• @cooopsspace@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    51 year ago

    That’s exactly what happened.

    It was “keep it for further testing” before it got reamed with poor review, and then it was “ok send it back then”.

    • @cerement@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      221 year ago

      didn’t qualify as a review much less a “poor review” – lose the provided graphics card, proceed to munge the cooler onto an unrelated card, complain when it doesn’t fit, blast it as a garbage product that no one should ever buy

      • @cooopsspace@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        81 year ago

        Yeah and if they’re going to mess it up that much the company might just take it back and send it to GamersNexus for a real review.

    • Th4tGuyII
      link
      fedilink
      81 year ago

      “Poor review” is putting it lightly after how dirty they did that card. They probably wanted it back to give to someone to do an actual, fair review of.

      Also, they were told they could keep it for further testing, but not that they could keep it forever or as a gift. That LTT auctioned the prototype that definitely still belonged to Billet Labs was plain irresponsible.

      • @cooopsspace@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        Yeah that what I mean, GamersNexus would have given it a fair review and not done an absolute ballsup of the process.

        And yeah, if they weren’t intending to test further it should have just been sent back.

        • Th4tGuyII
          link
          fedilink
          31 year ago

          Exactly. Linus seems to interpret their conversation as though Billet were going to let them keep it forever.

          It seemed to me much more like, “We don’t urgently need this back, so feel free to run more tests if you want”

          Which turned into, “Oh, you shit all over our product and refuse to do more testing? Can we get it back then please?”