HDM Rumor thread! Put all rumors here. - Page 52  

I'll take anything posted at the digital bits as being rumor, so I guess it's posted in the right place.

So we're supposed to take Bill Hunt's word as factual? He's the guy who invented (using nice words there) the "150 Million came from Microsoft" nonsense. Anything he says, I would think the opposite is likely true.

Robert posted the Warner/combo info.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=914750

I'll take Robert's word over Bill Hunt's any day.

Normally - so would I - in a heartbeat. But Bill is posting a retraction to a post he made the day before. He is correcting the wrong info that he had. He even quotes WHV. Robert either was given wrong info, didn't understand the info he got, or he is correct and Bill is lying.

Robert is not infallible:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=903461

And why would Hunt lie about this?

Someone has incorrect info, but to suggest lying about it is ridiculous.

Personally I do not believe either party is lying. i believe there was some errornous info floating around and it was taken out of context.

"For the foreseeable future"

Got to love those hard as nails, can't argue with that, no question about it studio answers.

YES . . . I really do feel like a mushroom when it comes to the Hollywood studios and how they communicate with us "little people."

Hollywood Mantra:

"You can't nail JELL-O to the wall!"

How much more can Sony possibly strip from out the PS3 to make it more affordable? What a joke the PS3 has turned out to be, if true, this moves stinks of pure desperation.

The new "5 Free HD Movie" offer which runs thru Jan 08 includes 3 different sku for PS3 (presumably 60 gig, 80 gig, and maybe new 40 gig?). But in any case there are three listed; and since 20 is long out of production and this is a new promotion I don't think that's it. I'm guessing they eliminate the card reader and put in the smaller disc; I would have thought they eliminate wi-fi; but Sony has filed papers with the FCC which seem to indicate a new wi-fi PS3, if I interpret the info correctly.

There are separate threads on both these items. I'll see if I can find them and link to them.

EDIT: Here is the thread; which contains links to both items I mentioned.

http://wesleytech.com/samsung-bdp-24...-canceled/380/

Samsung BDP-2400 Blu-ray player cancelled:

BD-UP5000 dual-format player delayed until December:

Maybe Samsung is planning their own standalone HD DVD player.

RDJAM...just after CEDIA you said someting was coming in a month..i think that is next week...is that still on track and any further hints..or a review of hints in case we missed a post.

I agree!

Still, when semi-serious rumors are reported, it can be a lot of fun.

However, no one wants the "I know something big because I know someone in the know who works for a big important company which I cannot name...and I can't tell you what the something big is; just that it is coming soon" type of post.

I think we need some sort of format for posting rumors

for example:

rumor:

my source is.......

I have [have not] sent additional info to mods

etc

feel free to PM ideas, or post them here

We see the value in this thread but want to curb abuse

IMO - the most important item is a link to the rumor. If there is no link when the rumor is posted - then the rumor post MUST be deleted.

Facts and proof are needed to add credibility to the rumor. Without them the rumor is nothing more than heresay and should not be allowed.

If this was adhered to from the getgo - that hoax rumor that was posted 2 days ago would have been removed 5 minutes after it was posted and none of the problems would have resulted.

There were no links provided in that post.

Links will stop any hoax's in the future.

Bill's information is spot on, IMO.

In some cases it may be impossible to post links since it is a rumor. Instead of links why not require the posting of where the information came from without posting names. I would also require that if the rumor proves false the poster should be required to tell us where the rumor came from.

I don't think links should be required. I recall reading from Kosty something to the effect: 'I heard from my sources at Cedia that TL51 is compatible with existing players.' I consider this reasonable and I don't expect a link.

I see two troublesome types of posts.

1) The FUD post which does not provide the substance of the rumor.


I think these should be summarily deleted. If the substance of the rumor will not be posted, I think these posts do nothing except lower the value of the thread and the forum.

2) The prank rumor. Of course this was made legendary from the br.com incident, however I don't recall seeing it occur here. I don't think this needs to be defended too much because posting history is valued here and if someone comes in and posts a prank rumor without a reasonable posting history, it is treated with suspicion.

updated:

rumor:

my source is.......

Link (if avail)

I have [have not] sent additional info to mods

Time frame

Certainty of this rumor [scale 1-10]

Here is the problem with the non-linked rumor:

EXAMPLE:

Rumor: "X Title Will Be Cancelled"

"I spoke to a friend of mine who is a distributor for HDM movies. He received a notice that X Tile will not be shipping on the 24th as was expected."

So what is the point? To get the rumor posted first? So the poster can say "I posted the rumor first here at AVS . . ?" If the title in question is delayed or cancelled then the studio will make an announcement about it.

Without a link you can post anything (as we are seeing already).

just an example: not trying to get anyone in trouble:

this to me does not qualify as posted: some basis, link, more info would have to be posted under the new guidelines

lol yupe . this place is for us to post and discuss rumors. not create them . if you want to create rumor, please go to BD.com. That is what they are for

another example only:

this might be OK: we could challenge the poster to provide more info: either by post or PM to mods if he wanted it to remain undisclosed. If mods were not satisfied, we would delete

I support the use of links. The only exception is if the poster give supporting info to the mods and the mods approve the posting.

Agreed. The Mod(s) have to make a post that they have reviewed the source of the rumor and agree that it qualifies for this thread.

they certainly are preferred:

that is exactly what happened a week ago with a rumor posted with no link: I challenged poster to provide more info and he did by PM: I was satisfied with his basis and in fact it turned out to be true

Also no bashing of flaming of these posts. Lets try to keep this thread like the Insiders thread which is now very much on topic.

And no PMs between members who support one side or the other keeping hoaxes going just for their own giggles.

Hi,

I have nothing against a requirement to post a link, but unfortunately it doesn't prevent a recurrence of this recent debacle. The source of the problem posting was Bluray.com. If a similiar pot-stirring posting were to be posted there, or anywhere else for that matter, what would a link to another site accomplish?

We need some rules guiding minimum information requirements. In addition, there probably needs to be some sanctions against members if it can be reasonably determined, after the fact, that the "rumor" was a deliberate hoax designed to stir things up.

I admit this is an extremely difficult situation to attempt to moderate. Perhap PMs to the moderators really is the best way to go.

Larry

jawohl mon commandant