Flysurfer: Kite lines - a science of its own

[Kamikuza]

http://www.flysurfer.com/en/topnews/477 ... -fur-sich/

[The Captain]

interesting.
....and i would have some questions.
but Toby is clearly not the author and there is no link to the original article.
personally, i find this version of plagerism more annoying than PMUs cut n' paste BS



-bill

While I agree a link to the original article would have been warranted, it is pretty obvious Flysurfer pays a fair share of the bills on this forum. Calling it plagiarism is unfair. It is just Toby supporting a client, something I have not problem with.

It is still an informative article, no matter what kite you fly. If your kite (LEI or foil) has lost some of its 'je ne sais quoi', perhaps this essay helped you too...

[Kamikuza]

Toby posts up plenty of news items from all sorts of companies. "Plargarism" would have been posting the article and adding "Written by Toby" at the bottom

[zfennell]

Toby posts up plenty of news items from all sorts of companies. "Plargarism" would have been posting the article and adding "Written by Toby" at the bottom

of course he did.
one column of the thread is titled Author. and Toby is the name listed.
additionally, i see no quotation marks in the text and no additional reference as to where toby uncovered this info. ( other than the obvious Flysurfer marketing format)
this is not a question of grammar or format or even an ethical approach to providing credit.
however, it has a lot to do with credibility and validation which would make the information more useful.

now personally, i also believe that in this case he is merely serving one of his masters and they do not mind.
i also believe his primary motivation is simply to generate 'hits' for this popular enterprise and the wishes of the true author is secondary.

regardless, i still find the practice misleading and annoying.

not a big deal in the grand scheme of things, so i'll just let it go at that.
you folks are all entitled to angonize over the subject as you see fit.
regards,
-bill

[john a]

over 1000 parts to optimally function together

Does not sound good in my ears... a lot of parts to tear and ware... Just another reason to ride a tube to me
But creds for all sick amount of the R&D!

[joedy]

Of course, tube kites have an amazing amount of parts that have to work together. I would be skeptical if someone proclaimed that tube kites have less than 100 discrete parts that have to be cut, sewn, reinforced singly, double and triply, joined, connected, glued, zippered, knotted, tied, etc.

Modern kites are complex machines not because of their part count, but because their intended use requires a unique and particular design.

I think that part of what Armin implied as some of the 1,000 pieces needed for a Flysurfer kite to function correctly are the intangibles such as wing profile shape, aeronautical drag and coefficient-of-lift. These are all critical "parts" of a kite, but are a result of the design, not necessarily a physical part of it.

-joedy

[gmb13]

yes definatley lots of technology going on in the kite its self. I like the ability to adjust the bridles through a mixer test. but the bar is a very bad design in my opinion.

ever tried to replace pullies on a speed 3? you have to remove all the B and C bridles.... very time consuming. they should change the knot arrangements so you can easily replace parts on the pully system.

who would want a kite with 1000 parts? people that want to have rediculous amounts of glide in silly light winds

Hi Plummet.

You do not have to remove all the c and b bridles to replace the pulleys.

After you pull out the yellow mixer line out of the pulley, you just open the larks head on the grey mixer adjustment line and slip it over the pulley. Then it's off.

--
Gunnar

[Kamikuza]

Toby posts up plenty of news items from all sorts of companies. "Plargarism" would have been posting the article and adding "Written by Toby" at the bottom

of course he did.
one column of the thread is titled Author. and Toby is the name listed.
additionally, i see no quotation marks in the text and no additional reference as to where toby uncovered this info. ( other than the obvious Flysurfer marketing format)
this is not a question of grammar or format or even an ethical approach to providing credit.
however, it has a lot to do with credibility and validation which would make the information more useful.

now personally, i also believe that in this case he is merely serving one of his masters and they do not mind.
i also believe his primary motivation is simply to generate 'hits' for this popular enterprise and the wishes of the true author is secondary.

regardless, i still find the practice misleading and annoying.

not a big deal in the grand scheme of things, so i'll just let it go at that.
you folks are all entitled to angonize over the subject as you see fit.
regards,
-bill

So which is it - plagarism or master-serving? Or could it just be an informative post on a forum :rolleyes: it's the internet, not a doctoral thesis.

... oh damn, another post on the interweb, another hit for the thread. At least PMUs not up in here running up the bandwidth with kilobytes of copy'n'paste

[POACHER]

I'm gonna go with "Who gives a shit" for $500 please Alex.

[Kamikuza]

I'm gonna go with "Who gives a shit" for $500 please Alex.

If you don't care... don't post