Yes, it's Meade bashing. Perhaps Ken doesn't realize the effect of the wording of his post. It said "...it seems that Meade is true to form and has dropped the ball once again." These are judgmental statements that rile those on the other side, not facts. That they rile is the reason we are having this discussion now. If he had said "Here is an interesting review of the Meade ETX-L5 6. This individual appears to have had some problems.You can judge for yourself how representative this incident is of Meade" that would have been an informative post that does not rile. Instead the link is prefaced with judgmental statements about Meade, i.e., it has dropped the ball and is true to its form, which right off orients the reader in a negative direction. Sorry, Ken, if I have to be critical of your post.
Again, I haven't had significant problems with Meade to the extent that I bash the company and choose a Chinese company instead. I have, in general, had good experiences. I have had some of the same types of experiences as you and others have had but I don't hate it.
Stan p.s., it is raining cats and dogs up here now. Steve D. wrote:
"Meade bashing"? Looks like an objective, non-hostile and honest review. If the device doesn't work after 8 or 9 tries, it doesn't work. Sending it back and working with customer "support", and it still doesn't work looks like a waste of $1500 to me.I have seen this same telescope in action, and it's marginal at best, hobby discouraging at worst. A $1500 "department store telescope". No bashing intended, just fact.Steve Dodder Chairman, SAC Novice Group Coordinator, Grand Canyon Star Party, North Rim Director, Stone Haven Observatory fester00@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.stargazing.net/Astroman <http://www.windowslive.com/Desktop/PhotoGallery>
