Sign the petition please

Pontiacg5 said:

My proof? Those diodes have been gone for over a month and I have yet to receive one complaint.

I wash my hands of this thread, I see more members are starting to see you for the troll you are. It won't be much longer and you'll get this account banned too, hope you have spares.

Click to expand...

Degradation of laser diodes is only noticeable when you test the output
of each LD before and after the exposure to back reflection and the other elements
you subjected them to.

You simply plopped the array on top of the projector, subjecting them to the
elements known to cause >DEGRADATION< without any data before or after.

As ive said before, and you continue to ignore, LDs can live a long time even
after such exposure. BUT it also means that any potential which those very
LD's had is now gone at the expense of the GB runner (you) and his cool
burning video, paid for by people who wanted NEW (as advertised) virgin
diodes.

They got your sloppy seconds, and you took full value from their wallets,
nuff said.

Again, I can prove that your actions will cause degradation as noted in
many Nichia datasheets regarding back reflection, and heat.

You did not test, you played with, and have absolutely no data to back
up your argument.

SCAM.

wannaburn said:

Again, I can prove that your actions will cause degradation as noted in
many Nichia datasheets regarding back reflection, and heat.

Click to expand...

Wait, what? I was gonna try to avoid this particular branch of the thread, but how did him using the diodes in their massive heatsink cause degradation? I guarantee you they get much hotter in the projector.... on top of that, the reflection wouldn't be intense enough to cause any damage, and it wasn't any more "exposed to the elements" than when the diodes were inside the projector or when they were removed from the heatsink.

goninanbl00d said:

Click to expand...

I completely agree...
The threadjack started with TJ's comments (as usual) and his little cronie
pontiac decided to drag his grudge through the front door as well, to
back up his buddy..

What can I say, I dont sit idly by..

ossumguywill said:

Wait, what? I was gonna try to avoid this particular branch of the thread, but how did him using the diodes in their massive heatsink cause degradation? I guarantee you they get much hotter in the projector.... on top of that, the reflection wouldn't be intense enough to cause any damage, and it wasn't any more "exposed to the elements" than when the diodes were inside the projector or when they were removed from the heatsink.

Click to expand...

If you can find the original thread where this was discussed already,
pontiac argued that it was impossible that his single video lasting near
10mins straight putting other peoples LDs through a number of obvious
do nots, could in no way damage anything.

The point of my argument was that there was no way to determine this
without the appropriate data. That thread also dragged out with his guessing.

The point was more about not doing it with his own money and so on.

Running the projector array out of its case away from its mounted
position, out of econo mode at its highest output, then placing a non
AR coated piece of plastic (cd cover) flush in front of the array would
cause "no damage".

Not only is this impossible to say, but he also claims that the temp
did not exceed their rated absolute maximum.

I have typed all of this before, and now that he decided to drag it into
this thread I find myself wasting more time typing...

I stated in thread that I will reenact the same conditions with my own
LD for sake of argument.

Im a busy guy when im not getting trolled lol, and will do as I said to prove
my point.

He just continues to dig it up in anybody's thread of his choice..

Look up the thread 'i have done it, i have the power' or something like that.
My points are valid and will back up what I say, where as he chooses to ignore
his burden, and continues to sh!t on this thread where people were trying to stay
on topic, myself included.. But I will not ignore the snide remarks.

wannaburn said:

Running the projector array out of its case away from its mounted
position, out of econo mode at its highest output, then placing a non
AR coated piece of plastic (cd cover) flush in front of the array would
cause "no damage".

Not only is this impossible to say, but he also claims that the temp
did not exceed their rated absolute maximum.

Click to expand...

There's a thermal protection circuit to prevent heat damage, and stop ignoring that, in the projector, it's next to a blisteringly hot TEC heatsink. Casio spend a LOT of money designing this projector and you seem to have forgotten that it was just that, a PROJECTOR designed to run for hours on end in meetings and peoples' homes, on ANY mode. If it had been bad to keep that many diodes in that close a proximity then they wouldn't have done it or there would have been tons of reports of dead projectors...it's simple when you think about it, these weren't put in any danger by moving them FARTHER from a serious heat source and leaving the fans running when it was designed to run NEXT to the heatsink of a rather formidable TEC. Don't link to more .pdfs from Nichia.

In the projector the LD's are not exposed to non AR coated plastic, smoke, popcans, acrylic screwdriver handles, etc.

Back reflection is a known problem in laser diodes >fact<

He admitted running out of econo mode (projectors max rating),
providing no data from before or after to PROVE the LDs suffered "no damage"
then proceeded to ship them to customers in his group buy as NEW diodes.

This was not testing, it was abusing his position of the GB runner, and taking
members money without them having prior knowledge of what he did with these LD's.

He did not get a group permission to mess with their diodes, he assumes no damage
of any sort took place, cannot prove that, but continues to state it, and is wrong for
doing so.

They were behind the knife-edging array, it's not as if he just stuck random objects up against the diode array and went to town.

wannaburn said:

In the projector the LD's are not exposed to non AR coated plastic, smoke, popcans, acrylic screwdriver handles, etc.

Back reflection is a known problem in laser diodes >fact<

He admitted running out of econo mode (projectors max rating),
providing no data from before or after to PROVE the LDs suffered "no damage"
then proceeded to ship them to customers in his group buy as NEW diodes.

This was not testing, it was abusing his position of the GB runner, and taking
members money without them having prior knowledge of what he did with these LD's.

He did not get a group permission to mess with their diodes, he assumes no damage
of any sort took place, cannot prove that, but continues to state it, and is wrong for
doing so.

Click to expand...

Fact- the projector lenses are non-AR coated. You can confirm that with Jayrob if you wish.

Fact- the diodes were behind a beam-combining/focusing lens.

Fact- the diodes were run using the projector drivers on the projector's current setting.

Fact- the diodes are tested at the factory, inside the projector.

The end result? The lenses themselves pose more of a risk of reflection than whatever was being burnt. The diodes were behind TWO lenses, protecting them from any smoke or contaminants. The diodes were also run at a current chosen by the projector- if it was detrimental to projector life it would never have been chosen. The diode array would also have been tested at the factory. Does the 'damage' to the diodes then and there get factored in, or are we playing 'bash pontiacg5 as much as we can'?


EDIT: 589 posts

EDIT 2: 589nm is indeed DPSS SHG, not SFG. Also, I have included a picture below of a 589nm VESCEL.

Prototype said:

They were behind the knife-edging array, it's not as if he just stuck random objects up against the diode array and went to town.

Click to expand...

Are you serious??

Thats precisely what he did WITH OTHER PEOPLES PROPERTY.. fak.

You are presenting the same moot points as pontiac.

Seeing as you are also so sure 'that no damage occurred', can you
point me to this data?

-What was the temp of the array outside of the projector away from the
high CFM fans?
-What is the temp inside the projector while powered in its full mode??
-What is the cutoff temp vs the absolute max rating for these diodes running at full??
-What was the power of each LD's in mW PRIOR to his activities?
-What was the subsequent mW ratings at the same current and temp after?
-where are the 24 members who are satisfied with their possibly degraded LD's,
who paid full price for NEW LD's AS STATED IN THE GB????????????

-Where is this data?????

-Do you feel that it is right for GB runners to PLAY rather than essential test
and verify working LD's???

-Would you spend full price to receive diodes that were potentially damaged???????

-Are you one of these GB participants who have one of these diodes???????

-Would you recommend to other members that they pay FULL price for used diodes
sold as new???????

I mean come on, this was about principal, and how MEMBERS on this forum were
treated, then he has the audacity to start the same debate in another thread
when this was all discussed before.

This is entertaining to say the least, and I can only apologize to the OP for this trainwreck
of a thread, where 2 trolls (TJ and pntiac) decided to drag their crap in.

Pathetic.

wannaburn said:

Are you serious??

Thats precisely what he did WITH OTHER PEOPLES PROPERTY.. fak.

You are presenting the same moot points as pontiac.

Seeing as you are also so sure 'that no damage occurred', can you
point me to this data?

-What was the temp of the array outside of the projector away from the
high CFM fans?
-What is the temp inside the projector while powered in its full mode??
-What is the cutoff temp vs the absolute max rating for these diodes running at full??
-What was the power of each LD's in mW PRIOR to his activities?
-What was the subsequent mW ratings at the same current and temp after?
-where are the 24 members who are satisfied with their possibly degraded LD's,
who paid full price for NEW LD's AS STATED IN THE GB????????????

-Where is this data?????

-Do you feel that it is right for GB runners to PLAY rather than essential test
and verify working LD's???

-Would you spend full price to receive diodes that were potentially damaged???????

-Are you one of these GB participants who have one of these diodes???????

-Would you recommend to other members that they pay FULL price for used diodes
sold as new???????

I mean come on, this was about principal, and how MEMBERS on this forum were
treated, then he has the audacity to start the same debate in another thread
when this was all discussed before.

This is entertaining to say the least, and I can only apologize to the OP for this trainwreck
of a thread, where 2 trolls (TJ and pntiac) decided to drag their crap in.

Pathetic.

Click to expand...

Fact- the projector lenses are non-AR coated. You can confirm that with Jayrob if you wish.

Fact- the diodes were behind a beam-combining/focusing lens.

Fact- the diodes were run using the projector drivers on the projector's current setting.

Fact- the diodes are tested at the factory, inside the projector.

The end result? The lenses themselves pose more of a risk of reflection than whatever was being burnt. The diodes were behind TWO lenses, protecting them from any smoke or contaminants. The diodes were also run at a current chosen by the projector- if it was detrimental to projector life it would never have been chosen. The diode array would also have been tested at the factory. Does the 'damage' to the diodes then and there get factored in, or are we playing 'bash pontiacg5 as much as we can'?

Click to expand...

I'm pretty goddamn sure if any of the people had complaints they could choose to opt out of the GB, and pontiacg5 would issue a full refund.

Happy customers say a lot more than skeptics.

goninanbl00d said:

I'm pretty goddamn sure if any of the people had complaints they could choose to opt out of the GB, and pontiacg5 would issue a full refund.

Happy customers say a lot more than skeptics.

Click to expand...

This is pointless...

I did not start this in this thread. These were my questions / concerns for people spending their cash..In the appropriate thread might I add.

Like I said, there is no way to determine if any damage was done. All im saying is that it is possible, and undetectable considering no data was recorded in the first place.

Selling things as new when there are other members who sell the same LD's quickly tested and right out of the projectors. Not fetured in lazor youtube vids and sold as new..

Find the other thread, read it. Im not going to continue to argue and have to type the same shit over and over when it has all been discussed before in the appropriate thread.

wannaburn said:

This is pointless...

I did not start this in this thread. These were my questions / concerns for people spending their cash..In the appropriate thread might I add.

Like I said, there is no way to determine if any damage was done. All im saying is that it is possible, and undetectable considering no data was recorded in the first place.

Selling things as new when there are other members who sell the same LD's quickly tested and right out of the projectors. Not fetured in lazor youtube vids and sold as new..

Find the other thread, read it. Im not going to continue to argue and have to type the same shit over and over when it has all been discussed before in the appropriate thread.

Click to expand...

Most of us refuse to type out 'the same shit over and over' as well. Except the whole time you have insisted to drag pontiacg5 through the mud. Why? For no other reason than out of spite.

The buyers knew what they were getting. I have seen the other thread. People who wanted out could get a refund. They knew that their diodes had been 'used' by pontiacg5.

Now- explain to me how testing the diodes out of the projector would be any different from using the diodes to burn. In both cases the diodes are run out of the projector, using the same lenses, at the same power levels.

goninanbl00d said:

Now- explain to me how testing the diodes out of the projector would be any different from using the diodes to burn. In both cases the diodes are run out of the projector, using the same lenses, at the same power levels.

Click to expand...

Other GB runners / sellers of these LD's power up the array in econo mode (default) which means the lowest power to the LD's that the projector performs at.

Other sellers and GB runners power the array, look for dead LD's, shut it off and extract, package and sell.

I have answered your questions in the other thread, and it is apparent you have indeed NOT read it, or you would not be asking the SAME questions that have already been asked by others.

seriously mmkay..

wannaburn said:

Other GB runners / sellers of these LD's power up the array in econo mode (default) which means the lowest power to the LD's that the projector performs at.

Other sellers and GB runners power the array, look for dead LD's, shut it off and extract, package and sell.

I have answered your questions in the other thread, and it is apparent you have indeed NOT read it, or you would not be asking the SAME questions that have already been asked by others.

seriously mmkay..

Click to expand...

Congratulations on contradicting yourself. I haven't even POSTED in the other thread. So how can you answer my questions if I haven't asked them?

Also, if the high-powered mode was indeed detrimental to the life of the diodes, I'm pretty damn sure that the Casio engineers would not have included it.

goninanbl00d said:

Congratulations on contradicting yourself. I haven't even POSTED in the other thread. So how can you answer my questions if I haven't asked them?

Also, if the high-powered mode was indeed detrimental to the life of the diodes, I'm pretty damn sure that the Casio engineers would not have included it.

Click to expand...

Derr, the same questions ASKED BY OTHERS... you really dont read, just post I guess..

Detrimental is the POSSIBILITY here, with no data to confirm HIS CLAIMS that it DID NOT DAMAGE... english??

The engineers im sure did not intend for the array to be run outside the projector after defeating the ENGINEERS implemented switch on the access panel to the array, and be run outside and AWAY from the >3< high power COOLING fans..

Again, are you serious?

:horse:

wannaburn said:

Derr, the same questions ASKED BY OTHERS... you really dont read, just post I guess..

Detrimental is the POSSIBILITY here, with no data to confirm HIS CLAIMS that it DID NOT DAMAGE... english??

The engineers im sure did not intend for the array to be run outside the projector after defeating the ENGINEERS implemented switch on the access panel to the array, and be run outside and AWAY from the >3< high power COOLING fans..

Again, are you serious?

:horse:

Click to expand...

Oh, yes, I am serious.

Unlike what your pathetically tiny brain thinks, my English is fine. You started this whole shitstorm, and I don't see why you shouldn't answer the questions personally. Why should I have to read through your senseless trolling if I want to find answers to something you started? If you think you can start this and creep away from it like a yellow-bellied coward, sorry, but it doesn't work that way.

I have records of the -rep, saved for your posterity.



Also, I left your past out of the discussion, purely out of respect for you, which you quite clearly have proven incapable of showing anyone else here. I thought you would know better, and I did not bring up what had happened in the past. Don't think I didn't do a quick search- your past stays with you. Despite that, I chose to ignore that, and what Prototype and pontiacg5 had said about you, and make up my own mind. I should have listened to what they told me, it'd have made no difference with some lying coward who hides behind the Rep system.

Turns out it's no surprise you were banned from the forum. Not only is having multiple accounts here against the TOS, deliberately inflating prices to catch less-informed buyers is frowned upon here. Although you may call it 'business', business does have it's limits, and where people like yourself have overstepped the thin blue line, it is not taken lightly at all.

It's no surprise either that you reacted adversity to Tech_Junkie. Why? Because what he had said was true. Everyone here's been trolled by T_J, and it's often an amusing experience at that, and it's one of the things that make Tech_Junkie himself.

Except what he had said was true, and quite obviously, you didn't take the truth too well did you? And when you were losing the very 'sh!t' that you'd started, you decided to quietly disappear by blaming it on Prototype and pontiacg5? Is the best you can do- come along, threadjack a perfectly good thread, start an argument, then blame it on two other people who had absolutely nothing to do with starting the argument? It was your fault, you started it, and it is you who should be sorry, not anybody else.

You didn't want them to find out about your past, did you? Now that it's gotten out, the first thing you can do is try to make pontiacg5 look bad so you can draw attention away from yourself. You're only digging yourself deeper and deeper into a cesspit. Better stop now and apologize to Prototype and pontiacg5 while you still have the chance.

As for the diodes, have you got any data to say that it did indeed do damage? Your claim goes both ways. Everyone who've received one of these diodes have reported no abnormalities, power loss, or sudden diode death (as was the case with one of scopeguy20's diodes, which was tested as you described).

So, should I let loose at scopeguy20 (doing what you are doing to pontiacg5) and accuse him of selling crap diodes that LED after a few seconds?

Give up. The community hates you. Even Tech_Junkie hates you, and that's saying something. Go back to scamming people on eBay in the name of 'business' if it makes you feel any better about your pathetic self.