Tenly I am at a loss to understand your defensiveness and I certainly won't be drawn into personal insults. We are in agreement in at least one respect, this board is a frequented in the overwhelming majority by seemingly very good people with a common interest who share knowledge. I lurked here for a long time prior to joining and my enjoyment and advancement in the hobby has been helped greatly by this community. I had a lot of experience and stick time with other RC aircraft, some is of direct relavence to multirotors, a lot isn't- the knowledge and experience freely offered here has been and I expect will continue to be highly valuable.
There are some helpful and friendly people here, as I expected - but in the handful of threads I've participated in - and in the dozens of others that I've read without commenting on - I have unfortunately not seen an "overwhelming majority" of those good people you speak of. I participate in several Internet forums and there are trolls, instigators and a**holes in all of them - but here, there seems to be a much higher percentage of that class of member than on the other sites. I sincerely hope that as I continue to read and participate, I find more of those "very good people".
I read most of the threads in the P3 forums. In recent times I have observed your apparent demeanour and seemingly opinionated and combative approach.
I'll address those in a moment - but if you found those posts, you must have also found many posts where I am helpful, well spoken, polite, friendly - and provide good and well though out information/advice in greater number than my combative posts.
As recently as today you launched at several members who didn't share your views on the need to provide an alternative to the currently implemented CSC command.
Yesterday actually - but if you take the time to read the entire thread, you'll see that my posts were defensive. Compare my first few posts in that thread to the last few and note that my entire demeanour changes when a member with a different opinion, amongst other things - compares my 11 year old son to a crazy ape or chimp or monkey of some sort, calls me an unfit parent and to defends his opinion he presents a number of opinions and assumptions as fact and then tells me to drop the subject and/or take it to DJI.
For the most part - and almost exclusively - I don't start fights here, on the other forums I participate in or in person. But if someone starts a fight, I will certainly defend myself and usually escalate. If it turns out I'm in the wrong - which happens at most 5% of the time - I'll back down and apologize.
As far as I'm concerned, the only excuse for rudeness and impolite behaviour - from myself or others - is retaliation or defense. Some may disagree and say that those aren't good reasons. I respect their opinions and agree to disagree. I won't allow anyone to bully or censor me - and if someone is rude to me, they're going to get it back threefold.
There are an unusually large number of people here who appear to be here only to judge and belittle others. Part of me wishes I could filter them out completely and part of me is glad that I can't - so I can defend the person being oppressed - or at least offer a word of support for them. Arrogance and condescension appear to run rampant here also. It can be seen in almost every thread - including the CSC one that you mentioned. Short-sighted and narrow-minded are also traits i would have to use to accurately describe far too many members here - and it's funny how often arrogance and ignorance go ah d in hand here. I don't know how many forums your participate in that's aren't related to drones. I'm starting to wonder if it's just this particular forum or maybe any forum devote to this hobby? Does flying a drone inherently attract more people with those negative traits or is this forum just an anomaly? (The precious rant was rhetorical. No need to reply to any of it)
[/QUOTE]
Not so long ago you outright accused another user of pilot error sighting what you claimed to be a refusal to share flight logs as being the determining factor. It was later revealed that an experienced member confirmed there was an issue preventing log retrieval and ultimately DJI fixed the damage under warranty.
It wasn't his refusal to submit the logs as much as his refusal to even acknowledge 4 separate mentions of the logs in the first 7 pages of the thread and his incessant demands to be believed based on his word and his claims that he "did everything right". It's a funny thread actually. I still suspect pilot error was the root cause - but - he convinced DJI to repair it or free - so who knows. In any case - this is the only post I've made here that I wish I could take back. No matter what my personal thoughts were/are. There was no good reason for me to post the message I did. It was instigating - and I would have probably chastised someone else if they had posted something like that. So I'll give you the point on this one and admit I was out of line. But not the others - especially the CSC one!
You call me opinionated - and maybe I am - but most of my opinions are based on logic and can be backed up by facts. I've never denied anyone else the rugby to their own opinion if it is a valid opinion-based topic. If it's a fact-based topic - opinions are invalid. You can't have an opinion that there are 390 degrees in a circle because it's a fact that there are 360. As for opinion-based topics - so what if I have an opinion? So does everyone else. There's nothing wrong with comparing opinions, the reasons for them etc. At the end of it all, I've never attacked anyone for having an opinion that is different from mine. For opinion-based discussions you have to be willing to agree to disagree.
I don't feel special or singled out to the extent I am a recent victim of your assumption based attacks.
It's almost funny to hear you call my attacks "assumption based" - because this entire exchange started because you made a number of assumptions about me - all negative and all wrong - and then formed an opinion about my suitability for a beta test you have nothing to do with and no knowledge about their actual requirements for participation - and then you decided to present your opinion based on false assumptions as "advice" in a condescension and superior tone!
I fully admit that I escalated in my reply - but you most certainly instigated! You can't possibly think that your "advice" - even if it had been accurate - would have been well received - so what was your motivation for posting it if not to pick a fight? Well - congratulations, it worked!
With respect to my comments on beta testing I do have a strong opinion there. Largely based on bad experiences where in more than one project we provided pre-production, prototype and in some instances bare development board level hardware to a pre qualified testers. I stand by what I said. It's my opinion only. I don't expect or need everyone to share my view.
Fair enough - but the Autopilot beta is not your project and is set up very differently. I don't get how you could have possibly thought it relevant. AutoFlightLogic is not supplying hardware and may have very different goals. In the beta tests that I've run - we wanted some testers who were going to actively try to break the system - but we didn't want them exclusively - we also needed testers to use the system as it was intended to be used. Otherwise we would have caught bugs in the corner cases but possibly missed them in the core process flows. We even had a group that were not provided instructions of any kind and we instructed them to "just figure it out"
With respect to Litchi your revised commentary and position I agree with. Allow those who are considering purchasing the product to make informed decisions. That is a lot different to your original opinion.
Well I'm glad we finally agree on something. But as I explained - my original comments were based on what I knew of the previous version and I believe they were mostly accurate.
As to the features track is different to follow. It allows you to select an object in frame and will attempt to keep the camera focussed on it. It's pretty impressive. Follow uses GPS, currently tied to the the device attached to the controller. It is expected there will be a later magic leash option supported (you likely would be familiar I expect with airspace in AP, I suspect it will have similar functionality).
So with track - the drone would remain stationary or be flown manually by the pilot and the "track" would control the camera and keep it focused on the selected object which could be either stationary or moving ? And it works with the P3 ?
I don't know about you but my main intent here is the pursuit of my interest in and enjoyment of flying and all associated with this hobby. I will go back to that now.
Happy flying!
Likewise. There's just so much rudeness, arrogance, bullying, ignorance and condescension here that my frustration and annoyance builds and builds - it gets to such a high level that when I finally do have a reason to take exception to something directed at me - my response is often much more severe than is called for.
Peace.