Re: [IRCA] Wince-worthy IBOC praise article

[Scott Fybush <scott@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Patrick Martin wrote:
> Scott,
> 
> I do not want to attack any person, but if the article is flawed, then
> we have a right to attack that. I do not know the person, but anyone who
> finds IBOC flaw free, there is something wrong with the picture. As we
> all know IBOC has plenty of flaws. 
> I do not want any personal attacks on the list and that is one important
> rule here, but we do have the right to disagree with nonsense printed
> about any radio related subject incluing IBOC. 

No argument there - as long as the disagreement remains focused on the 
IDEAS, not on the individual proposing them.

It's remarkable (and somewhat disappointing) to me how quickly the 
response to this truly irrelevant and outdated article turned into 
snipes aimed directly at the individual who wrote it, including utterly 
unsupported allegations that he was being paid under the table by 
Ibiquity and that he was writing under a pen name as some sort of front. 
  There's no call for that.

You're quite correct, Patrick, when you say "we all know IBOC has plenty 
of flaws." We do indeed all know that, and the lack of momentum in the 
industry for the AM IBOC system is very rapidly proving us all accurate. 
Piling on to a commentary that was pretty generally ignored by the 
industry a year and a half ago doesn't make us look any more accurate - 
just a bit silly and desperate, when there's no need for silliness or 
desperation.

s

_______________________________________________
IRCA mailing list
IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca

Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers

For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org

To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx