Results from Beta Testers of New Formulas

4Yanx,

I read through the entire thread in some detail. Your interest in the topic is obvious and in playing devil's advocate perhaps was meant to stimulate more discussion, BUT your tone is antagonistic and uncalled for. If you developed a formula that you intended on marketing, would you go into any detail as to the composition? Intellectual property is always closely guarded, it's the differentiator that makes your customers buy your product over a competing product (or simply copying your invention).

I don't have a degree in chemistry and certainly don't work in the field myself; as such I rely on what I hear rather than speculate on how or why the fluid does what it does. I've tried Paul's two step process and it works very well. Paul was kind enough to send me some samples, that's the extent of my stake in this whole thing. I also know that Paul went to one helluva lot of trouble to put together a system for a girl that was paralyzed when hit by a drunk driver. Many folks here chipped in with gear and whatnot, but Paul put a ton of time and effort in helping out Leslie. I really doubt you'll gain a lot of points with people on the 'Gon for taking potshots at a truly stand-up guy.

At the end of the day an informed opinion is what counts. Take Paul up on his offer, try out the stuff and report on your findings. Costs you nothing and all of us will certainly listen to what you have to say.

4Yanx,

Like I said... I'm no chemist so whatever answers or explanations a developer would provide would be meaningless to me anyway. I would imagine that would apply to you as well, although as you pointed out in your rant you have some active interest in the area so perhaps you're better informed than the rest of us. It's certainly obvious you have a burning desire to be right about this issue. I tried the stuff and it works well, as for any long term effects I'll have to monitor the records and see if there are any untoward changes. The records I used the two-step process on were lost causes and they sound very good now, so what's to lose? I view this as a pleasant hobby, not something to get all worked up about.

Viggen,

You can point to all sorts of empirical data and testimonials that are often touted by PhD's but frankly I'm in no position to evaluate the validity of the claims. Since I'm far from being an expert in such things I am quite willing to give something a try, especially if the records are considered lost causes. Call me lazy if you will but I don't have a clue what's in the Record Research fluid I use either. No idea at all. Zilch. Nada. I'm totally clueless. The RRL fluid was recommended to me, I tried it out, and I'm quite happy with the results. Paul's stuff seems to restore records that I thought I'd have to junk, even after careful cleaning with RRL. If over time there's no apparent donwside to using Paul's cleaning fluid then I'll expand the use of it. My point to all this: why not approach this with an open mind, and why would anyone dismiss the product without trying it out? End of my contribution to the thread, there's certainly more important and interesting things to worry about. Remember folks, this hobby is supposed to be fun.