KS already vets projects. Sometimes their staff reject projects for silly r= easons. Other times, they let through Trinities. They may eventually hire t= he right people. Or not. Sent from my phone > On Jun 2, 2014, at 11:59, Alexandros Nipirakis wro= te: >=20 > It seems entirely possible that a few (early) successes by Kickstarter > Campaigns may have fooled the general populace that this is a (safe) way = to > invest in things. >=20 > This is very similar (from my point of view) to the early Internet boom > (1995 or so until the crash in 2001). It seemed like anyone with a modem > and a server could literally print money. >=20 > I think you could find some kickstarter campaigns that made money - or at > the very least created a useful product. >=20 > The problem (that Kickstarter should address sooner rather than later - i= f > they intend to be more serious than a spam board) is (just as with the > internet boom) for every one legitimate product there are plenty that are > complete garbage. >=20 > The fact that many of the investors in these things are either not > sophisticated enough or simply don't understand why something in rubbish = is > the problem. If the intention is to connect good ideas with money - > perhaps there should be a vetting process. >=20 > Of course, in the 2.0 kind of world, vetting processes are frowned upon a= s > somehow curtailing innovation. >=20 > Kind Regards - >=20 > Aleksei >=20 >=20 > On 2 June 2014 10:22, RussellMc wrote: >=20 >>>> I can't say I like the idea of giving money to scammers to gain the >>>=20 >>>> privilege of pointing out their scams. >>>=20 >>> I suspect that my $2's worth will have reduced their take by >> substantially >>> more than that. Consider it a cost of community service. >>>=20 >>> I have since pointed out that if they amend the graph axis to m/s from >> mph >>> (~=3D 11x reduction in power at any given wind speed) and apologise to >> their >>> supporters now, they may save themselves a law suit or general >>> unpleasantness later on. Whether they have done so I know not >>>=20 >>> ______________ >>=20 >> Update: >>=20 >> Several of the 100 early innovator slots which had been fully subscribed >> became free. >> Others will take their place BUT at least a few people seem to have deci= ded >> that the products they shell out $249 for should not break the laws of >> physics. >>=20 >> They have not updated the graph - it still reads in mph. That would have >> been such a simple change to make. >> Their claims still break the laws of Physics. >> Other people have also commented separately and re what I said. >>=20 >> They have addressed some minor questions that others have raised but >> ignored any comments that raised issues re the impossibility of their >> claims. >> They have exceeded their funding goals, so get their % of the money, and >> kickstarter get theirs. >>=20 >> While some projects with quite complex goals offer to have product in >> people's hands very quickly, this project has a very long close to deliv= ery >> time scale. >>=20 >> April - Kickstarter Project starts >> June - Final Prototype >> July - Final Decision on manufacturing process >> September - Tooling, Tools, Trials and Fine Tuning >> November - Packaging Design >> 2015 >> January - First Kickstarter backers receive their Trinity >> February - Full Scale Production >>=20 >> Note July to December - from final decision on manufacturing process to >>> (presumably) manufacturing. >>> About 6 months. With full scale production in February. >>=20 >> Kickstarter's laissez faire approach is known - but if the above does no= t >> disturb Kickstarter then Kickstarter should be disturbing other people b= y >> now. >>=20 >> _____________ >>=20 >> MAYBE they are just being FAR more cautious than most. >> But: >>=20 >> We have been able to build a fully working prototype but it may require >> small changes for full scale manufacturing. We will face more challenges >> and unforeseen product issues as we get closer to manufacturing. We do n= ot >> currently have a factory though we will explore every option and decide = the >> best way to manufacture the product. If we decide to partner up with a >> manufacturer there may be delays should we need to change suppliers. Eve= ry >> step in our development will be carefully selected to make this product >> even more special for our backers. >>=20 >> We may need to make a few changes in materials so the product can become >> more durable and scratch resistant. This can cause the final product to = be >> slightly different from our original prototype. >> All of these factors can have an effect on shipping dates. We will work = our >> hardest to achieve our set dates and deliver a product that both we and = our >> backers are satisfied with. >>=20 >>=20 >> Is disturbing. >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>> Russell >> -- >> http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive >> View/change your membership options at >> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist > --=20 > http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive > View/change your membership options at > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist --=20 http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .