Theory11 Exposed... Again!

[Albert]

Originally Posted by Fin

No Albert, that's not arguable at all. I have always understood how important crediting is; I've made that pretty darn clear, in fact it was my eye for detail in the crediting of this move and the differences between it and similar moves that helped cause this whole debacle!

Okay, I'm going to break down what you said so I don't get confused. This we agree upon, that crediting is important, so Theory11 shouldn't leave it out, or delete it, like Mark has said. This was the purpose of the thread. I have no idea how this deviated to the crazy concept of "the move is similar to previous creations, so it's unethical to release it without credits" because that is is no way the purpose of the thread and that doesn't even make any sense at all!

Originally Posted by Fin

I agree that Theory 11 needs to do more on the product page and I have never suggested otherwise, but I also think that if we have problems with what they do or how they do it, our time is better spent writing THEM an email rather than discussing our qualms in forums, because, as we have seen, if someone gets their facts wrong when making a strong criticism, specially a respected magician such as yourself, the results can be ugly.

Well, Theory11 doesn't listen to use. Isn't that why we are so heated up in the conversation? Mark, I believe, has done tons to try and tell Theory11 what they are doing wrong. We barely see any changes. That's why we post them here.

Originally Posted by Fin

Yes, of course it is incredibly important that an influential company such as T11 "should make sure their products are not misleading, including the addition of credits", and similarly, if we are going to lead by example, then when criticising their practises we should be sure to get our facts straight. It's incredibly easy to mistakenly peddle in misinformation, as we have discovered in this little exercise!

We sure have. That was the whole point of this thread and I believe my mistake has done a pretty damn decent job to prove it.

Originally Posted by Fin

Look at it this way.. When all was said and done, in these "T11 exposed" threads you are trying to help consumers make an informed choice, right? And to teach them about ethics along the way hopefully. Isn't this the point of these threads? A warning to possible purchasers that they should know what they're getting into when they buy with Theory 11?

Yes, we agree on this.

Originally Posted by Fin

So now, for example, we have two innocent, uneducated noobs to magic. One sees the trailer and goes to the site, the other comes here. I think the one who just went to the site and saw the trailer would be much better off than someone who read this thread first, despite the problems that exist with crediting on the product page. The first person makes their decision based on the move, what it looks like, the price, etc, but doesn't get to see good crediting on the product page.. but hey, they get it in the tutorial.

Damn right! I completely see your point and have since the beginning. It seems like our debate has evolved into some quite different an issue we debated about before with GPS as the example. But remember, we didn't have issues with people who saw and bought the trick. They get the required in the purchase. Our concern is for those who don't buy it after they see the trailer. They are more prone to leaving with the wrong idea on the original creator after seeing no credits at all on the products page, except for Rick Lax as the instructor and 'creator' of the technique. That's where they possibly receive misinformation!

Originally Posted by Fin

The second person is worried, angry, then confused by all the arguing in this thread and the actual importance of the move goes out the window, because its all about credits, ethics, who said what, where did it originate, who stole what? etc. My point? I'd rather be the first person and just get on with making my own choices and judgements, rather than the second guy, who came to this thread, and got a very blurry picture painted for him about the origin of the move.

Sure, this person will be confused and upset at the differences between the Bow-to-Stern, Blind Square, and HighRise in terms of technicalities. But I believe this thread has done more than enough to explain that HighRise is not an original move and that crediting should be done on the products page for the sake of those who DON'T buy the move. Regarding credits, this thread should have done more than enough. This debate evolved into something bigger after I mistakenly said 'slight variation', which I admitted several times and apologized for. That should be pretty clear, even to you.

Originally Posted by Fin

I know this wasn't done on purpose but it has happened nonetheless. The point is that the thread did more damage than good, whether you like it or not!! On that note, I think I've said more than enough on this subject so I'll leave it there.

Peace and love to all

I don't completely agree with the more damage than good, but I can definitely see the damage.

I'll also leave it at that. At least now, we know what the real problem is since it's been broken down. Whew~