American E-Liquid Manufacturers' Standards Association launches

[oldsoldier]

I am going to make a suggestion here that you simply step back and take a break from this thread. Your righteous indignation here is just as disruptive as bad information.

 

[6pointprime]

I am going to make a suggestion here that you simply step back and take a break from this thread. Your righteous indignation here is just as disruptive as bad information.

Thanks for your opinion.

 

[Quick1]

I would think the Last Thing that the ECF would want to do is Become a Moderator of Questions between AEMSA and ECF Members.

One of the things I Respect most about the ECF is that they Strive to Stay out of Controversy instead of Trying to Sway Members towards a Side or Position. They merely provide a place for e-Cigarette related Topics to be Discussed.

This Thread is a Great Example of Providing just such a Platform for Discussion.

Right. I wasn't suggesting they get involved in the "controversy" (interesting choice of words?). As for resources, maybe just resources for an hour or two.
Yes, this thread is a great platform for discussion. But do not expect AEMSA to fully engage in this context.
It seems they are responding to emails (Meli, did you try that? or do you require a public stage) but everybody doesn't get to see everybody else's emails.

I frequent a car forum(s) focused on a particular manufacturer's performance platform. Some of the engineers within the manufacturer's performance division agreed to interact directly with the forum members. Naturally since they represent the manufacturer there had to be preset conditions. Things like "We will not comment on any future products or directions that have not been publicly announced". Stuff like that. So the forum set up a "chat" session. A sub forum was opened at a designated time and members could start "posting" questions and comments. Posting wasn't directly to the thread but analogous to time delayed. Posts were first cursorily reviewed by forum moderators then by the participating engineers. The engineers would then post selected questions along with their response. Forum moderators would filter posts like "I think you guys are completely incompetent with no prior experience. When will you shoot yourselves?". It was not an efficient use of their time for the handful of engineers to filter/review 100's of questions a minute so the forum moderators did a very rough cut on those where there was no question. Obviously they couldn't look at everything either but it did give the engineers a much higher signal to noise allowing the session to be much more productive. Session(s) lasted about an hour at which time the resulting thread was closed and kept. Worked really well.

It was just a suggestion in response to:
1) those who don't want to email AEMSA directly and feel the need for a public stage.
2) With direct emails AEMSA is probably answering (or not) a lot of identical questions over and over so this would scale better.
3) With media interviews it's only the interviewer's questions that get covered so it's is broader than that.

We do not wish to become a filter for questions submitted to AEMSA. This would be a conflict of interest and take up way too much of our time. We do hope that it grows and becomes a viable organization for furthering the "good" of vaping. Only time will tell.

I was thinking of "filtering" as what you do for forum posts now (maybe a bit more attention to off topic or inappropriate).

 

[Ceegary]

It wasn't presented as a fact, it was a question based on what occurred. I know nothing for or against the question, nor do I claim to. Watch that part yourself, I found it strange and raised the question as to why? There could be a number of reasons and I'd be open to hearing them.

I also do find it strange that they make a big splash on ECF and then take everything to email. It may be construed as more effective communication but it can also be construed as avoiding the public spotlight.

 

[oldsoldier]

It wasn't presented as a fact, it was a question based on what occurred. I know nothing for or against the question, nor do I claim to. Watch that part yourself, I found it strange and raised the question as to why? There could be a number of reasons and I'd be open to hearing them.

I also do find it strange that they make a big splash on ECF and then take everything to email. It may be construed as more effective communication but it can also be construed as avoiding the public spotlight.

Actually It was SmokeyJoe that brought them to the attention of ECF members in the InfoZone and in this thread. Their choice of responding through email is really their prerogative, and in a way it makes complete sense since it centralizes all questions and makes them easier to track/consider/respond. I don't think you can honestly accuse them of avoiding the public spotlight considering that they have made themselves available on several live shows.

 

[kwalka]

Actually It was SmokeyJoe that brought them to the attention of ECF members in the InfoZone and in this thread. Their choice of responding through email is really their prerogative, and in a way it makes complete sense since it centralizes all questions and makes them easier to track/consider/respond. I don't think you can honestly accuse them of avoiding the public spotlight considering that they have made themselves available on several live shows.

Also it would be suicide for them to try and take part in this thread with all the different opinions and interpretations of people's points. There is way too much going on in here for any one to respond constructively regarding there specific positions. They would need a full time member just to keep up.

 

[6pointprime]

There could be a number of reasons

Indeed, there could. The reason you hypothesized was that it was because a particular eliquid manufacturer who is a member of AEMSA receives a special discount.

Fair enough, I suppose you are entitled to your own opinion.

 

[Ceegary]

Yes, but email and the shows are pretty much a controlled environment while this board isn't. I guess that's why some of us love it and others stay away.

Actually It was SmokeyJoe that brought them to the attention of ECF members in the InfoZone and in this thread. Their choice of responding through email is really their prerogative, and in a way it makes complete sense since it centralizes all questions and makes them easier to track/consider/respond. I don't think you can honestly accuse them of avoiding the public spotlight considering that they have made themselves available on several live shows.

 

[cozzicon]

Yes, but email and the shows are pretty much a controlled environment while this board isn't. I guess that's why some of us love it and others stay away.

We don't filter or exclude *any* opinion... we'll pickup questions form the chat, you can call in, we only ask that rough language be left out so we can be distributed everywhere.

Just felt the need to say this because we don't control each other's opinions either.

That's also true, of many other shows.

 

[Ceegary]

Shows are good, but they also sometimes open other questions and stimulate ongoing dialogue.

 

[6pointprime]

We don't filter or exclude *any* opinion... we'll pickup questions form the chat, you can call in, we only ask that rough language be left out so we can be distributed everywhere.

Just felt the need to say this because we don't control each other's opinions either.

That's also true, of many other shows.

Agreed Cozz. The two broadcasts that covered this that I saw were Vapeteam and Vapelink. Both shows allowed full, unscripted participation from community members. I have not seen other shows, but I suspect they had a very similar environment. I was co-hosting the Vapeteam broadcast, and I saw the phone switchboard. Every single call was answered, and all callers had their points addressed, no matter how negative the caller was towards AEMSA.

To call this, or the Vapelink broadcast a "controlled environment" is an abject falsehood.

 

[Ceegary]

The questions certainly were handled well. However the first parts can be labelled controlled by the way questions were posed to them.

 

[SissySpike]

I think as long as AEMSA stays trans parent and focused on its main objectives it can do some good but when it becomes just another regulatory bureaucracy such a OSHA EMSHA ect and it loses touch with reality it becomes more harm than good. It happens time and time again these things start out with good intentions great ideas but at some point they become uncontrollable monsters!
I have no Idea of how to safe guard that. To me its seems when the insurance company's start sticking their fingers in it is when things start going to hell.
It will be interesting to watch this thing grow and see where it leads, I my self have volunteered for a position as I would rather be a participant than a watcher.

 

[zoiDman]

...
It will be interesting to watch this thing grow and see where it leads, ...

I think this is Something that we All can Agree On.

 

[Agorizer]

<snip> That's like not fully approving of the candidate your political party chose to run for president, so you vote for the guy from the opposing party, who doesn't share ANY of your beliefs or ideals. "No evil" is not one of the choices anymore.

No Evil is always a choice. It's called the non-aggression principle. If "both" "candidates" support aggression, I'll support neither.

I'm in. <SNIP> We could loose it all. Remember, don't forget to vote, it's your rights or you don't have the right to complain.......

I've come to believe that that old saw is absolutely backwards: If I accept the rules of the political "game", then do I have a right to flip over the board if I lose? If I perceive the game to be rigged, do I not have the right to not only refuse to play, but to point out that the game is rigged?

"Regulation" is when the government mandates that you to do something by signing laws that are backed by the threat of using guns to make you comply.

"Self-Regulation" is when a group of people voluntarily assemble and make a set of rules for their organization that they all agree to. There is no State, there is no threat of the use of guns for non-compliance.

Amen. And when the "self regulators" petition the guys with guns to apply the "Regulations" in a "kinder, gentler" way to THEM, it's called regulatory capture; and is exactly how Regulations always end up working---if they work at all.

<snip>
My advice? Read for yourself and make decisions based on what you read. There is nothing that can replace excercising your own due diligence.

Great advice. Too bad we all can't advocate for that, and tell the ANTZ and gov't. bullies to hit the bricks.

I'm not so comatose to political realities and the efficacy of the fear tactics that statists use (but I repeat myself) to believe that the state won't try to greatly curtail our chosen recreational pastime. I will, however, advocate for what I want--to be left alone--rather than what I think is achievable.
Luck to AEMSA and its members. Peace and Freedom to us all.

 

[kingcobra]

Well, that's part of the whole thing, in that they will never finalize.
Their standards are a living, breathing document subject to change, which is a good thing.

What we need to do is watch their process.
We need to watch how they listen, what they hear, and how they react.

If we can start to trust the process, maybe we can start to trust how this will all evolve.

I think "affect" is the better of those two, meaning to influence. Even better is "infect" which is actually a perfect way to describe this nonsense.

 

[meli.]

AEMSA requested ECF to be give them a platform to make Their announcement.
It took ECF 36 Hours to decide on how to approach this.
How ECF chose to disseminate such information isn't in dispute.

AEMSA used this Medium in order to gain Publicity for their Venture.
AEMSA used this Public Stage to Stage their Public Venture.
AEMSA have not openly requested that should the ECF Community have any concerns or questions to please E-mail them directly rather than Use this Thread.
AEMSA have previously posted in This thread and have stated they will respond in this thread.
It seems as this thread has subsequently Fulfilled its Purpose and Publicised AEMSA, and it seems AEMSA feel they are no longer required or interested in answering questions on ECF, the same Community that AEMSA have requested to Support them.

No one has asked hard, complicated or sensitive questions yet an Association which is trying to gain Trust and show Integrity and Transparency whilst Ignoring the same Stage and Community they used to launch seems somewhat at odds with itself.

Instead of which we are faced with self appointed spokespersons suggesting and presuming to answer for AEMSA when such persons hold no position in the Association.

 

[6pointprime]

AEMSA have not openly requested that should the ECF Community have any concerns or questions to please E-mail them directly rather than Use this Thread.

Yes they did. See post #686:

Any US e-liquid manufacturer may apply.
Contact Us | AEMSA

This contact form can also be used as the general contact.

Thanks,
Scott

As you can see, information can get lost in a fast moving thread. Just like you missed this information and made an incorrect statement about this point, so could an important question made by someone get lost.

You can email them and share your experience in the thread, just as other ECF users have done very recently.

we are faced with self appointed spokespersons suggesting and presuming to answer for AEMSA when such persons hold no position in the Association.

I am not suggesting or presuming anything. Rather, I simply read what they wrote and re-shared the information to address incorrect statements that are being made, such as the one I just identified that you made.

I hope that was of assistance to you.

 

[meli.]

6pointprime thank you for your Liberal Interpretation of the post #686 however I cannot find where it states 'We will Only respond to emailed questions'

 

[Quick1]

6pointprime thank you for your Liberal Interpretation of the post #686 however I cannot find where it states 'We will Only respond to emailed questions'

What was their response when you emailed them?