advertisement


Is this for real?

Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
You're mistaken. You're not 'prosecuted' for a civil offence. Driving offences which you can be prosecuted for are criminal offences. And he hadn't committed an offence, civil or otherwise, he'd crossed a regulatory line, which is very different as you well know. And yet you continue to double down.
Click to expand...
My understanding and usage of the word "prosecution" is in the sense of "pursued by the regulatory authorities for breaking a law". In the same way wars are said to be prosecuted. This includes driving offences. I still believe I can be prosecuted by the police for a simple non criminal speeding offence. Correct me if I am wrong, IANAL but I don't agree with your definition.
The ASA decided in this case not to prosecute. I have been in a similar position where a company I worked for broke the food labelling laws. This can be prosecuted under the Food Safety Act, etc. Some of the terms of the FSA are criminal, I believe some not. Was an offence committed? I believe so. However we were not prosecuted because Trading Stds decided not to, they soft policed it and gave us a talking to, slapped us on the wrist, told us to scrap and reprint the labels, etc. Now in the letter of the law there was no offence committed, because there was no conviction as such and nobody was prosecuted. Innocent until proven otherwise, etc. However in the spirit of the law, was an offence committed? As I say, I believe so. Similarly, I was spoken to by a policeman some years ago for exceeding a 60mph speed limit. He did not instigate proceedings. However had I committed an offence? You and I both know that yes I had. Yet I'm innocent.
Now we can dance around arguing about angels on the head of a pin and semantics, or not. We can spend all day defining "prosecution", or not. However the fact remains that RA was dealt with by the regulatory authorities for making false claims in advertising. I thought that he had been prosecuted for this. It turns out not. He was instructed to take down the offending terms. I imagine that he was told to do this or face prosecution.
Tesco were never prosecuted for their part in the horsemeat scandal. No offence committed, then? Apparently not. Well, there hasn't been a conviction of Tesco, has there?
 
chartz said:
The fact that some opportunistic snake oil vendors should take advantage of that misery I find unacceptable and pathetic.
Click to expand...

You're just jealous 'cos you've not got anywhere to put those foo fuses....;)

On a serious note, I find these things dangerous, there'll be someone out there who'll run their mains earth to one.....
 
Speeding is a criminal offence. If you’ve been convicted, you will have a criminal record. Your whole post is premised on a misunderstanding you’re simply not prepared to accept or admit. You're trying to weasel out of your use of the word 'prosecute' by implying you intended a largely archaic usage (and one you mis-define, to boot). Really? You’re still making broad and unwarranted assumptions about the RA conduct. Still doubling down.
 
stevec67 said:
My understanding and usage of the word "prosecution" is in the sense of "pursued by the regulatory authorities for breaking a law".
Click to expand...
If you replaced "regulatory authorities" with "Crown Prosecution Service" I'd be inclined to agree. The ASA isn't even a government agency. It is an industry body created to maintain self-regulation among advertisers. For the most part, their rules are not law. If they deem someone to have broken an actual law, they can presumably refer the incident to actual law enforcement. The ASA does not have the power to prosecute. Correct me if I'm wrong.
 
chartz said:
There are some incredibly gullible, possibly miserable people in the hi-fi world.

The fact that some opportunistic snake oil vendors should take advantage of that misery I find unacceptable and pathetic.

Those crooks have always been out there, ready to exploit any psychological weaknesses.
Click to expand...
I do find the doublethink on here interesting. Not getting at this post in particular, but we hifi afficionados are simultaneously described as being part of a privileged, largely middle class cohort with above average wealth and privilege; and also as gullible, miserable, psychologically prone to manipulation and, by extension, vulnerable to being preyed on by the unscrupulous. It's a sort of 'Schroedinger's audiophile' - you don't know which state he's in until you look.
 
Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
I do find the doublethink on here interesting. Not getting at this post in particular, but we hifi afficionados are simultaneously described as being part of a privileged, largely middle class cohort with above average wealth and privilege; and also as gullible, miserable, psychologically prone to manipulation and, by extension, vulnerable to being preyed on by the unscrupulous. It's a sort of 'Schroedinger's audiophile' - you don't know which state he's in until you look.
Click to expand...

The two aren't mutually exclusive surely?
 
Tony L said:
Strange marketing prose, but looks to be a zero gain tube buffer, which is a ‘thing’ (e.g. Musical Fidelity etc have made them).
Click to expand...

Or is it putting a potential on the shield? Don't Audioquest do something like that?

I do find it a bit alarming where the description says that it " uses house voltage to power the shield". Sounds dangerous!
 
irb said:
I do find it a bit alarming where the description says that it " uses house voltage to power the shield". Sounds dangerous!
Click to expand...

The whole terminology sounds odd to me. It’s an ECC82 dual triode so has 2x6.3V AC heater and a far higher DC voltage (stated at 80V in the ad). I really can’t see it being anything other than a comparatively simple tube buffer, though I’m not at the level of being able to reverse-engineering it just by looking at the picture.

PS My best guess is the transformer on the left provides the AC heater voltage, the one on the right goes through a bridge rectifier and smoothing caps to provide the high DC voltage, and the various resistors lose much of the gain the valve would otherwise add to the signal. It will certainly change the sound compared to a straight bit of wire, so inevitably some folk will like it, some not.
 
stevec67 said:
My understanding and usage of the word "prosecution" is in the sense of "pursued by the regulatory authorities for breaking a law". In the same way wars are said to be prosecuted. This includes driving offences. I still believe I can be prosecuted by the police for a simple non criminal speeding offence. Correct me if I am wrong, IANAL but I don't agree with your definition.
The ASA decided in this case not to prosecute. I have been in a similar position where a company I worked for broke the food labelling laws. This can be prosecuted under the Food Safety Act, etc. Some of the terms of the FSA are criminal, I believe some not. Was an offence committed? I believe so. However we were not prosecuted because Trading Stds decided not to, they soft policed it and gave us a talking to, slapped us on the wrist, told us to scrap and reprint the labels, etc. Now in the letter of the law there was no offence committed, because there was no conviction as such and nobody was prosecuted. Innocent until proven otherwise, etc. However in the spirit of the law, was an offence committed? As I say, I believe so. Similarly, I was spoken to by a policeman some years ago for exceeding a 60mph speed limit. He did not instigate proceedings. However had I committed an offence? You and I both know that yes I had. Yet I'm innocent.
Now we can dance around arguing about angels on the head of a pin and semantics, or not. We can spend all day defining "prosecution", or not. However the fact remains that RA was dealt with by the regulatory authorities for making false claims in advertising. I thought that he had been prosecuted for this. It turns out not. He was instructed to take down the offending terms. I imagine that he was told to do this or face prosecution.
Tesco were never prosecuted for their part in the horsemeat scandal. No offence committed, then? Apparently not. Well, there hasn't been a conviction of Tesco, has there?
Click to expand...
Driving offences, including speeding but excluding many parking offences, are crimes.
 
Tony L said:
Agreed. It isn’t trying to force anything on anyone, and judging by the pictures they are ‘open source’ now too, e.g. a couple of bits of stripped 2.5mm twin & earth copper wire, a 4mm socket and I can turn the cat’s litter tray into one.
Click to expand...

Is that the cat equivalent of a heated loo seat?

Andrew
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top