ls7corvete, there is one other option you forgot to cover in your reply.
The moment one realises that they are entering a position that can be perceived as a conflict of interest, then cease all reviews and hand that responsibility over to someone else, and develop the technology behind closed doors. Heck, it's what everyone else does.
Am still a little perplexed about the definition of an independent test though, especially with this statement:
"there will be independent tests published by a very large technology company which has assisted us in this effort"
Must be a different definition of "independent" to which most people are accustomed to. Confusing though is JoeC's own tests placing it behind the XP90C, yet "independent from a company that's assisting us" places it far ahead.
An alternative yet again to your limited response is this:
The correct timing of this, if he were acting as a true enthusiast would be as all enthusiasts do: explain the idea publically, explain why he thinks it'll work, and commence a work-log from the time that the project starts. Alternatively if you have an idea to make a commercial product, you develop it silence, keep it behind closed doors, and present it when it's nearly complete like he's done. Nothing wrong with that, but the entire time he's been doing that he's been presenting himself as an independent reviewer.
Look, I'm not begrudging JoeC his work, his time spent, or his right to turn a profit. I don't agree with the way the timeline has played out with respect to disclosure.
I've had my say. I'm stopping now.
|