We do feed them in part, but do you not also take from here? You clearly spend a lot of time on here, so i presume you are getting something out of it. Not all that you take needs to have a monetary value.

I did not say it was over, but merely suggested that the majority on here
felt that we held a differing opinion to yours and you wern'y going to win us over.

Surely at some point you can see that you really aren't going to change Marks opinion?

The money is far from incidental. Now who is being disingenuous?

ah well, perhaps I attributed too much of my own lack of interest in money to you 🙁

Not all that you take needs to have a monetary value.

A curious remark given that I have been advocating ignoral of financial concerns.

Surely at some point you can see that you really aren't going to change Marks opinion?

that's not necessary to me. I raised an issue and we've argued it back and forth. For what it's worth, some of my favourite arguments are when someone changes my opinion, though that hasn't happened in this case. As for majority agreement, I suspect intelligence is inversely proportional to the number of people, and a herd almost mindless 🙂

The money is far from incidental.

No wonder he wouldn't get rid of those flashing ads!

I suspect intelligence is inversely proportional to the number of people, and a herd almost mindless

So going by that logic we are mindless because we choose NOT to walk on frozen canals?

I don't think that we are mindless, but how far do you go to prove a point, when the consequences can directly affect your (and others) livelihood? If you have nothing to lose then fine, by all means go all the way, but dont expect me to suffer for your beliefs.

So going by that logic we are mindless because we choose NOT to walk on frozen canals?

no it's more that, the more people you have, the less significant the things they'll all agree on

I don't think that we are mindless

that was tongue-in-cheek 🙂 My point was that just because a lot of people agree about something doesn't make it right (unless that's your definition of truth)

but how far do you go to prove a point, when the consequences can directly affect your (and others) livelihood? If you have nothing to lose then fine, by all means go all the way, but dont expect me to suffer for your beliefs.

I'm not quite sure where you're going with that, but I guess you will mainly suffer from your own beliefs, and can be unconcerned about mine (if any)

thanks folks, I quite like these threads, I find the discussion interesting and I feel like I've learnt a few things along the way.

Argument / discussion can be frustrating and some times irritating as people challenge one anothers point of view.

Why do some of you complain and attempt to stiffle discussion? I dont understand. Its a bit like the telly, if you don't like whats on turn over.

IMO Mark and SFB have both be polite, they both have the choice not to participate in the conversation as does everyone else who has contributed to it

Say Mark to chose to follow your advise and "publish and be damned", then STW could be left out of product releases and generally lose the trust and respect of the manufacturers. If that happened, there would be less to read about the mag(product tests etc), readership could dwindle to the point where the magazine was unsustainable to the point where it would close, taking the forums with it.
Therefore I would be worse off because of someone else's ill advised actions.
At the end of the day, STW is not a bunch of mates having a bit of a laugh, its a legitimate business and anything that could potentially harm the viability of said business has to be considered VERY carefully.

Can I just say I write for the mag for the love of it, I've been out riding my 2 X 10 speed today in ace weather on great trails, and you are wrong about everything Simon…..

:oP

PMSL @ Dave! You are a lucky man, im at work (lol) 😉

Actually I think Simon Barnes is the only one looking for an arguement here.

STW, has two customers; the OEM and the buying public. That means that they have to decide what is in STW best interest at any one point in time.
Sometimes that best interest will benefit STW and the buying public, and other times it will benefit STYW and the OEM's. As long as people are mostly happy, there's a successful magazine.

FWIW, if the 2011 XTR looks anything like the pics, I'd buy it.
But I certainly won't be dropping cash on any 2010 XTR in a hurry now I know there's juicy new toys coming out.

Say Mark to chose to follow your advise and "publish and be damned"

that suggestion was Mark's not mine, in a 'reductio ad absurdam' type argument. I agreed that they should respect Shimano's copyrights first hand, but not when Mark suggested I should take the discussion off the forum – though he made no steps to enforce this.

and anything that could potentially harm the viability of said business has to be considered VERY carefully.

including becoming seen as an instrument of the industry they purport to hold up to scrutiny!

and you are wrong about everything Simon…..

when people contradict me I think I'm onto something, when they agree, I wonder if I've made a mistake!

STW, has two customers; the OEM and the buying public.

an interesting viewpoint – I hope it doesn't degenerate into advertorialism 🙁 One might imagine the advertising is predicated on the readership and not the other way round.

when people contradict me I think I'm onto something,

then you are wrong and mistaken

:oP

including becoming seen as an instrument of the industry they purport to hold up to scrutiny!

Mark's admitted that pretty much that's how it works, and I've never seen/heard ST (or any any mountain bike magazine for that matter)make a claim that they "Hold up to scrutiny" anything.

It's a hobbiest magazine, not a investigative journal…

We are all, in a way, "instruments" of the industry in the wider context

then you are wrong and mistaken

you forgot "FACT" 🙂

I think it's you who ignores the facts Simon

:o)

and I've never seen/heard ST (or any any mountain bike magazine for that matter)make a claim that they "Hold up to scrutiny" anything … We are all, in a way, "instruments" of the industry in the wider context

Oh ? Well that's OK then, snouts in the trough everyone! I shall have to accept that critical mantle for myself…

've been out riding my 2 X 10 speed today

Any pics?

One or two, but they're embargoed until the mag is out ;o)

I think it's you who ignores the facts Simon

relying on 'facts' is a sure sign of a rogue 🙁

I've never seen/heard ST (or any any mountain bike magazine for that matter)make a claim that they "Hold up to scrutiny" anything

+1. I would have sworn I made this point many hours ago, but as it is the central misconception that has been driving simon's posts along since I am glad he didn't notice. 😀

[Chuckles at Drac] 😉

Oh ? Well that's OK then, snouts in the trough everyone! I shall have to accept that critical mantle for myself…

The lone noble warrior valiantly fighting for truth and justice in the face of vile corruption eh?

I have to almost admire your staggering pompousness. 😆

One or two, but they're embargoed until the mag is out ;o)

Well that's no fun, I was looking forward to reading Mark's response on facebook after you posted some.

I have to almost admire your staggering pompousness

it was supposed to be funny 🙂

I've never seen/heard ST (or any any mountain bike magazine for that matter)make a claim that they "Hold up to scrutiny" anything

so those group tests just go to the highest bidder ? Surely that is a libellous allegation ?

Simon, you are starting to make yourself look a bit ridiculous now.
And I'm not going to rise to the libelous nonsense.

Day after day,
Alone on a hill,
The man with the foolish grin is keeping perfectly still
But nobody wants to know him,
They can see that he's just a fool,
And he never gives an answer,

But the fool on the hill,
Sees the sun going down,
And the eyes in his head,
See the world spinning 'round.

Well on the way,
Head in a cloud,
The man of a thousand voices talking perfectly loud
But nobody ever hear him,
or the sound he appears to make,
and he never seems to notice,

But the fool on the hill,
Sees the sun going down,
And the eyes in his head,
See the world spinning 'round.

And nobody seems to like him,
they can tell what he wants to do,
and he never shows his feelings,

But the fool on the hill,
Sees the sun going down,
And the eyes in his head,
See the world spinning 'round.

Ooh, ooh,
Round and round and round.

And he never listens to them,
He knows that they're the fools
They don't like him,

The fool on the hill
Sees the sun going down,
And the eyes in his head,
See the world spinning 'round.

Ooh,
Round and round and round

Simon, you are starting to make yourself look a bit ridiculous now.

so what's new ? This isn't a popularity contest…

I don't think it kind to suggest that the mag doesn't hold anything up to scrutiny

The fool on the hill

at least I'd be on a hill :o)

so those group tests just go to the highest bidder ?

Most likely, yes!

I haven't read this thread.

the fool on the hill

a fitting epitaph for when someone puts Simon out of his misery

volunteers? 😀

a fitting epitaph for when someone puts Simon out of his misery

when the time comes it'll be a kindness 🙂

volunteers?

we've had internet bullies, now the internet kill ?

No,let's all sit back,not reply,and watch the Uber-troll vanish up his own backside,arguing furiously with himself all the way.
Ian

and watch the Uber-troll vanish up his own backside

isn't it a cheap shot to accuse someone with a legitimate concern of trolling ? Such action is an attempt to circumvent discussion by claiming there is no case to answer.

They can ban you, based on a self-determined ruleset. Therefore the freedom of speech is granted within confined boundaries, as determined by the owners.

this interests me because ST provide and administer the forum in compliance with their legal responsibilities and the interests of good taste (at least notionally) – but the value inherent in the forum comes from the bulk of its contributors – who far outnumber the ST team, and provide most of the content. Thus I would suggest that the forum 'belongs' to all of us, not least because we hold the copyright to our posts

I don't think it kind to suggest that the mag doesn't hold anything up to scrutiny

Most of the time it doesn't, and it doesn't try to. I'm becoming increasingly unclear what magazine you're reading. In common with all other magazines of roughly the same ilk (of which there are hundreds) it reports what it is told by PR and marketing people, takes shiney pictures of gadgets, garmets and devices, prints some blurb about them, tests things in a rather vague and unscientific, but reasonably useful and amusing sort of way and attempts to compare them, in a way which usually involves stating that they're all actually for different things and it isn't fair to compare them, or which comes to the conclusion that they're all quite good and you should make up your own mind. You will never read any of the following articles:

– "2010 Shimano proven to be better than 2010 SRAM"
– "Bike pricing cartel exposed"
– "There is no such thing as "slope-style" – it's marketing bullshit"
– "QR's and disc brakes are a deadly combination – our lab tests reveal"
– "Bike manufacturers fail to pass on falling aluminium price to consumers"
– "People should spend less on bikes and just have fun"
– "Revealed – the child slavery at the heart of Taiwan's bike industry"

etc etc (no sugestion that there is a grain of truth in any of these should be implied). You just won't. You'll read endlessly about how everything keeps getting better and better so you should buy it, that maybe, just maybe, this one isn't as good as it should be, that they had a pre-production sample and the product has been improved for 2010 etc. That they had a nice ride, that such-and-such a place is well worth a visit, that some chap at CyB has created a really good new trail.

That's just how it works. Everyone except you knows that, and no-one except you greatly cares. I know I'm not reading hard-hitting investigative journalism, I'm fully aware I'm reading a trade mag mostly filled with PR and fluff. It's reasonably entertaining, and provides a certain amount of information. But "scrutiny" is simply not the game.

It is (as Mark has pointed out repeatedly) part of the bike industry. It does not have the relationship to the bike industry that we expect Private Eye to have to government. It doesn't have a libel defence fund (I shouldn't think), it doesn't have the business model to support investigations or the production of articles containing serious analysis of independently-collected data. It just isn't like that at all.

It is however a good magazine run by perfectly decent people. You're seeking to hold it to a standard that it doesn't purport to reach. If you feel it is important that someone should "take up the mantle" of critiquing the bike industry from the outside then you're probably right, it might well be healthy. If you did it well, we'd all buy less stuff, possibly have more fun, spend less money, worry less about a whole lot of things. The "industry" as we understand it might well contract however, and your efforts would not net you a living. You'd not be producing a glossy magazine and a popular website, you'd have a small blog, which would cost you money. You could do it, of course. But don't expect someone who's decided to do something else, from which they can make money and have fun, to be doing what you could do but aren't.

Don't bother selectively quoting bits of this in italics with tediously provocative non-sequiturs about how this is like slavery/cannibalism/pederasty incidentally. I'm almost certainly not going to rise to it. 😀

Everyone except you knows that, and no-one except you greatly cares.

wot, just me ? I don't think I'm that special.

If you feel it is important that someone should "take up the mantle" of critiquing the bike industry from the outside then you're probably right, it might well be healthy. If you did it well, we'd all buy less stuff, possibly have more fun, spend less money, worry less about a whole lot of things.

that sounds wonderful. Someone should definitely do it.

Don't bother selectively quoting bits of this in italics

I hope you're not trying to censor me ? It's not a personal thing, and it doesn't have to be you replying. The whole point of inserting quotes is to show which bit is being responded to, and without you'd have to guess.

TimBle – Member

FWIW, if the 2011 XTR looks anything like the pics, I'd buy it.
But I certainly won't be dropping cash on any 2010 XTR in a hurry now I know there's juicy new toys coming out.

Indeed. I've been mulling over the whole 2×10 thing since seeing the XX reviews and realising that I can't honestly remember the last time I actually used the big ring. And yeah I think it looks nice (better than the current stuff for sure)

I was also mulling over getting some XTR stuff again too and was talking to Dipper/Gravity Sports about it (turns out that the prices are reduced at the moment – wonder why that could be, eh?). So no I'll not be buying anything new in a hurry.

Say, don't suppose that might be why Shimano wanted an embargo in the first place would it?

when people contradict me I think I'm onto something, when they agree, I wonder if I've made a mistake!

You're so right Simon.

I've been mulling over the whole 2×10 thing since seeing the XX reviews and realising that I can't honestly remember the last time I actually used the big ring

OK, but, as far as I can make out, the issue of 10 speeds and that of running just 2 rings are unconnected. The extra sprocket just gives fractionally closer ratios but the same gearing spread, and unless you are racing the exact cadence isn't critical

Or even that with 10 speeds you might only need 2 rings? But that would be connected though…

I hope you're not trying to censor me ?

You can't help yourself, can you? You quote me, selectively and misleadingly with a lazy allegation that I'm trying to censor you rather than helping you to avoid wasting your time. Truly, you are the master of the endless argument. 😀

OK, but, as far as I can make out, the issue of 10 speeds and that of running just 2 rings are unconnected.

Don't start that probing journalistic website just yet ;o)