Is this Stormtrooper mold story just Propaganda?

[Nairod]

Ok thanks. Thus according to you, the original HDPE had a smooth finish on both side (as a sheet)?

And it's the vacuum forming process which gave this textured finish to one side of the plastic?

 

[GINO]

Ok thanks. Thus according to you, the original HDPE had a smooth finish on both side (as a sheet)?

Correct.

And it's the vacuum forming process which gave this textured finish to one side of the plastic?

Correct. Sort of.

.

 

[sskunky]

This is me correcting you for being wrong.
The inside is textured, but it has nothing to do with the sheet material being textured before being formed.


.

Gino,
here you go again, trying to set facts right when you have no idea what you ate talking about. I have seen and even have a bit of the original HDPE. How can you sit there and even suggest you know what was used in the original process? Did you make them? Do you have an original unused sheet of HDPE? Do you even own an original helmet? No you don't so stop trying to educate people with information you know nothing about.

 

[Art Andrews]

You are not supposed to talk about banned members

.

I thought it still was considered lame to do that because the banned member can't defend himself.

While it has been pointed out that the rule against mentioning banned members is no longer a part of the MGL, I wanted to take this opportunity to explain why... as threads like this are one of the main reasons the rule was removed. When explaining something as complex as the history of the replica stormtrooper lineage, it is virtually impossible and silly not to be able to mention names like Matt G or even Paul and by previously forcing you to mention them without mentioning their names, we only created confusion for new members who wouldn't know who you were referring to.

While I am here, I'd like to point out that we have allowed this to run probably a bit longer than it should in order to let both sides clearly get their POV across as issues like this are relevant to the hobby and are the source for a lot of bitterness that is often seen bubbling just under the surface of a lot of other interactions. However, as the thread has progressed personal attacks have begun to work their way in again (we took out a number of them early on). ManfromNaboo has already asked that you keep it clean and I would like to remind you again of the respect rules:

Please extend respect to others. Discussion and debate may lead to heated disagreement; approach them in a civil manner, showing respect for the other person's point of view.

* Avoid personal attacks.
* Avoid flaming, trolling or baiting which includes, but is not limited to creating content with the intent to disrupt.
* Avoid hijacking threads. This includes making repetitive dissenting remarks that disrupt the purpose of the thread.
* Avoid harassing or making any type of threat, implied or expressed, including physical threats, or legal threats.
* Be cautious to not misrepresent or besmirch the reputation of any individual, group, site, or company.

Keep you comments on target, about the subject at hand and leave the personal attacks and baits at the door. This applies to those on BOTH sides of this argument.

 

[GINO]

I have seen and even have a bit of the original HDPE.

Was is sitting next to AA's original molds? :lol

Did you make them?

Nope.

Do you have an original unused sheet of HDPE?

Nope.

Do you even own an original helmet?

Damn, still nope.

No you don't so stop trying to educate people with information you know nothing about.

But I still know more overall information about trooper helmets than AA, and all things considered, that is sad.

.

 

[sskunky]

Wow...a couple of hours away from this thread and it has really derailed into a pissing match.

:lol

Gino all I'm trying to say is that you don't know what the original HDPE looked like prior to vac forming so stop giving false facts out. you just said nope to all my questions and that says it all. Speculation.

 

[GINO]

:lol

Gino all I'm trying to say is that you don't know what the original HDPE looked like prior to vac forming so stop giving false facts out. you just said nope to all my questions and that says it all. Speculation.

And I would say that neither do you or AA for that matter.


.

 

[Qui-Gonzalez]

:lol

Gino all I'm trying to say is that you don't know what the original HDPE looked like prior to vac forming so stop giving false facts out. you just said nope to all my questions and that says it all. Speculation.

Sskunky, I easily separate you from your acquaintance with Ainsworth. That said, I would not base much of my first hand knowledge on things he has said. At least admit you should take things he says with a grain of salt. Remember, he would have left the whole trooper mess alone if not for RPFers contacting him about it. So, I think I am safe in saying that aside from the vac forming work, he knows less than you think.

I had a mentor/martial arts teacher who always told me "Don't believe me, find out for yourself!" I still take that lesson to heart to this day.

I wonder if Don Bies gets a chuckle at reading these threads, or rolls his eyes at us.

 

[vaderdarth]

AA keeps getting thrown around in this thread, but honestly, AA has zero to do with this accusation. This one is all Gino and what he claimed multiple times........versus.......what we know to be true today about the helmets he sold. Gino didn't mention AA in his sales Ad, so it's not pertinent to this issue. His conduct on this board and in particular his past dealings with other members, are pertinent. They illustrate a long jaded history of the same underhanded sales tactics. Leave AA out of it. I think the vast majority of the RPF is on the same page concerning AA. I think we pretty much left it, as such: AA was the guy who vacformed the original SW armors/helmets. Most of his other claims are fuzzy at best. No need to revisit AA as it's just a ploy to distract from the real issue here. AA did not write Gino's sales AD, Gino did.

 

[sskunky]

Sskunky, I easily separate you from your acquaintance with Ainsworth. That said, I would not base much of my first hand knowledge on things he has said. At least admit you should take things he says with a grain of salt. Remember, he would have left the whole trooper mess alone if not for RPFers contacting him about it. So, I think I am safe in saying that aside from the vac forming work, he knows less than you think.

I had a mentor/martial arts teacher who always told me "Don't believe me, find out for yourself!" I still take that lesson to heart to this day.

I wonder if Don Bies gets a chuckle at reading these threads, or rolls his eyes at us.

Qui,

I understand what you are saying and I am a firm believer in finding out by myself. But if we are to believe that because AA said a lie in court to get through being sued for $20 million dollars that everything he says is a lie then I think everyone of us here should start to look at 99% of people in this world that have told a lie. Are you telling me that you have never lied? this whole thread is about someone lying about the truth of a product. AA just happen to lie about Stormtroopers that has struck a chord with the modeling community. It doesn't make him evil.

 

[sskunky]

AA keeps getting thrown around in this thread, but honestly, AA has zero to do with this accusation. This one is all Gino and what he claimed multiple times........versus.......what we know to be true today about the helmets he sold. Gino didn't mention AA in his sales Ad, so it's not pertinent to this issue. His conduct on this board and in particular his past dealings with other members, are pertinent. They illustrate a long jaded history of the same underhanded sales tactics. Leave AA out of it. I think the vast majority of the RPF is on the same page concerning AA. I think we pretty much left it, as such: AA was the guy who vacformed the original SW armors/helmets. Most of his other claims are fuzzy at best. No need to revisit AA as it's just a ploy to distract from the real issue here. AA did not write Gino's sales AD, Gino did.

Thank you,
Gino just brought AA up again as usual to detract away from what this thread is all about. Two lies don't make the truth.

 

[GINO]

AA keeps getting thrown around in this thread, but honestly, AA has zero to do with this accusation. This one is all Gino and what he claimed multiple times........versus.......what we know to be true today about the helmets he sold. Gino didn't mention AA in his sales Ad, so it's not pertinent to this issue. His conduct on this board and in particular his past dealings with other members, are pertinent. They illustrate a long jaded history of the same underhanded sales tactics. Leave AA out of it. I think the vast majority of the RPF is on the same page concerning AA. I think we pretty much left it, as such: AA was the guy who vacformed the original SW armors/helmets. Most of his other claims are fuzzy at best. No need to revisit AA as it's just a ploy to distract from the real issue here. AA did not write Gino's sales AD, Gino did.

The situation with AA is completely relevant in the context that I used it in.
In addition, when I refer back to someone's supporting of AA, such as you for example, I use it to illustrate a pattern of bad judgement, hypocrisy, and being on the wrong side of what is truth.

And if you are going to continue to refer to write-ups or descriptions of my props as sales ads, then I don't want to hear it when I do the same in regard to you, Joe, or your friend's prop descriptions.
In fact, by your definition, any showoff thread or gallery with a description is considered a sales ad.


.

 

[vaderdarth]

Alright, let's all just cool it and leave it up to the mods. Unless there is any new information to present, I think everyone has had their say. Let the Mods sift thru the facts and act accordingly.

Dave

 

[Art Andrews]

Alright, let's all just cool it and leave it up to the mods. Unless there is any new information to present, I think everyone has had their say. Let the Mods sift thru the facts and act accordingly.

Dave, I need to stop you right there.

Don't drag the staff into this. While I am sure all the staff has their own personal opinions about the issue, from a staff standpoint, we are not the judges or arbiters of this situation, and are only making sure the thread doesn't get out of hand. Trying to put this on our doorstep is only setting us up for one side or the other to call bias.

The two sides have made their case with one side claiming Gino has misrepresented his helmets while the other side claiming he hasn't. No customer has come forward publicly (or privately) to complain to the staff about feeling cheated in any way and in fact a couple have mentioned publicly that they don't feel cheated.

This is a matter for members to decide on their own after reading the evidence provided and then they can judge for themselves whether or not they want to deal with Gino or others who have posted in this thread in the future.

This is not a staff matter.

 

[Qui-Gonzalez]

Dave, I need to stop you right there.

Don't drag the staff into this. While I am sure all the staff has their own personal opinions about the issue, from a staff standpoint, we are not the judges or arbiters of this situation, and are only making sure the thread doesn't get out of hand. Trying to put this on our doorstep is only setting us up for one side or the other to call bias.

The two sides have made their case with one side claiming Gino has misrepresented his helmets while the other side claiming he hasn't. No customer has come forward publicly (or privately) to complain to the staff about feeling cheated in any way and in fact a couple have mentioned publicly that they don't feel cheated.

This is a matter for members to decide on their own after reading the evidence provided and then they can judge for themselves whether or not they want to deal with Gino or others who have posted in this thread in the future.

This is not a staff matter.

Thumbs up on this position. Like I said earlier, it is going to take some getting used to to NOT have the RPF Nanny State that we used to have. Last year, this thread would have been locked pages ago. I don't like the mud-slinging to have to sift through, but if you can do that, there is information to be taken from this whole thread. To me, it is the replica information more than the personalities. Keep it coming, guys!

 

[GINO]

How can I have lied, when it has been shown in multiple instances, in multiple forums where I was VERY clear about it?
Because you interpret as such in my propstory?

How can that possibly make me a liar?

It can't. And it doesn't.
What we are seeing here now is certain people trying to save face in the midst of them being proven wrong.

.

 

[GINO]

well said Gino, only you are the dude trying to save face, because it's your hiney on the line here.

Save face for what?
My' hiney' was never 'on the line'. I never did anything wrong regardless of what you and your friends think, or wish to be true.


.

 

[Too Much Garlic]

Well that doesn't stop being threads about me on forums I've been banned from like the prop den or FISD now does it?
And in my case they are specifically geared to bash me, so don't even come at me with that BS.
.

The thread on The Den is remarkably tame as the RPF is the location where the real talk is taking place, so why really comment at a place where one party is excluded from replying?

I think it's a bit silly to fault a whole forum for comments made by some of the members - in any instance, not just this one. Sure... there's been some animosity between TPD and SWP... but I don't really see it in this case - you are free to judge for yourselves and make your own conclusions, sure. But I understand that in a thread such as this that over-generalizations and blanket statements pop up in the conversation from either side. Hey... I'm not perfect either. But is the whole of RPF at fault for those comments or just the individual users?

Other than that I'm not well-versed enough in trooper stuff or the histories of such to really comment about much, but as "ugly" as this is, it is actually educating me, removing doubts and changing things I thought I knew - hopefully for something closer to the facts.

 

[GINO]

OK how are you proving me wrong, what do i have to be proved wrong about ?? i am just stating what ive seen and read not just on your own site but on others too where you yourself have stated that your molds are first gen.
And the part about the HDPE was to clarify the discussion about the finish, i have worked with the stuff and the finished pieces have a smooth finish on both sides!
Just to reinforce... i have no personal involvement with anyone here and i am just putting my point across after reading quite alot about this!

Wrong in your belief that I lied.

As far as the HDPE goes, I'll post pics soon enough that illustrate my point, but it won't be in this thread.

 

[GINO]

The thread on The Den is remarkably tame as the RPF is the location where the real talk is taking place, so why really comment at a place where one party is excluded from replying?

I think it's a bit silly to fault a whole forum for comments made by some of the members - in any instance, not just this one. Sure... there's been some animosity between TPD and SWP... but I don't really see it in this case - you are free to judge for yourselves and make your own conclusions, sure. But I understand that in a thread such as this that over-generalizations and blanket statements pop up in the conversation from either side. Hey... I'm not perfect either. But is the whole of RPF at fault for those comments or just the individual users?

Other than that I'm not well-versed enough in trooper stuff or the histories of such to really comment about much, but as "ugly" as this is, it is actually educating me, removing doubts and changing things I thought I knew - hopefully for something closer to the facts.

Carsten, I was referencing TPD and FISD from a historical standpoint of allowing bashing threads about me to exist while I was not there. Not just necessarily in this most recent instance.
I was trying to point out the hypocrisy of the guy who said it was bad form of me to discuss a banned member, and in my defense, I was merely saying that I have been (and am) the topic of threads on these forums while being a banned member. I just mentioned the names of the forums where it historically took place. Both before this incident as well as including this incident.

.

.