Even Engadget website got news on e cig - Page 2 - e-cigarette-forum.com • The place for electronic cigarette reviews, news and chat

Rorschach · 09-22-2008, 03:06 PM

*guilty of being off-topic*

Puresmoker states it too in his FAQ
PureSmoker.com - Your #1 Source For ECigs, Parts, & Accessories!

trog100 · 09-22-2008, 03:07 PM

not a lot dude except most of us have read the WHO stuff already and the intellicig is prominently linked to..

threads often go off course.. being as this one didnt offer much we havnt seen already i see no problem..

a nice case of "defection" thow.. i deflect the thread u deflect the name brand "how many puffs per atomizer" issue.. he he

it was a gentle prod i though u might respond to.. perhaps i shouldnt have made it.. he he

trog

leaford · 09-22-2008, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kit

leaford who ever completely sticks to the threads subject!
we are all guilty of this.

C'mon, this isn't a case of one topic leading to another; there was no mention of intellicig, atomizer life, or anything similar. It's not a response to anything that was mentioned before.

It's just a total non-sequitor.

leaford · 09-22-2008, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by trog100

not a lot dude except most of us have read the WHO stuff already and the intellicig is prominently linked to..

Prominentyl linked to? Where? Not in the Engadget article. Not in this thread. I have no idea what you mean.

Quote:

Originally Posted by trog100

threads often go off course.. being as this one didnt offer much we havnt seen already i see no problem..

No problem. I just don't see any reason to post this here. Start a new thread.

Quote:

Originally Posted by trog100

a nice case of "defection" thow.. i deflect the thread u deflect the name brand "how many puffs per atomizer" issue.. he he

it was a gentle prod i though u might respond to.. perhaps i shouldnt have made it.. he he

trog

Why should I respond? I'm not an e-cig manufacturer. I don't have the information you want. I have no position on how many puffs an atomizer should last for. This has nothing to do with me.

You want my response? My response is, "That's nice to know. It would be better in it's own thread."

Kate · 09-22-2008, 04:43 PM

This is at least the fourth thread Trog has hijacked recently to - in my opinion - deliberately try to start fights on the forum.

leaford · 09-22-2008, 04:49 PM

Why would I fight over that? I have no argument with Trog asking manufacturers how long their atomizers last. I have no argument with their response. I ain't got no dog in this race.

It just seemed like a totally random place to post the info.

Kate · 09-22-2008, 04:50 PM

I think he's lost the plot myself.

dc2k08 · 09-22-2008, 06:17 PM

anyways, anyone know of a ec seller/manufacturer that is associating their product with WHO's logos etc? cant think of one off hand.

TropicalBob · 09-22-2008, 06:25 PM

I have seen numerous Web references that say our practice complies with WHO's "step down" way of smoking cessation. I'm sure at least one site popped up a WHO logo. Dumb. ALL references to smoking cessation need removal. It's waving a red flag at a bull that just spotted us. There are some really unsupported claims on some Web sites. Future trouble.

trog100 · 09-22-2008, 07:06 PM

the WHO are simply saying e smoking does not as yet have their blessing.. and disassociating themselves from claims that suggest it does have their blessing..

it can be used as a "step down method" to stop smoking.. it could also be used to create a whole new bunch of nicotine addicts.. or "worse"..

its a self contained battery powered drug delivery system.. the powers that be are bound to get their knickers in a twist over such a thing..

and whilst as yet it isnt proven to be unsafe.. it also aint proven to be safe either.. but being as its out loose in the wild its not gonna be easy for officialdom to stop it..

they say the police objected to henry ford putting rear view mirrors on cars cos the criminals could see the coppers sneaking up on em..

CB radio was attacked in pretty much the same way.. criminals could plan and coordinate their crimes with them..

e smoking will get attacked in pretty much the same way when they get around to it.. mainly because of its ability to create new "addicts"..

but new technology comes along just like the H bomb came along.. once invented it cant be un-invented.. we have to learn to live with it.. including governments..

trog

09-22-2008, 03:06 PM	#11
Rorschach ECF Veteran Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: New York, NY Posts: 522	guilty of being off-topic Puresmoker states it too in his FAQ PureSmoker.com - Your #1 Source For ECigs, Parts, & Accessories! __________________ The world will look up and shout "Save us!"... And I'll whisper "No."

09-22-2008, 04:49 PM	#16
leaford Supplier/ECF Veteran Join Date: May 2008 Location: San Francisco, CA USA Posts: 3,043 Blog Entries: 4	Why would I fight over that? I have no argument with Trog asking manufacturers how long their atomizers last. I have no argument with their response. I ain't got no dog in this race. It just seemed like a totally random place to post the info. __________________ New VP of Product Development at www.Vapor4Life.com, author of E-Cigarette Review and Advice Blog www.E-Smoker-Forever.com, and creator of The Leaford Lanyard. Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known. – Carl Sagan, 1934 – 1996

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

09-22-2008, 03:07 PM	#12
trog100 Banned Join Date: May 2008 Location: UK Posts: 3,284	not a lot dude except most of us have read the WHO stuff already and the intellicig is prominently linked to.. threads often go off course.. being as this one didnt offer much we havnt seen already i see no problem.. a nice case of "defection" thow.. i deflect the thread u deflect the name brand "how many puffs per atomizer" issue.. he he it was a gentle prod i though u might respond to.. perhaps i shouldnt have made it.. he he trog

09-22-2008, 04:43 PM	#15
Kate Moved On Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: UK Posts: 7,355	This is at least the fourth thread Trog has hijacked recently to - in my opinion - deliberately try to start fights on the forum.

09-22-2008, 04:50 PM	#17
Kate Moved On Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: UK Posts: 7,355	I think he's lost the plot myself.

09-22-2008, 06:17 PM	#18
dc2k08 4mer 4um Addict Join Date: May 2008 Location: .ie Posts: 1,815 Tweet this post!	anyways, anyone know of a ec seller/manufacturer that is associating their product with WHO's logos etc? cant think of one off hand.

09-22-2008, 06:25 PM	#19
TropicalBob ECF Veteran Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Port Charlotte, FL USA Posts: 5,076	I have seen numerous Web references that say our practice complies with WHO's "step down" way of smoking cessation. I'm sure at least one site popped up a WHO logo. Dumb. ALL references to smoking cessation need removal. It's waving a red flag at a bull that just spotted us. There are some really unsupported claims on some Web sites. Future trouble.

09-22-2008, 07:06 PM	#20
trog100 Banned Join Date: May 2008 Location: UK Posts: 3,284	the WHO are simply saying e smoking does not as yet have their blessing.. and disassociating themselves from claims that suggest it does have their blessing.. it can be used as a "step down method" to stop smoking.. it could also be used to create a whole new bunch of nicotine addicts.. or "worse".. its a self contained battery powered drug delivery system.. the powers that be are bound to get their knickers in a twist over such a thing.. and whilst as yet it isnt proven to be unsafe.. it also aint proven to be safe either.. but being as its out loose in the wild its not gonna be easy for officialdom to stop it.. they say the police objected to henry ford putting rear view mirrors on cars cos the criminals could see the coppers sneaking up on em.. CB radio was attacked in pretty much the same way.. criminals could plan and coordinate their crimes with them.. e smoking will get attacked in pretty much the same way when they get around to it.. mainly because of its ability to create new "addicts".. but new technology comes along just like the H bomb came along.. once invented it cant be un-invented.. we have to learn to live with it.. including governments.. trog