Hi Steve,
OK to all points. I appreciate your comments. I normally never mention other manufacturers, but have been impressed by the candor on the thread and the open discussion including allegations about the products and policies of Red Rose Music. With this in mind, I thought to bring up a real issue about company policy that is important to some people who own vintage ML equipment.
Many people have asked me about service for such units (LNP-2, ML-2, ML-3, ML-6, ML-7, etc.) thinking that maybe I can help them. What they don't know is that only Harman has the documents and parts required for this service, and so far, they seem unwilling to give them to anyone. WBT seems ok with posting discussions of the policies of Red Rose Music that contain false allegations and highly critical comments, so I thought maybe Harman's service policies were fair game, especially since my point is factually correct.
There is still freedom of speech with regard to personal opinion, and comments and questions based on facts are not actionable. There is no potential for litigation or "political fiasco" if questions are asked, and factually correct statements are made. In a blog where people seem concerned about the ethics of manufacturers, I see potential for making improvements that are relevant to the interests of more than a few equipment owners. It is a pity that good products like the original ML units should become unusable and unserviceable due to the decision of a big company that has the resources to provide the service and support just not the ethics. Those who know the history are aware that Harman wanted the old products, associated with me, to die, while the Harman ML products would be supported. This is a bona fide case of company policy and ethics that deserves to be questioned. If you think this is not true, please explain. If it is true, then my point should be well taken.