Mistake Correction Explanation
Recently I posted some comments within this thread which created a fuss. Upon re-reading these I observe that they are far too ambiguous and vague and as a result can read to appear to be rude and unhelpful. This is far from my intention. I will now try to take steps of correcting this matter.
Below I will re-post the comments with suitable explanation, amended as necessary and with appropriate disclaimer, away from the posts about the design of the light and charging system. Text specific to the light and charging, I’ll copy re-edited in follow-on post to keep that separate.
I wish to be as helpful as possible, but equally; do not feel it a good thing for posts or comments amongst adults to be nuked for putative Orwellian wrong-think or wrong-speak. Ideally; if a post is not spam and a problem is politely brought to the attention of person(s) concerned, they are going to want to re-edit posts themselves. This should hopefully make the forum run smoother.
When writing for too long, too late and too tired one is apt to make mistakes…
The charging port should be MAGNETIC!
- Probably won’t be as the remit of this project would view that as an extra expense.
- Probably won’t be as the added cost increase would place it outside of a practical manufacturing price.
N.B. Somehow there persists a gross lack of respect unto elders which permeates much thinking in the west. The elderly are too often seen as charity cases; if they are poor in their old age it is their own bloody fault and they’re obliged to be grateful for crumbs.
This comment was tacked on as an afterthought to an otherwise coherent discussion about magnetic charging. It is me voicing my opinions about provisioning for the elderly in general. Although I still stand by the comment, it should not have been placed where it was.
If they are read as an attack upon the OP they do indeed appear very highly rude. It was not my intention to appear to focus on the OP.
These comments were general and none were intended to be specific about BLF or any member. I have considered this until now much more of a group project with a shared responsibility so attacks are not seen as criticisms of any one person /people.
The view point is now revised that it is less of a group project than perhaps originally thought and my comments should be suitably amended to reflect the shift.
Basically; the manufacturing / pricing constraints are far more real on this light than on say BLF GT and thus different to what I’d originally imagined. Negotiations for with the manufacturer are hard won, so it is not fair to write so as to leave open the suggestion of responsibility for penny-pinching.
I might have come across as sounding callous and dismissive about the abilities the elderly, and therefore by extension also appearing disrespectful unto the relatives of forum members. The reason behind the critical approach was or is to stress-test the design requirements of the potential future design of the light by deliberately assuming absolute worst-case operating conditions ahead of what such a design might actually expect to encounter in practice.
That means challenging the participants to envisage the most decrepit senior-citizen; the least motivated, the least bright, least technically provisioned, etc. But it may suggest I was being crass wanton provocative or bad-mouthing other people’s relatives! I hope it is not seen that way.
Remember Kids: If they are POOR by time they are OLD they SCREWED UP and deserve it.
Please note that this is intended as a joke, to add some levity to an otherwise heavy topic and above all -to make people ponder how they individually might wish to price lights. Any sentence that begins: ‘Remember Kids…’ -is not to be taken too seriously!
As this thread progressed it has become clearer that the design of the light is not intended first and foremost to be a leading offering for the elderly /disabled. Rather, it will likely cover some of those requirements by way of overlap. Therefore; now I am not obliged to stress the needs of towards older people, in the way that I did previously.
The light I now treat as conceptually being sort of a reluctant-spouses light. RS; or ring-switched if you prefer! Blf-RS. Anyway, that to is a perfectly valid use-case where luxury of magnetic charging is not critical and I wish it every success.