You mean this is the puff-piece reply from Oliver that you had everyone waiting on! It is truly laughable.
It is extremely revealing that you did not address one specific bit of evidence that many people have posted here. But I understand, you simply have no rebuttal for the facts.
But let's take a look at a few facts. Why don't we begin with the email that you sent out BEFORE you wrote the article. (Should never put anything in an email that you don't want to come back to bite you in.., David!)
For all that have followed this controversy, here is Olivers ("no 'agenda.' Period.") email.
> Hello all -
> Hope all is well with you.
> Some of you know that I was writing a Genii review of the Virtual Soundman
> Remote Commander (the "Majiloon" thing). Well, it's been changed slightly.
> First, for those who I ran an initial draft by, it has become a little softer
> (the first draft was a little harsh toward the competition, written under
> duress, while my own system was still missing from the Conclave!). Plus, it's
> no longer going to be a short review, it's going to be written up as a short
> feature story in an upcoming Genii.
> Here's why I'm writing to you. I personally recommended the unit to each of
> you, and you all trusted my judgment (why?) and bought one. So far, in
> speaking with you, you each have told me that my recommendation was solid,
> and that you are happy with the unit. That makes me happy. I would like
> permission to use your names in the feature, as a partial list of
> professionals who I personally know are happy with the unit. Some of you, I
> know are former ShowTech owners, and this will be addressed in the same,
> brief paragraph.
> Basically, the paragraph will be in the body of the story, and will read
> (something along the lines of):
> "In fact, I HAVE bet my reputation on it, by recommending the VSRC to several
> full-time pros, including (list of your names here). They were all amazed at
> how simple, dependable and affordable it is. Some of these performers, and
> others I have not mentioned, were former ShowTech owners, who have since sold
> their ShowTechs, purchased their VSRC's and consider themselves converted.
> And now I'm recommending it to you."
> That's about it. This paragraph's not going to change all that drastically,
> if at all (maybe grammatical corrections). However, before I included any of
> your names in the story, I wanted to get your permission first. Also, if you
> have since recommended it to any of our other "name" professional friends,
> who have bought, used and are happy with it, I'd like to know if it's ok to
> use their names as well.
> Please e-mail me back by next week (6/13) as to whether or not I can use
> your name in the story. If you'd rather I didn't, I understand, and will not
> include your name in the final version.
> In any event, (as with any upcoming magazine article), please, I'd appreciate
> it if you do not let it get too far beyond our immediate circle of friends
> that there is a story coming out. Don't want to spoil the surprise, do we?
> Thanks, again.
So let's examine your "no agenda"!
You wrote in your email:
"the first draft was a little harsh toward the competition".
What competition is that David? Incredibly damning that you would choose to use the word "competition". If this were an unbiased article from the outset, the appropriate remark would have been, "the first draft was a little harsh toward the SHOWTECH".
Nah...you didn't have an "agenda".
You also wrote:
"I would like permission to use your names in the feature, as a partial list of professionals who I personally know are happy with the unit. Some of you, I know are former ShowTech owners, and this will be addressed in the same, brief paragraph."
What happened to the list of names, David? Did no one give you permission to use their name? Well, we know one person gave you permission - as a matter of fact. He posted a copy of the email in this forum that he sent you. And his reply to you was that the MiniTech was FAR SUPERIOR TO the VSRC. If you were truly writing an objective article, why didn't you include this information when you specifically asked people for feedback and permission to "use their names"? It's very simple. You had an agenda. You didn't want to write one flattering thing about the ShowTech or MiniTech. You went out of your way to do just the opposite.
In your email you wrote:
"Some of you, I know are former ShowTech owners, and this will be addressed in the same, brief paragraph."
This brief paragraph never happened did it, David? You intentionally left Puck's feedback out of your article because it refuted everything you wrote about Kerry's products.
One of the most incriminating passages that you wrote is:
"Basically, the paragraph will be in the body of the story, and will read something along the lines of):
"In fact, I HAVE bet my reputation on it, by recommending the VSRC to several full-time pros, including (list of your names here). They were all amazed at how simple, dependable and affordable it is. Some of these performers, and others I have not mentioned, were former ShowTech owners, who have since sold their ShowTechs, purchased their VSRC's and consider themselves converted. And now I'm recommending it to you."
How did you know PRIOR to getting feedback from owners how the paragraph was going to read: "Basically, the paragraph will be in the body of the story, and will read something along the lines of...."
YOU KNEW BEFORE YOU EVER EVEN RECEIVED ANY FEEDBACK THAT YOU WERE GOING TO SLAM THE SHOWTECH AND RAVE ABOUT THE VSRC!!!!!!!!!
The dumbest thing you could have ever done was to put that in an email (in writing). I cant believe that you put into writing that you knew WHAT you were going to write BEFORE you ever even received any feedback from owners!
And the icing on the cake!
"In any event, (as with any upcoming magazine article), please, I'd appreciate it if you do not let it get too far beyond our immediate circle of friends that there is a story coming out. Don't want to spoil the surprise, do we?"
You mean spoil the lynching? You knew in advance this was not simply going to be a favorable review of the VRSC. No big surprise to WORRY ABOUT when writing a POSITIVE review. But you didn't want to "spoil the surprise" because you knew this review was as damning to the ShowTech as it was complimentary to the VSRC. That was the big surprise! Not smart.
Now lets move from your email to your reply that you just posted here in this forum.
"I mentioned the facts as I saw them, based on my own experiences with a $500 item and a $2400 item."
You have no experience with the ShowTech. Be honest. You have never used it once and all of your information is anecdotal. Why didn't you do what all professional reviewers do from Auto magazines, Audio/Video magazines, Gun magazines and Magic magazines (well, most Magic magazines) and use the product before even contemplating writing about it? At least your "agenda" wouldn't have been so transparent.
Here's another damning blunder:
"Over several years, I HAVE SEEN THE SHOWTECH SUCCEED, but more often, I have seen it apparently fail."
However, in your article you wrote:
"Since then, I have personally witnessed the showtech being used by numerous professional performers....who constantly rave about the device. Yet, EVERYTIME I have seen their show, there's always a miscue or other sound related problem."
Which is it, David? Have you seen it SUCCEED or has it failed EVERYTIME?
The truth is, you have never seen it fail to your knowledge. Do you know for sure if the ShowTech has ever failed? No you don't. What you have seen and heard is performers blaming the ShowTech for their mistakes. Period.
"At the end of the review I gave Mr. Pollock's contact information..."
And you go on to falsely claim that the MiniTech came out after the article was written.
You knew long before the article was written that the MiniTech was available. May I suggest, once again, that you refer to Puck's email to you that he posted here. Is the truth in you, anywhere?
"And, throughout the review, I suggested user-error,"
Do you call throughout the review....twice? That's how many times you suggested user error.
Oh, and here is the beauty of all beauties:
"I have not seen the VSRC fail."
I believe another performer posted in another forum here that he saw your show and the music stopped twice. And you say, "I have not seen the VSRC fail."
I wont do what you did throughout your article and accept anecdotal evidence as fact, but if your music did stop
.bwaah, ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha....ROTFLMAO! Man do you have gall!
"For those who misunderstood my review, and took it as a personal attack against Mr. Pollock.....Claims that this was an attack against him on some personal level are simply unfounded."
Do you really believe that everyone here that is reading your pathetically lame reply is a simple school child and they will eat anything you spoon feed them? You are insulting.
And it's not just the article that confirms your malice toward Kerrys products, there are many witnesses that have seen you harangue Kerry in public numerous times about his products. In front of customers at his dealer booth, no less.
Careful with your reply here David, there are abundant witnesses.
After spending almost 10 years in law enforcement (before pursuing magic full-time) I have seen this type of reprensible behavior many times before. Deny, deny, deny.
But when placed under oath and watching witness after witness and one piece of evidence after another being presented, it is amazing how quickly the accused denials become pleas for mercy.
This entire attack disguised as a review is simply shameful. It is yellow journalism, a discredit to the magic community, a disservice to Richard and an affront to the intelligence of all who have read this article. Everyone sees it for what it is.
It is unfortunate that your petty little game is not simply limited to your, "personal and professional review" of the VSRC. You have quite possibly damaged a respectable man's business by printing information that you knew was untrue and omitting information that you knew was beneficial to the same.
You should be ashamed and I hope the magic community gives you what you deserve.
They should shun you.