Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Robin
That "it's well-established" sounds SO MUCH like the old commercials which said "clinical tests prove" or "scientists agree" - where's your data? Your vague "ton of research" clearly doesn't include MR, where many buyers often do the exact opposite of "vehemently defend" their new purchase.
Ownership CAN BE an impediment to objectivity, but it's also extremely difficult to be objective about a product one knows nothing about, as is often the case with people dissing items they don't own.
|
Since you're the one disputing the established research, the responsibility is on YOU to offer evidence contradicting the data, for the same reason the burden of proof is on those don't believe in the efficacy of vaccines (for example) to prove their case.
Again, you're claiming ownership is an asset to objectivity and that's the argument you must prove despite all evidence to the contrary.
The people best positioned to offer opinions are those who are able to review a new product with no vested interest. It's why people are willing to pay money to review services like Consumer Reports, etc.. for new cars, for example, rather than someone who may be paid surreptitiously by a car company for their review.
People react with a lot of emotion when you claim they may not be perfectly objective in all circumstances!
