On Tuesday, May 9, 2017 at 4:26:16 PM UTC-5, Markem wrote:

But then again I have doubts about Consumer Reports ability to be
objective, has to do with being paid by whom?

Could be like beer medals if you show at the show you get a gold
medal. Which explains how Lite beer got its praise.

All tests are no better than the folks that perform them. The folks that perform them are no better than their adherence to the standards and parameters they are told to follow. The standards and parameters are designed by someone that may or may not be anyone more than a lab guy, no real experience in the field.

With that in mind, I always take tests with a grain of salt, no matter who does it. Too many times I believed tests and followed the results if from a trusted publication. Now I look at tests as starting points, not much more than guidelines. If they don't include testing protocols and procedures, I don't even read the results or article.

As far as medals and awards go, I use the same skeptical approach. Whose taste buds decided the awards? How many contestants were there competing? Did they follow a standardized judging set of rules? Are their standard rules for certain competitions, or are they held just for fun?

Could be gold medals are sometimes won if there are few contestants, and the contest (of whatever that might be) has judges that observe nothing more than their own personal taste.

Robert