QED

[UrbanFox]

UrbanFox,

There is a very big difference between defamation and discussing patents and their merits, consumer laws and marketing methods.

And there is a very big difference between fact and the speculation you and associates continually go on with. You blokes seem to believe that if you say something enough times and often enough then it must be truth.

Perhaps now would be a good time for you to divulge any commercial connections and your reason for bringing the ongoing anti-competitive campaign to yet another venue.

Perhaps it would be a good time for you and associates to wake up to yourselves, and also divulge the extent of commercial advantage you expect to achieve for the QED by your continual campaign against Minelab.

Bugs, if you would like to know more about me then get my phone number from either Doug or Huego and give me a call. Note that your group have previously been passed my phone number and invited to call me to discuss the same issue and haven't done so, but you are quite willing to continue to publicly infer and speculate.

I am happy to discuss my "reasons" with you by phone, and then you and associates will not need to speculate and waffle on with erroneous innuendo.

EDIT: If you don't want the expense of calling me then PM me a number i can call you on and I will call you I can't be more fair than that

[bugwhiskers]

A public disclosure of your association / connection, pecuniary or otherwise is proper as is your "interest" in the QED and the purpose behind you and your associates incessant anti-competitive tyrade. Consumers have the right to a free and open market place where a product's success is determined by it's performance, reliability and price alone.

[UrbanFox]

A public disclosure of your association / connection, pecuniary or otherwise is proper as is your "interest" in the QED and the purpose behind you and your associates incessant anti-competitive tyrade.

OK, Bugs, just to satisfy you and associates. No association, No connection, No peculiarly or otherwise interest.

My interest in the QED? OK, I have been reading the waffle about the QED for around 3 years, and have also seen your ridicule of anyone who has been prepared to challenge any part of your agenda.. That agenda is not just to continually present the QED as something that will take the world by storm, but is also to present the company who would be your biggest competitor as a company of suspect ethics and business practices. I just don't like you and your associates style. Need I say more?

Consumers have the right to a free and open market place where a product's success is determined by it's performance, reliability and price alone.

You have to have a product first that has the performance, is reliable, and can substantiate it's price. Certainly two years ago, when your waffle was already evident, you failed on all three counts, and still to date you have not demonstrated anything of consequence.

The best thing that could happen is your mate Doug actually doing it instead of just "Considering walking away".

[bugwhiskers]

None of your posts relate to your own "personal behalf", can you please explain why.
Put another way, can you please explain you own "personal" interest in the QED.

[UrbanFox]

None of your posts relate to your own "personal behalf", can you please explain why.
Put another way, can you please explain you own "personal" interest in the QED.

You are remiss in not deciphering my intentions. My interest is not in the QED per say, but in your behaviour. My judgemental attitude toward what I have seen of your behaviour and the behaviour of your cohorts results in the direction I have taken! Satisfied now?

[bugwhiskers]

I think people have seen enough now to draw their own conclusions.

[hdphilip]

whats a QED, is it like a metal detector?

philip

[Woody.au]

Just like sands through the hourglass, these are the days of our lives.

Be careful using analogue filters to reduce interference, and by the way the input stage of a Minelab P.I exhibits a very sharp cutoff above 1.5 Mhz so why would emf from "microwave towers" have any effect?

[crane]

The synchronous mains rejection claim is clear and concise. A first year student of Electronics would understand how it works, no fancy math required. It's user adjustable to accomodate the prevailing mains frequency (eg 50 or 60 Hz or even a GenSet) and the setting remembered at switch off, quite probably never requiring re-adjustment.

And the fact that the mains is continuously cycling back and forth through 50hz is also clear and concise and it doesn't take fancy math to prove that the method described in the patent can't cancel the very substantial variation if high gains are applied. You should disclose how you address this problem in the patent if you expect anyone to take it seriously. Just solving half the problem leaves it open for someone else to apply an innovative step to your idea which would then prevent you from using it.

Why keep bagging Minelab while making unbelievable claims for a detector that might never be released or might not be accepted by prospectors if it is released?

We all pat ourselves on the back when we get a new design to work but this doesn't mean it will impress others. For instance, you think that not using the existing audio stream for the user adjustment interface is just plain dumb but I sat around the camp fire with a bunch of guys recently and we all agreed that we can access and read information much faster than listening to a very annoying voice announcement.

I think you can expect to cop flack until you prove the QED actually exists and is as good as you say it is and doesn't rely heavily on someone else's IP and R&D.

[Carl-NC]

Put another way, can you please explain you own "personal" interest in the QED.

Bugs, I can't tell if you're serious or not, perhaps the was a roll of the eyes as you typed that. Based on what you guys have posted over the years regarding both the QED and Minelab, are you really, honestly surprised at the responses you get?

As I said before, your involvement with certain people doesn't serve you well at all. It has already cost you a potential collaborator. Go silent, finish the durn thing, then brag all you want when it's on the shelf with a price tag stuck on it.

[Carl-NC]

I've removed several posts for civility violations. Woody, Doug, I'll not have you drag your silly fight here. Go somewhere else and hash it out.

[PATCHES JUNIOR]

I know you realize Bugwhiskers that if you stayed away from the way Doug promoted the QED you would not be in the pickle you are in now. Can you see what would be said about Als detector if Doug used his style of promoting it? You for sure picked a winner when it comes to a PR man. I am sure if Doug promoted his dog breeding "them big dogs" like he did the QED he would be out of business.

So I agree with Carl. Be quiet till its ready. And get rid of Doug, and his little "purple" friend. Hang onto Aziz, he might turn you on to his worlds best ground balance if your lucky.

[PATCHES JUNIOR]

Doug still does not "get it" I hope he was just kidding with this statement.

News: Why does Carl-NC of Geotech forum treat us as children? Why is he denying the public's right to know? Why is he denying the public's right to make informed decisions? Why is he engaging in ad hoc and unjustified censorship?

[dougAEGPF]

I've removed several posts for civility violations. Woody, Doug, I'll not have you drag your silly fight here. Go somewhere else and hash it out.

Carl you sent me a private PM ticking me off for high jacking Aziz's thread.
Did you do the same for Patches junior who was the first to high jack the thread?
For members and guests the deleted posts can be found here:
http://australianelectronicgoldprosp...cseen#msg23383

[dougAEGPF]

Patches junior have you ever claimed that the use of multi layer SM boards in the QED is bad because it will cause problems with harmonics? If so would you care to elaborate? Why are multilayer SM boards worse in this regard than single layer SM boards?