turn it into some sort of federal case when it just isn't.Actually, it wasn't even a "developer's" response. It was an opinion voiced by "just another simmer..."

"ithout factual evidence for such accusations one could put themselves in an unenviable legal position as well"The flip side is true--a business--be it an add-on provider for payware in MSFS or somone selling amber sunglasses, can find themselves in a legal quagmire for making false or misleading claims about their product or the competition, or attempting to patent/trademark someone else's idea or slogan. We are within our rights if we know something to be based on either a false or misconstrued assumption to comment on it. And if I state an opinion on something I question, that doesn't look right to me, I have a right to do so as long as I am not trying to intentionally make false or damaging statements against a company.But I know I won't be buying any more payware from some add-on providers now having seen this threat. God forbid we fight over a misplaced widget or pixel--which some payware vendors go down in flames defending. Life's too short.-John

I won't say its old or isn't irrelevant. I'll just say that you still haven't answered the question and haven't proved a link to a payware developer "whining needlessly about a developers alleged costs, and how they don't make any money, etc...."Why not, if you're so sure of your position?Why should should I bother doing research? You are the one making the claims so you should be prepared to provide evidence to support them. Finally, I notice that you complain in other threads about personal attacks on you. What do you think "which is better than doing your research since it seems too difficult a task for you" is?

John you are absolutely correct in stating that these things cut both ways:-)Proven false and/or misleading statements by Vendors/Payware Developers would certainly be grounds for some sort of action by someone who wished to pursue such a thing.You, or anyone else are certainly within your rights with factual evidence to call anyone into question that you may wish too.:-)You are also within your rights to state your opinions on any subject that you wish too. We do still live in a nation that holds free speech in the highest regard:-)Our statements should not be construed as threats, simply pointing out that while we all have the above named rights and we cherish them, that using myself for example: I would be in an unenviable legal position if I were to accuse XWZ Merchant of false and misleading practices without a shred of factual evidence to back up my claim:-)

Thanks Ron--I think I understand your point better-John

You are welcome John. Glad to hear a reasonable voice here:-)

Now, let's all shake virtual hands, agree that everyone is entitled to their own take on things, and resume our previous comraderie and mutual respect for our individualism. OK? OK!Glenn'Maintain thy airspeed, lest the ground rise up and smite thee.'

The US government agencies (as well as people such as ISO, FMRC andCSA) perform audits on a regular basis, but these concern manufacturing procedures, quality control and administrative practices.I'm writing as a supplier and not a contractor such as Halliburtonfor example.Regards, JAH - Los Angeles.

We agree that there are indeed exceptions to what has been stated.Yours is another good example:-)

Here ya go :-wave Hope a wave will do....

How did I know you'd be first? :>)Glenn'Maintain thy airspeed, lest the ground rise up and smite thee.'

bill, go back and read the context.. sheesh.....bill, if you read up to the original post #8 concerning the quote, I was refering to way above where I used the words MINIONS, and betatesters in addition to payware developers as well. If you show up late to the thread, at least show the courtesy to follow along. ;-) Try to pay attention to the topic in the thread before you post next time. I said above, now read closely bill, just for you.The whole books scenerio ONLY came about due to some payware developers, their betatesters, and their minions whining needlessly about a developers alleged costs, and how they don't make any money, etc....And before you go off on the same tangent Ron did, yes I did notice you were responding to z in post #39, but since I posted the quote and you are making reference to it, I chose to respond.Grab My FREEWARE Voice recognition Profiles here:[a href=http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=fs2004misc&DLID=58334]Cessna 172 Voice Profile[/a][a href=http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=fs2004misc&DLID=60740]FSD Avanti Voice Profile[/a].You will need the main FREEWARE Flight Assistant program to use it, get it here:[a href=http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=genutils&DLID=39661]Flight Assistant 2.2[/a]

Sorry, I don't feel like fishing with you today, as I really don't care what you think. :-)