Quoted Text
Matt and Alan,
You have both continued in the same immature vein you started out in, and have instead of reflecting on your initial comments have ratcheted them up. You call me out for pouring oil on troubled waters THAT YOU BOTH CREATED.
Your opinion of what the site is or is not is simply that: your opinion. Alluding to silent "others" who share that opinion is not even worth addressing. The site allows all opinions, including yours, and if you find it too "Dramarama" or "comical" for your refined sensibilities, then don't let the door hit you in your tender asses as you leave.
RFM have been called out for an incomplete offering recently released. It's irrelevant what AFV Club did or did not do years ago. The hobby moves on, and if we hadn't been calling attention to where companies come up short, we'd still be building Tamiya over-simplified kits from the 70s and 80s.
Again, if mild "mockery" is too much for your tastes, feel free to hide David's or my posts or whomever you don't like. I stand by my criticism that you both have acted poorly and I'm not surprised you don't like it. Whatever my modeling abilities, I can recognize bad behavior, the kind that chases away an exchange of information in favor of "I know you are, but what am I" schoolboy rants. If that makes me a school master, then you can address me as "Sir" henceforth. 
So it appears you don't have the same desire as myself, but instead wish to pursue this matter with more of the same tone.
I agree with you on one important count, my opinion, and it was that I was expressing the same as anyone else, including you. You seem to want to defend David Byrden's opinion on this matter no matter what common sense alternative view is expressed.
If there was something inaccurate about the tracks, for example wrong shape, holes or no holes in the guide horns that should be there etc and this was brought up and highlighted as a fault with the item
then I would have no argument with those findings or the announcement of such , but to imply as others have done that RFM should be singled out for criticism over not supplying something they clearly never stated would be the contents of the box, is as I said unfair criticism.
Consider the conflicting views in your posts.
On the one hand you want to put forward the importance of David's knowledge and opinions based on that, which there can be no doubt, he is a leading authority on the Tiger 1 tank, and to stop any behaviour that might discourage such people from posting here.
On the other hand you want to play down any "mockery" as some have put it, that his post gives over. Surely the importance you place on his opinion would therefore mean any criticism he should make carries more weight to it than if it came from you or I, and shouldn't be taken lightly.
The parallels drawn by others between such things as jigsaw puzzles or aftermarket barrels is absurd. If you purchased a sink would you expect to get the taps and waste pipes, no these are purchased separately to complete the installation, as you purchased "a sink".
If you buy a tire for your car it doesn't include the air valve as part of the tyre, you purchase it separately as it shows on the invoice, but the tyre is still just the tyre regardless of what else you need.
You brought an airbrush for your modelling. It's pretty useless without the air hose to connect to the compressor. Do you then criticise the airbrush company for not selling you the airbrush with hose included.
Is it that somehow in this matter you see wrong doing in me but not in others. Well that's your problem not mine.
Looking at David's last post "I'm posting my warnings about this set because somebody ought to." then hopefully you'll do the decent thing and note the same for all the other suppliers of transport tracks that don't include the items you list. It would seem they are all at fault under your list and it should be noted as such, that is unless you do have something solely against RFM.
I was accused of coming to this thread with a "personal issue" The only thing I've come to this thread with is an opinion, which is RFM have been singled out for criticism over supplying exactly what others do, and for exactly what they describe on the box, a set of transport tracks.
So how would you describe the statement that "If there had been a polite "Ooops, we didn't know about the differences, it's too late to change" then I'd be less insistent about highlighting their omissions." if that's not having "an issue"
