Talk:Signal/One/Archive 1

Untitled

Have a problem with the removal of the "dark side" of Signal/One's history. Suggest adding the phrase "criminal organization" back.

Here's the story from http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/648

I exchanged many phone calls and a lot of email with Jim wherein we discussed Don's written and oral promises to me to make good my huge investment, both in my original radio the IC 781 plus a great deal of cash; I continued to expect the latest and “greatest” version of the 1030, the model E with DSP. I sincerely believed Jim when he told me he was designing new boards etc. and that Don would definitely fulfill his responsibilities and build the improved and innovative radios.

In July 2000, Don phoned advising that they needed to add new components and a special Lambda power supply and requested yet more money, this time $1326.00. I asked him then, "Will that complete the project and updates?" He promised it would, so I sent that payment. Soon afterward his correspondence ended. I was later told that there remain, “Several brand new Lambda Supplies in the box.” The Lambda supply was to power the requirements for what was to be the “ultimate” radio, one with an onboard Sony computer.

It has been more than a year if I recall correctly, since Don finally did phone me after writing a letter promising the radio in "just a few months." I had so many hopes and dreams for this radio. I truly had envisioned having this state-of-the-art masterpiece of custom engineering on the air in a reasonable period of time and to be able to report on its performance to fellow hams worldwide.

Now we are in early 2005, more than six years since the radio was sent back to Signal One. All I can ask is where is my radio and my money? I want my My Mil Spec 1030CI or E with DSP.

Signal One once had a website; they advertised in QST too. I believed in the company and trusted their advertising and representations.

I am not generally a gullible person but I got caught up in this and just continued to pay thousands in the hope to finally get it right and now I am dismayed to see that with the value of the original radio and cash paid, my investment exceeds $17,000 and I have no radio, not even my original Icom 781. If I were rating that I would have given it a 5 at the time!

So I will have to rate the first Mil Spec 1030 CI by Signal One, at least from my brief experiences with it, at a 2. Now, with no radio, I cannot up or downgrade this report. If and when I do receive my radio I will post a review and hope that the once proud name of Signal One will shine brightly among those historically stellar pieces of equipment that are part of our hobby; nothing would make me happier than to follow this review up with a rating of a 5!

Updating my previous post, after numerous tries I have been unable to locate Mr. Roehrs, find my property (My Signal One Milsepc 1030 CI.) or obtain any return of cash sent to Mr. Rohrs. I have been advised that the name Signal One was re-registered by Mr. Roehrs this year with the US office handling trademarks. For those who have written and tried to help me recover my property I am grateful for your efforts. If anyone can shed light which will assist me in my continuing work I thank you in advance.

unsigned by 71.191.17.233

Sounds terrible. However please see WP:V Thanks. - LuckyLouie 04:49, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

There's more at this website (which does include some info from the first.).

http://www.k5og.com/S1%20History.htm

This is not intended to be a "slam" on Signal/One but an accurate report of a U.S. Company that went over to the Dark Side in its final day. It happens and in the interest of accurate and truthful reporting, should be included. Many, many, many people lost thousands of dollars. For the most part, these are good natured hobbiests who did not know where to turn.

Leaving the "criminal" and "fraud" part out weakens the article. It might not be "gracious" but this is an article about corporate theft, fraud, and desperate con men. An article about Signal/One cannot be NPOV if this is left out.

Sorry, life is harsh at times.

Signal/One

Hi, I understand your wish that "truth be told" about Signal/One, but you must take into acccount that Wikipedia is an encylopedia, and must provide reliable sources fo anything it publishes. It cannot publish private opinion, editorial comment, or rumor (even though it may be "truth") coming from blogs or comments by hams on eHamnet/QRZ.com. If you can point to an article in QST, CQ, or even a reputable business magazine or mainstream newspaper, I would be glad to help include information about Signal/One's" customer problems. Please read WP:V especially the part aboutt "reliable sources" for more information. - LuckyLouie 16:50, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

That's a good point but the fact is, the 3rd estate is not doing it's job and has failed us in the Internet Age. QST, CQ are too focussed on keeping up appearances and their current advertisers. The losses to the Signal/One fraud are dwarfed by the losses at, say, MCI-Worldcom, Enron, which it resembles. - unsigned by 71.206.56.43

Could be. However, as you can see, WP:V prohibits unverified opinion being published as fact. Just as we could not publish a bunch of comments testifying that Signal/One's business practices were "without fault", we cannot publish a bunch of comments testifying that Signal/One was a "criminal organization". Anything published here must be cited from a reliable source. In the case of uncontroversial items such as transceiver specs and general info, that is unsually uncontested in articles such as this one. But controversial material such as you suggest gets held to a higher standard. I assume from your unsigned comments you are new to Wikipedia, so my friendly advice is to find some sources that will pass muster for what you wish to include. - LuckyLouie 04:12, 7 July 2007 (UTC)