HomeRoast Digest


Topic: UL Slurring (2 msgs / 47 lines)
1) From: John Abbott
I wasn't going to respond - I know it will not prove much other than my thin
skin.  But I resent having people attempt to put words in my mouth.
The comments I made about the cost to businesses for achieving UL approval
of a product were not based on my evaluation of the work done by others.  It
was based on my personal experience with submitting hardware for UL approval
  The cost to me was substantial and what I considered to be disproportional
to the task performed.
At no point in my posting did I say or infer that one could achieve approval
by purchasing it, and I resent the implication that I did. Mark Price owes
the list an apology. It is this very thing that keeps me from reading his
material.
John Abbott
Mission Texas
John
homeroast mailing listhttp://lists.sweetmarias.com/mailman/listinfo/homeroast

2) From: Mark Prince
Answered off the list. But also to clarify here, I posted because my s/o, 
after reading this list yesterday, asked me if UL was just a rubber stamp, 
and completely useless. I figured if it gave her that impression, a post 
might be necessary.
That's the impression the trash talk against them has garnered, at least 
with her. I was not attempting to put words into John's mouth. I wanted to 
clarify that while many people don't think much of UL (mainly those who go 
through the process), they actually do test products, have a minimum 
standard, and are often quoted in law courts when liability cases appear, 
and thus, it does serve a purpose. I never stated specifically that John 
said they don't test products or will rubber stamp for bucks, and if my own 
post gave that impression, I apologise - that was not the intent.
See how perception is reality?
As for John not wanting to read anything else I post, sorry to hear it, but 
there's not much I can do about that.
Mark
At 09:23 AM 10/09/2002, you wrote:
<Snip>
homeroast mailing listhttp://lists.sweetmarias.com/mailman/listinfo/homeroast


HomeRoast Digest