Exploding mods: the feedback thread

[jj2]

You can put out all the warnings you want. You can title the posts in BIG RED LETTERS and sticky them at the beginning of every post but that doesn’t mean all will read.

My advice, to be able to join ECF a battery safety is a must read. To get into the Modder’s section the first time, safety should be required reading. Make up a questionnaire that the reader has to answer several yes or no questions-the answer being obvious if they read the paragraph. Then at the end he/she has to agree to whatever terms/conditions/liability waiver you’ve deemed to implement.

mod vendors should have some kind of safety guidelines to follow and then have new customers fill out the same type thing as the above mentioned, and at the end it should state that the device has not been CE so purchaser is taking a personal risk.

 

[ejoker]

if i may, i understand the forum owners concerns here. and, while i think they are unfounded, they exist nonetheless. i also appreciate the concerns you have for the membership at large, myself included. i build my own mods, and have purchased a few commercial models, and i feel as safe using them as i do riding a motorcycle that i've worked on or walking under the ceiling lights i installed. note that i'm neither a battery expert, licensed mechanic nor trained electrician.

i am curious though about why would you only be concerned with mods? why not the suppliers/providers of 'stock' e-cigs? they don't have any safety features, except the cutoff. we have all read of incidents of both manuals and automatics going off in pockets. and as sure as a battery has 'blown up' in a chuck, the cutoff in the stocks will fail, and ...

and why not also include e-liquid? does ecf know for sure that each vendor's 24mg is actually 24mg, and not 50mg, resulting in overdose? does ecf know for sure that vendors who sell 'no pg base' don't have any pg at all in them? what about all the diy suppliers? is the ecf liable if a user mixes a 100mg concoction and overdoses?

again, i understand your concerns (and no, i'm not attorney but do own 3 small businesses and have consulted on similar scenarios), but i believe them to be unfounded.

it would be a sad day if ecf had to close down due to the costs of a lawsuit. but that could happen whether you have an approved mod list, a required safety feature for mods list, an approved supplier list, or just sell advertising space. nobody is bulletproof when it comes to litigation. what would be more sad, is if flocks of suppliers and members left due to any 'governing/controlling lists' and ecf had to close down as a result of that.

 

[SheerLuckHolmes]

In your long post you said, "What we need to do is make sure we don't get sued, and that people can make an informed choice on what to buy. Simple as that." Then reguested comments.

Then about 4 pages later you said, "If you are licensed to practice law in Illinois, or England, or Canada even - then I will listen carefully to your advice. Otherwise - please!"

Seems a bit dis-ingenuous to me, to ask for participation and then disrespect those that answered.

If you are 'simply' interested not getting sued, consult international legal advice, since this is an international forum.

Impliment the advice and let the forums get on with their discussions of the life saving innovation of e-cigs.

 

[Mister]

With e-cigs still in their infancy I do not think that useful standards or specifications can be created, nor is appropriate for ECF to do so. But I think there are a few things ECF can and should do:

1) Add an article to the library section regarding battery safety issues. More about this further down.

2) Add stickies in some appropriate places, especially the new members subforum, which define "battery mods" and recommend that users not purchase one without first reading the battery safety issues article.

3) Maybe, I'm not sure whether this suggestion is too draconian: Disallow (i.e. don't approve) any vendor who sells battery mods and does not provide appropriate cautions regarding battery purchase and charging issues with their product.

Defining battery mods seems like a useful starting point because that's when user knowledge becomes important. When a user buys an e-cig which only uses custom batteries made for that e-cig, we expect that the manufacturer has addressed safety issues and the user can't easily make a battery related mistake. A battery mod is a device where the user can replace the batteries and thus can make a mistake.

I think that the battery safety issues article needn't be long. I'm no expert but on reading the many recent posts about battery issues it seems to me that the issues a consumer should be aware of are clear. In particular:

1) If you don't want to be bothered with battery safety issues then only buy e-cig kits which come with matched atomizers, batteries, and chargers all manufactured to work together. Otherwise read on.

2) Be sure you are using rechargeable batteries and a charger which is approved for the specific batteries.

3) Rechargeable lithium ion batteries can explode due to sudden discharge and high heat. This risk can be reduced in a number of ways, e.g. protected batteries which include charge/discharge limiting circuitry in the battery, e-cigs which include similar circuitry in the e-cig, e-cigs which limit the on-time and/or operating temperature, e-cigs with vent holes to dissipate gases if an explosion does occur, e-cigs with override switches to prevent accidental activation, etc. Check how a battery mod is protected before purchasing and use it appropriately.

4) If a battery becomes hotter than normal discontinue use immediately and put it down away from anything it might harm while it cools down.

5) Using more than one battery in a device increases risk and the need for caution. (reference a good battery info site for technical details, the reasons for this being more complicated than most users will care about in this ECF article)

6) The larger the battery capacity, the greater the possible damage if it explodes.

7) Using a higher voltage than what an atomizer was designed for puts you into the "hobbyist" camp - you become responsible for your own safety if you do this.

 

[CatVTTV]

Can I just say, I welcome anything that will improve this fast growing, new industry.

Each day when I read these forums, I keep in mind that various 'powers that be' are also reading the same threads I am.

Here in the UK we have the problems with the MHRA, to whom many people have submitted that we as vapers, want to be self regulating. Those people, and various other interested parties, are reading this forum right now, they want to see if we as vapers can do that, and one of the main points is whether or not we as a unit are safety conscious.

I for one want to see that kite mark on my PV's ( CE ) as I am sure we all do, we all want our PV, whatever model we prefer, to be safe.

Remember, not all vapers sign into a forum, so not all vapers get to read the updates, the concerns etc., how do we protect them?

Well we do it, the same way other manufacturers do, we make it hard for them to get it wrong. We make it so that nothing will explode if a battery is put in upside down, after all, the vaper could be blind or have sight limitations. Im sure you all get what I am trying to say.

Those of you in the US have won the first battle in your war, but it is just the first battle, we have yet to win ours. We cannot take risks, we have to show unity and a sense of responsibility to all vapers, this industry is new, very new, and yes the juices have to be looked at, and currently moves are being made in that direction.

But there is a long way to go for that kite mark to appear on every PV and every bottle of juice, and I will support every practical and sensible pathway to see that happens.

 

[rolygate]

Some more replies, thanks for the comments.

@shelbee6478

Roly you say ECF does not want to be a governing body? IMO you are placing yourself in this position by making a standard. I know this that if you start approving mods you place yourself in the position to be sued. IMO if this is happens here you are no longer a discussion forum you have become a governing body. IMO this forum will suffer and so will the members of this community, we need safety but it is not the ECF's place to implement it if it chooses to remain a discussion board. JMO

OK. There are a number of possibilities.
(1) we have a short list of safety features that seem a good idea. That list is published on the site, and warnings are placed in areas where people have to read them. I hope this is as far as we will need to go.
(9) The legal people tell us that we have to prevent any mention of mods on ECF that do not incorporate those safety features. This would be a sad day and I think there will be a long way to go before we get to that.
(2) thru (8) I have no idea yet what could be done if (1) is not sufficient. That is what this debate is about.

What ECF will not do, I hope, is set up some sort of governing body because it's not feasible to do that. We cannot approve mods because it is not our place to do so, and liability may attend that process.

@CaSHMeRe

RolyGate - You're more concerned with getting sued...

As the site manager that's directly in my remit. Can't avoid it.

You are essentially trying to turn ECF in to a *governing body* Plain and Simple. Unless you want to put up the funding to have Non Partisan MSDS sheets pulled on everything, "appointing" a governing body of nobodies won't get you anywhere fast.

All we might have to do is look at if some mods are best not advertised on ECF. Since one or more have exploded in somebody's face, and there are numerous reports of other injuries such as burns, are you saying I should ignore this? Wow.

Have a lawyer re-write your T&C's, taking any and all liability away from ECF.

Already been advised that we cannot disclaim liability, Sir.

Put warning threads up in the necessary area's and leave it at that.

Yes, this is the preferred step I think.

You should be MORE concerned about the liquid being used, than the hardware.

Ah-hah. Perhaps we are.

5 or 10 cases of Venting/Exploding mods over the 15,000+ sold ... You are talking 0.1+% and at least 90% of those could be attributed to user neglect and/or error.

OK but just one blowup in someone's face might be one too many. Or how about a purse fire that burns down a house at night and kills a family? I'm not sure how you manage to ignore this possibility so easily - I can't.

@lightgeoduck

If what Rol has said that if you ask all the modders questions on the matter you will have just as many different answers,then that would lead me to believe that it would be an impossible task to regulate.... Wouldn't it just be either a back and forth on what is approved... or just a continual rejection of every new mod for one reason or another?

Very possibly. But I thought it best to put the option out there. One day modders will talk to each other about product standards, if all this makes it happen a bit sooner then it might have been worth it.

Wouldn't you lose a big chunk of your membership if we went this route? I mean I wouldn't want to browse the forum only to see "where can I get an ecig with a blue led" type threads.

Yep. Well let's hope it doesn't go that far.

I really think the warning is already out.. and no liability should be held....

But you are wrong here - the warning is not out until it is impossible for a person to buy a mod without seeing a safety warning. And as I said before, we have already been advised that if in fact ECF has any liability, we cannot disclaim it. An "It's not our responsibility" notice is apparently worthless. This isn't a car park.

If it wasn't for the forum... no one would have heard about the incident and got educated on the matter.

The implication being, we should have kept our trap shut? Yes, that was always an option. But who do you think comes out best from this: modders who refuse to admit there is a problem, do nothing about it, and continue to sell units that might explode; or us for fessing up and saying we were wrong to ignore this and we won't ignore it any longer?

More people will get hurt and we need to speak out. It's like some here can't even admit that their gear is injuring people. It's not all down to operator error, sorry.

@Ejoker

I am curious though about why would you only be concerned with mods? why not the suppliers/providers of 'stock' e-cigs? they don't have any safety features, except the cutoff. We have all read of incidents of both manuals and automatics going off in pockets.

OK. Firstly, they don't explode in peoples' faces. Many stock ecigs have various approvals, which mean they must have had some sort of testing - no mods ever had any as far as I've been told. The batteries are safer because they are all small, single units, low voltage, and protected. The units are designed to function as one complete interdependent tested unit, unlike mods, which are often ad hoc components that are overdriven. The switches in stock units appear to be up to the job, but some in mods appear under-rated. Stock units have some kind of manufacturer standing behind them; but if you tried to sue some mod makers, where would that get you? There are a lot of carry cases around for stock units. A carry case looks to be a fairly important item. How many mods have carry cases? Etc, etc.

Not individually compelling reasons perhaps but stock units are seen as generally safe, whereas mods are increasingly being seen as an unknown or potentially risky item.

.

 

[Drozd]

Here's my take on the situation..
First let's look at what the person who posted about this most recent incedent of his mod and the battery failure...
The User bought cheap batteries from a site that were neither advertised as protected or even rechargeable for that matter...
The site he got them for filled the order with a substitute that was also not advertised or labeled as protected or even rechargeable for that matter
The User chose to use them anyway and when they failed to fire he metered them and put them on a charger and took others of the same brand off a charger and attempted to use them...and continued to press the button when they weren't working properly..
(this is from his accounting in the thread he started on the incident..read it all yourself...he's quite clear about what he did and what he purchased and where)

So it was a series of poor choices made by the user.. adding a extra travel or kill switch wouldn't have prevented this incident...people will be stupid and manage to defeat or ignore safety features to have the ability to continue to be stupid...so requiring mods add superfluous features is just kinda dumb...

From my non-lawyer view...ECF as it stands is just a place for advertising and for manufacturers to anounce new products and stay in touch with their customers.. if they were to institute their safety specs and say that a mod must meet these safety specs to be advertised on ECF...THEN I see it as ECF essentually rubber stamping that mod as safe...and if it were to fail because someone was stupid..then I can totally see the argument "Well ECF said it was safe"...and would expect to see someone try to assign liability to ECF...

I'd rather see ECF remain solely a discussion and information forum..both good ideas and opinions and bad...it's neutral that way..

At most post links to battery university and some of the other battery safety links and sticky them...
Perhaps it would be nice for mod vendors to simply disclamer themselves by making a statement saying "The (insert mod name here) was designed to use (insert 3.7V battery model here), for which we recommend (insert brand here) available here: (insert reputable vendor here)"
So for example it would read something like "the Chuck was designed to use protected 3.7V 18650 batteries, for which we recomend AW brand batteries available at lighthound.com
It that way the mod vendor recommends using the safest battery possible so it functions as intended for those that don't bother to educate themselves on batteries....
This kinda forces the people that may want to use it in another function to at least attempt to learn something about what they're doing...and moves things back into a self regulating state...
What I mean is, if someone comes along clueless and says "can I use batteries in these?" then if it becomes obvious they know nothing about batteries or safety or even have a basic desire to learn such then we can point the user to the appropriate threads where they're forced to learn safety to be able to find the information they want...

in other words don't force the mod builders to cater to the stupid...force the stupid to educate themselves to be able to use the mod beyond it's basic safe as designed mode....

 

[rolygate]

@SheerLuckHolmes

In your long post you said, "What we need to do is make sure we don't get sued, and that people can make an informed choice on what to buy. Simple as that." Then requested comments.

Then about 4 pages later you said, "If you are licensed to practice law in Illinois, or England, or Canada even - then I will listen carefully to your advice. Otherwise - please!"

Seems a bit disingenuous to me, to ask for participation and then disrespect those that answered.

Not sure if I requested legal advice or started a debate on the whole thing. There are so many issues - technical, ethical, practical, as well as legal.

We do actually have members who are licensed to practice law in various places, and know a huge amount more than the average lawyer about ecigs - though perhaps it's just a standard product liability thing. I certainly wouldn't discount advice from those members.

But the idea of modders giving legal advice is unrealistic. The way things are going it looks as if one them might lose their house soon.


@Drozd

From my non-lawyer view...ECF as it stands is just a place for advertising and for manufacturers to anounce new products and stay in touch with their customers.. if they were to institute their safety specs and say that a mod must meet these safety specs to be advertised on ECF...THEN I see it as ECF essentually rubber stamping that mod as safe...and if it were to fail because someone was stupid..then I can totally see the argument "Well ECF said it was safe"...and would expect to see someone try to assign liability to ECF...

And you could be right. It needs thinking about.

 

[anim8r]

Quote:
If it wasn't for the forum... no one would have heard about the incident and got educated on the matter.
The implication being, we should have kept our trap shut? Yes, that was always an option. But who do you think comes out best from this: modders who refuse to admit there is a problem, do nothing about it, and continue to sell units that might explode; or us for fessing up and saying we were wrong to ignore this and we won't ignore it any longer?
.

I don't think that was the implication at all. I think he was stating that this forum is a Great source of safety information concerning e-cigs. I also would not have known there were exploding batteries if it wasn't for this forum. For that I am thankful and take special care in handling my mod and the batteries.

I don't think anyone is saying we shouldn't do anything about the risks associated with mods. I hear a lot of people stating they would simply prefer more emphasis on posting warnings rather than removing mods from our discussions.

Posting warnings is doing something, and also makes these hazards more easily searched by new members and those using google or yahoo to look for such hazards.


I don't imagine anyone would say to be intentionally silent on these matters (or to bury these stories). Actions like that would undoubtedly leave ECF wide open to litigation.

 

[BuzzKill]

So what you want to see in a safer MOD is

1. Overcurrent protection ( keep the batteries from over heating )
2. Thermal shutdown ( turns off if in a over temp. situation )
3. Reverse voltage protection ( batteries put in backwards )
4. Warnings about battery dangers.
5. Master Switch to turn the Power OFF ( covered by the top 3 with the proper circuitry )
6. Testing reports and results.


The CHinese versions have over load protection in the form of the 5 sec. cutoff ( crude but effective ) battery overcharging protection , and battery discharge protection ( batt. dies/flashing LED ) they do NOT have a master switch BTW.

 

[Lightgeoduck]

Remember, not all vapers sign into a forum, so not all vapers get to read the updates, the concerns etc., how do we protect them?

Well we do it, the same way other manufacturers do, we make it hard for them to get it wrong. We make it so that nothing will explode if a battery is put in upside down, after all, the vaper could be blind or have sight limitations. Im sure you all get what I am trying to say.

Yes I understand where you are coming from But the vapers that don't sign into a forum.. will most likely be buying the normal ecig battery types.. I think that the concern here is the recent issues with mods that are mostly talked about on forums... so there is a big chance that for one to find said mod or how to find said mod... will also find the warnings and risks of utilizing the device....... I know members reacted to those few incidents and vendors reacted as well...

Like I mentioned before that I received a mod from a vendor with a 3 page warning on the possible risks and the misuse of batteries.


Yes granted there are the few ignorant that get a device with out taking heed, mods are made with a forum or not... I mean once someone gets there hand on an ecig it doesn't take long for them to think" hey its just a battery and a tube,, I can make one of them!"


I just feel people should be able to share their ideas and possibly their product open and freely..... i do however believe that the disclaimer should be inserted everywhere and anywhere it possibly can.... but regulation or a committee I believe there should be no place in an open forum... even if all eyes are watching....if it is civilized it should be permitted

 

[SheerLuckHolmes]

My experience on this site has been nothing but positive.

For example I, one day, went to the AltSmoke section and asked what I needed to use their BB at 6v or 5v. What came back was post after post, including the owners, saying that the BB was not designed to be used at 5v or 6v. So I did not buy one. The point is that most of the folks on this forum ARE looking out each other. Not just on AltSmoke, but in everyone of the various areas of this forum.

You have stickies in each area with saftey warnings, battery adivce and every other consideration. I would think that, from my non-legal viewpoint, pretty well covers you as a concerned forum regarding user safety.

You even have a sub-forum, "Not Advisable Dumping ground for threads promoting e-cigarette usage that is almost certainly not advisable!" You could take this out of the lounge and make it its own section.

​

You can lead a horse to water, but you can not make him drink! This a classic for a reason.

There is a reason that ECF has become the largest and fastest growing e-cig forum. Keep doing what you are and have been doing, it doesn't seem to be broke, don't fix it to death.

 

[kristin]

@Deena
That case law is interesting. But what was the outcome?

Of the McDonald's Case? Here is is:

A lot of people seem to think that she got 100s of millions. Simply not true. Urban legend.

Not only that, but what is frequently NOT reported is the fact that McDonald's had been continuously warned that they had their coffee made too hot - it was MUCH hotter than other fast food restaurants. The woman had severe burns that would have been less if McDonald's had kept their coffee temps reasonable and safe.

But fears of "frivilous" lawsuits is what causes kneejerk reactions like this one at ECF - however, it was not a frivilous lawsuit - just reported as one.

Roly you say ECF does not want to be a governing body? IMO you are placing yourself in this position by making a standard. I know this that if you start approving mods you place yourself in the position to be sued.

Agreed - as soon as you start setting a standrard, you place yourself in a position of authority and open yourself to litigation regarding the mods that you DO "approve."

I really think the warning is already out.. and no liability should be held.... If it wasn't for the forum... no one would have heard about the incident and got educated on the matter

A valid point and completely misunderstood by Roly.

This forum does better to allow discussion of ALL mods and let the warnings get out, rather than censor the discussions. Because of ECF, people have been warned about the dangers now.

You can put out all the warnings you want. You can title the posts in BIG RED LETTERS and sticky them at the beginning of every post but that doesn’t mean all will read.

Roly said that they cannot "disclaim liability" yet there is so far no evidence that ECF actually HAS any liability in the event of an accident.

Most discussion forums have disclaimers that state that the opinions expressed by the members are not those of the site's owners, management or employees, is meant for entertainment purposes only and the site's owners, management and employees are not liable for what is discussed or transactions.

So long as the site's owner, management and employees do not weigh in and give an "approval" or "disapproval" or any opinons of any kind on the mods, they have no liability then. Period. So better to have a rule for your staff to stay out of giving opinions about mods or other risky behavior and you will remove ECF from the equation.

Another recommendation would be a required "I agree that..." with a list of terms and services (including that the site is for entertainment and ECF is not liable) and the new member has to check a box to agree or they do not get to be a member. Discuss the fact that there are unknowns and dangers and the user is responsible for their own actions.

Finally, you need to change "Approved Vendor" to "Advertising Vendor" or "Paid Advertiser" so as not to suggest that you endorse them or their products.

Those three things would make ECF no more liable for a transaction between a modder and customer than craigslist is for transactions between it's members. If someone hooks up a date on craigslist and gets crabs, there is no way in hell that craigslist could be sued or if they were, it'd be dismissed quickly. I suggest looking to their terms of use for guidance - I'm sure they've paid some big lawyer fees to cover their virtual butts.

Once you start limiting what can or can't be discussed or advertised, you will be implying that you are making the site a "safe place" for members and keeping them from harm. If they do still get hurt or sick, you have breached that implied contract and will be held liable.

You're better off not setting any precedence and staying out of it, with appropriate warnings & disclaimers.

I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice, but I have learned a lot from lawyers in my real estate consulting career and learning what is and what is not implied representation, both in selling and running web sites. I recommend determining what would make ECF liable before any kneejerk policy changes.

By censoring and setting standards, you are making an opinion of what is "good" or "safe" and opening up yourselves to even more liability, IMO.

It's a pickle. Good luck with that.

 

[Connman]

I would hope when a device is found defective not having one or more safety features it would be brought out to the members of the forum to do a check up, Recall if you will?

Seems there is more to this then just the battery issue. Or are you just thinking people will find these post in the Suppliers forums?

There seems to be a safety issue here and it`s more like cover your butts rather then inform the forum to check your _ _ _ _. I leave you forum runners to fill in the Blanks.



At least you should be telling people to check the forum suppliers forums to check for updates on their equipment since there is one. Remember think safety first then cover your butts.

 

[SudokuGal]

Well said Kristin.

Not only that, but what is frequently NOT reported is the fact that McDonald's had been continuously warned that they had their coffee made too hot - it was MUCH hotter than other fast food restaurants. The woman had severe burns that would have been less if McDonald's had kept their coffee temps reasonable and safe.

But fears of "frivilous" lawsuits is what causes kneejerk reactions like this one at ECF - however, it was not a frivilous lawsuit - just reported as one.



Agreed - as soon as you start setting a standrard, you place yourself in a position of authority and open yourself to litigation regarding the mods that you DO "approve."



A valid point and completely misunderstood by Roly.

This forum does better to allow discussion of ALL mods and let the warnings get out, rather than censor the discussions. Because of ECF, people have been warned about the dangers now.



Roly said that they cannot "disclaim liability" yet there is so far no evidence that ECF actually HAS any liability in the event of an accident.

Most discussion forums have disclaimers that state that the opinions expressed by the members are not those of the site's owners, management or employees, is meant for entertainment purposes only and the site's owners, management and employees are not liable for what is discussed or transactions.

So long as the site's owner, management and employees do not weigh in and give an "approval" or "disapproval" or any opinons of any kind on the mods, they have no liability then. Period. So better to have a rule for your staff to stay out of giving opinions about mods or other risky behavior and you will remove ECF from the equation.

Another recommendation would be a required "I agree that..." with a list of terms and services (including that the site is for entertainment and ECF is not liable) and the new member has to check a box to agree or they do not get to be a member. Discuss the fact that there are unknowns and dangers and the user is responsible for their own actions.

Finally, you need to change "Approved Vendor" to "Advertising Vendor" or "Paid Advertiser" so as not to suggest that you endorse them or their products.

Those three things would make ECF no more liable for a transaction between a modder and customer than craigslist is for transactions between it's members. If someone hooks up a date on craigslist and gets crabs, there is no way in hell that craigslist could be sued or if they were, it'd be dismissed quickly. I suggest looking to their terms of use for guidance - I'm sure they've paid some big lawyer fees to cover their virtual butts.

Once you start limiting what can or can't be discussed or advertised, you will be implying that you are making the site a "safe place" for members and keeping them from harm. If they do still get hurt or sick, you have breached that implied contract and will be held liable.

You're better off not setting any precedence and staying out of it, with appropriate warnings & disclaimers.

I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice, but I have learned a lot from lawyers in my real estate consulting career and learning what is and what is not implied representation, both in selling and running web sites. I recommend determining what would make ECF liable before any kneejerk policy changes.

By censoring and setting standards, you are making an opinion of what is "good" or "safe" and opening up yourselves to even more liability, IMO.

It's a pickle. Good luck with that.

 

[dk2]

I posted in another thread that an e-cigarette of a coworker which was manufactured by a major company and not modded overheated and discharged, so I don't see how ECF can hold modders at fault when there are cases of regular ecigs being just as dangerous.

Let the manufactures and users be held accountable for their own actions.

 

[WhatAClumsyGirl]

I think everyone who has posted has made valid points.

I don't know what the correct answer is, but definately posting warnings might be a step in the right direction.

I don't think banning a product or products is the right answer. If you ban some you really have to ban all as well as atomizers, ive heard some bad things about some of them as well. and the juice...it will never stop really.. ultimately we all are adults, we make our own decisions and I believe all of us are aware of the dangers.

I have been using the same batteries over and over for months and this issue has made me stop and think about what I personally have been doing. I have thrown all my old batteries away and now am using new batteries. So maybe this is a step in the right direction for myself.

We all need to think about things a little more..and maybe this is just a wake up call for all of us to take better care of our products and make things safer for ourselves.

Just my 2 cents.

Carry on

 

[DonDaBoomVape]

I think it is incumbant upon those of us who are viewed as some kind of "authority"* to urge vapers to adhere to reasonable safety standards. What those standards should be is evolving (for example, in this thread). Reasonable, knowlegeable ECFers will reach an informed consensus.

* That includes ECF (and other forums') spokespersons like rolygate and the moderators, ATE experts, manufacturers, suppliers, modders (especially those who sell their mods), video reviewers with a following, veterans, and 1,000+ posters (such as so many of the people who have contributed to this thread, including yours truly).​

I hope that the tactics used by ECF will be rooted primarily in persuasion rather than censorship or prohibition. Let most "trials" be conducted by the court of public opinion (i.e., ECF members). For example, if you ever see me urging people to stack unprotected CR2 batteries in an unvented device, please hoot me down.

I've seen more than one video reviewer recommending such practice (the stacking, not the hooting). That concerns me far more than their occasional use of the 'F' word.

 

[juicefreak]

the ecig vendor community reminds me many times of the the tech boom, oil boom, etc. get in while the gettins good and worry about the details later..or never, until it falls like a house of cards.

I would recommend getting legal advice from a lawyer. The community has grown and most members would be more than willing to support the forum with membership as we do on other forums, so monetary support should be a non-issue.

I know nothing about electronics, but i think that the commercial e-cigs from Ruyan and beyond, are all lab tested for safety? if you look at the pictures of their manufacturing facilities, they are state of the art clean rooms. sure they may have failures, but i would trust their expertise in my hand, before a home brew mod.

what other uses are there for the batteries (Lion) besides flashlights, cells, laptops, etc? A flashlight with a 18650 wouldn't be a logical comparison for safety because it uses a low heat LED bulb, versus a hot atomizer? Maybe the large capacity batteries were never intended for heating something like an atomizer? if that's the case, then the safety features should be mandatory. like i said, i don't know electronics.

one thing that could become ambulance chaser bait would be the ability of vendors to edit their forums. i would most certainly have a rule that they could not edit any safety information dialog between users on their sub-forums. To allow any info like that to be edited out and say, 'but we just rent the space' to them, *could* create a liability for the forum.

rather than complaining about the hardship to themselves (vendors) they should welcome the opportunity to further e-cigs as acceptable devices and ultimate government approval. we are all kidding ourselves to think we can renegade our desires as 'rights' and expect the government to look the other way. it's a matter of time and the more we as a community do to clean up our acts, because it's the right thing to do, the more influence we will have on the outcome of future laws and regulations.

if one of us choose to blow out our own eyes with a missile it's one thing, but if you have a child across the room that gets caught in the path, there would be brimstone raining down on that vendor, IF the batteries were never designed for that use and the modder/vendor failed to research it.

I'm not saying that's happening because i haven't a clue what the modders do as far as R&D, but they have moved beyond 'cottage industry/hobbyists' if they are selling online and it's the cost of doing business to make sure their products are safe. They don't need a trigger lock, but the same thinking applies. a main cut off would change little but aesthetics in a quick redesign, and rule out one more failure.

like i said, i know nothing about electronics or the law, but i know enough to know if it doesn't pass a sniff test, it's time to research the laws.

 

[Katattack]

I would recommend getting legal advice from a lawyer. The community has grown and most members would be more than willing to support the forum with membership as we do on other forums, so monetary support should be a non-issue.

I for one would be more than willing to not only purchase a normal "support ecf" membership but also make a donation in addition towards speaking with legal counsel. I'm sure I'm not the only one...just a thought (purely voluntary of course).