wrote:

also always ready to explain *why* he is of that opinion, withuot
resorting to IMM style "I am always right, trust me" statements.


That just isn't true. Andy is as prone as IMM (and any of the rest of
us) to wheeling out his pet hobby horses. He just has force of
personality and a better facility for dressing it up in some florid
language which makes it seems reasonable - but ultimately, many times,
it collapses under analysis.

This may be true some times, but not that often in my opinion (taken
over a time frame of several years). However where we are dealing with
matters of opinion, our feelings as to whether a given viewpoint stands
up to analysis will be largely lead by our own beliefs and prejudices
anyway, rather than black or white, right or wrong.

Where we are dealing with matters of verifiable engineering or
scientific fact then I freely admit that I have more implicit trust in
Andy's ability to post accurately on these matters than I do IMMs. He
has earned that respect over time for the quality and accuracy of his
responses in these areas. As have many many others on the group, some
for their own obvious expertise in particular areas, ans some for their
solid common sense approach to solving problems. Some for their general
good humour in giving said advice. I would include Andys' Wade, and
Dingley, Grunff, Nightjar, Stefek, Ed, John (boilerdoc), Christian,
Lurch etc. (that was not an exhaustive list - in fact I partly wish I
had not started it since I am going to forget a whole bunch of people
who ought to be in it. So don't be offended if your name did not appear!)

Andy has brands he likes (like the rest
of us) and he praises them and dismisses the rest without looking.

Sure we all have pet brands and solutions. I also know why Andy (and for
that matter IMM) dismiss some classes of product without consideration.
I have no difficulty with Andy saying "This is what I would do and here
is why", I find IMM's "This is what you should do because you must
conform to my world view of DIY" style a little less agreeable.

No, I believe he says that for many users, a slight error may not be
critical. Much depends on the type of work you are doing.


I can't believe the contortions we'll go through on this group rather
than admit any failing on Andy's part. If it's built to acceptable
tolerances, why go on about it? If it's not, then what's the point of
paying through the nose for it?

I don't see it as a contortion, just exploring a possible scenario for
why some people may not choose to return said item.... It may be that
Andy is just very fussy about these things being spot on (in fact no
_may_ about it!) It may also be that they do have a higher than usual
return rate for this product - I don't know and I doubt they are about
to tell me either.

In answer to your question, it was obviously not worth paying good money
for it in the circumstances, which is why I presume he returned it.

Well as highlighted, the Ferm could do 90 degrees on one axis, but
sadly failed on the latteral one!


So does that make it better than a DeWalt that doesn't do 90 degrees?
If they're both slightly out-of-whack, is the 40 quid one better value?

If you are comparing a Ferm to a DeWalt with a design flaw, then yes
possibly - both will give you less than spot on accuracy, the Ferm does
it for less. I expect the Dewalt will carry on doing it for years longer
in a heavy use environment however. Not sure if that is good or bad mind
you given the circumstances.

Well, I have the greatest of respect for you, John, and I hope you will
take a moment to reflect on what's been said and perhaps acknowledge
that Andy isn't always right.

I don't believe Andy is always right. Or myself or anyone else for that
matter. I have found it is difficult to achieve anything of value and
never be wrong or make mistakes. While I get the feeling he and I share
similar views on many things, I also get the feeling that he is on
occasion perhaps more extreme in those views. If Andy posts and omits
what I feel is a valid point, then I will usually follow it up. I don't
often spot disingenuous scientific errors of the "you can get more than
100% efficiency from a boiler" type. If I did, I would comment. Much of
the correspondence IMM attracts seems to stem from his (I presume
wilfully) misinterpretation and extrapolation of others arguments. Andy
rises to the bait (as do I) too often probably. I will confess that
sometimes it is interesting to goad him a little bit further just to see
how many other appendages he has room for having got both feet in his
mouth, other times it is the only way to get anything resembling a
straight answer (or more typically, lack of). There are even times where
IMM (or one of his AKAs) has posted good solid information that is of
relevance and use to an OPs question. On the grounds that there seemed
to be nothing wrong with the post I would typically not follow up.
Perhaps it is a little unfair in the circumstances that I choose not to
post a follow up commenting on this - but I am sure he neither seeks or
needs my approval!


****


Enough words have probably been spent on this subject, so I have a
proposal for a way to limit the number of times we need to have this
discussion in the future....

Thus:

New section for the FAQ, "How to choose a power tool". We start off with
the gamut of possible views from "buy the best quality at any cost",
to "buy several of the cheapest". Take in the options for "one time job
disposable tools", and "balanced approach based on likely usage etc".

Give each category a number.

Then when someone posts a question of the type "What is the best nnnn?"
we can direct them to the FAQ and ask which thought process/pocket depth
most closely matches yours?

When can then suggest answers fitting that viewpoint (or more
importantly) not suggest in cases where we don't believe the viewpoint
is valid.

We can also include reference to our own "Tool Attitude Type" in
responses so that it is clear where we are coming from.

What does the panel think? I am happy to have a lash at a draft of some
of the words to get the ball rolling if it is felt it would help.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/