Well, if someone is going to be a dolt and only review one source of information they deserve the outcome that they get. I learned long ago that you can learn something from just about anybody. You just have to learn to eat the meat and spit out the bones. Gather information from many sources. Then do some thinking to figure out what elements from each apply to your particular situation. Everyone has to do something to make a living. I don't hold that against them.
Not my point. You can review all different kinds of push sources and you get nothing more than a bunch of independent push ideas. I'm not saying there is no value in those ideas. As I started my post I said "Lots of good and lots of not so good..."
What you get here is different ideas rubbing against each other. Multiple perspectives with point and counter point. You can weigh how post apply to your situation by the location and posting history of the poster. The more frequently I use the forum, the more perspective I get on each poster and the better I can weigh their content. Some things are well grounded in science and you can often find links to research. Much of what I see with the push information has a conclusion, mostly opinion, with a little cherry picked science when it support the idea and science ignored when it does not.
Not all push sources are the same. Some are much better than others, but in my opinion, a non-commercialized interactive forum like this with a mix of experience levels is the best resource available. Some are 80% good info and 20% hot air and others are 50% hot air, 25% bad information, and 25% good information.
You are right that everyone has to make a living. The folks selling snake oil on late night TV ads to improve your sex life are making a living. So is your physician. We don't equate information from both sources the same. I'm not saying that all push sources are snake oil salesmen. Take QDMA (now NDA) for example. They ran a great public forum. There push information from the web site was challenged buy members on the forum and folks doing QDM benefited significantly from that. The problem was that sponsors who took out ads in the magazine and such were not to happy when the forum would discuss how some products were significantly over prices or did not perform and alternative sources that were more effective at a lower cost. The decided they wanted to "control the message" and a public forum was not consistent with that. While that decision probably benefited the organization financially, it did a disservice to the members and mission of QDM.
This is just one example of how a great organization became a push-only source for information. No longer do we see critiques of products pushed by their sponsors and advertisers. So, let's take Joe Blow "Great Deer Web" (a fictions push site). The profit motive distorts the information. Attracting eyeballs to ads tends to make things more sensational and absolute rather than well balanced. A desire not to offend tones down negative comments. Techniques and strategies are sometimes designed around pitching product.
I'm not saying don't read or use those push resources. I'm saying before acting, come here to ask specific questions and get a variety of responses.
Thanks,
Jack
