🚀 go-pugleaf

Telamon wrote:
> In article <47081BCD.718D80DE@milestones.com>,
>  dxAce <dxAce@milestones.com> wrote:
> 
>> Telamon wrote:
>>
>>> In article <7VSNi.11511$JD.1433@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net>,
>>>  "David Eduardo" <david@davideduardo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Telamon" <telamon_spamshield@pacbell.net.is.invalid> wrote in message
>>>> news:telamon_spamshield-355B68.11071206102007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net
>>>> ...
>>>>>> You just don't like what you hear, so you make up your own 
>>>>>> definition of listening, of markets (today's post was a good 
>>>>>> example) and of the way radio is used. You have no data other 
>>>>>> than what your megaradio can pick up, and you are projecting 
>>>>>> your own misconceptions on all radio listeners and this 
>>>>>> newsgroup. You have a classic "shoot the messenger" mentality 
>>>>>> about anything you don't agree with.
>>>>> Oh no Eduardo! I have the statistics to backup what I say!
>>>> No, you do not. You never have.
>>>>
>>>> Taking one example, that of "I can hear it so people must listen 
>>>> to it" you can see that you take one bit of personal, anecdotal 
>>>> data, your ability to pick up a station, and apply it to the 
>>>> general population. The facts betray you here, since hearing 
>>>> level is not listening level, and people around you do not listen 
>>>> to the stations you can hear.
>>> I've done the research. I have the statistics. You are just plain 
>>> wrong.
>> He's just plain fake, and a pathological liar as well.
>>
>> Proven fact!
> 
> I agree.
> 


   I got a thought, here.

   During a recent discussion, you and Gleason got into things about 
IBOC chip technology, and in requesting for support of a claim about a 
manufacturer and low power chip production, you asked for a link to 
verify his claim.

   To my knowledge there hasn't been such a link presented. And in his 
own defense, Gleason said that such a link couldn't be posted as it 
would contain access to proprietary information. Seems reasonable.

   But two questions have been bothering me since that exchange. 1) if 
the information was proprietary and he was restricted from disseminating 
it, why would he even discuss it on a world wide forum like USENet?

   And 2) if the information is so proprietary, with industrial 
espionage such a highly refined artform, why would any company put such 
a thing on the Web in the first place? Or even send it out of house 
without some intense confidentiality agreement? In which case, he'd be 
forbidden to speak of the subject at all.


    When Mercury Marine was preparing for the introduction of Verado, I 
had to sign a confidentiality agreement before I was ever permitted to 
sit behind a microphone. Before I was ever permitted to see even a 
script in development. I had to read it in the presence of the agency 
rep,  sign it in the presence of witnesses, and I had to verbally agree 
that nothing I was about to see, hear, read, or encounter would leave 
the studio. Hell, I wasn't even allowed to receive a copy of the spots 
and presentation for my own demo. And despite the fact that Verado has 
been on the market, now, for some years, and I've been the voice of 
Mercury for more than half a decade, I'm still not permitted to include 
the spots on my demo.

    I wasn't permitted even to tell my closest friends anything more 
than to go to the Miami Boat Show. I couldn't even tell them to see the 
Mercury display.

    Why? Because no one wanted to see Yamaha, OMC, or even Honda upstage 
the release of the all-new Verado with similar technology of their own.

    This is true of a number of projects I've worked on, and a number of 
sponsors I've worked with.

    If, in fact, Gleason has access to sensitive, proprietary 
information, why would they not sign him to a confidentiality agreement? 
If they did, why is he talking about it in a world wide public space? 
And if he's talking about it in a world wide public space, why is he not 
able to post your link?

    Definitely not the kind of behaviour one would expect of someone of 
some authority in a large multinational media conglomerate, where 
confidentiality is an essential tool of success.