We Remember The Magic Café We Remember
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Latest and Greatest? » » Little Man [Paul Harris Presents...] » » TOPIC IS LOCKED (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..9~10~11~12~13..23~24~25 [Next]
FredNarlo
View Profile
Veteran user
Been waiting for John Dough for the last
317 Posts

Profile of FredNarlo
Nobody thinks or has even said that PHP is trying to deceive us, the problem is the lack of communication as of late. We need to know SOMETHING...anything!

This calls for a haiku! Heck yeah it does!

We wait, no response
Is John Dough both deaf and mute?
Or is he just dead?

Mandarin, you got a haiku for our souls? I usually do all the haikus, but can you pop another out so my mind and soul can be therapeutically quenched?
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27087 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Quote:
On 2010-01-02 00:20, JPK wrote:
Good evening all.
I understand the disappointment with the marketing of this effect. I just don't understand how anyone could be so harsh with how long it is taking.
Did you pay for it as a pre-order?
If you did and don't like the time it's taking, get your money back.
If you didn't, and your just upset this isn't your newest thing to have then I can understand that as well.
They admitted they may a have made a boo-boo in talking about this to early.
The actual item might have had potential but wasn't up to PH's standards.
Or maybe he had some better ideas.
At this point I don't think any one of us knows.
Can you make a good argument that an effect shouldn't be released without real world experience? Yup.
But we don't even know that.
It might work right in the proper hands. This is being marketed for the general public.
That can't be easy. I can't imagine what that would be like.

I'm not trying to excuse what PHP has done.
Just trying to understand.
I refuse to believe that PHP is trying to deceive us.
Just my opinion.
JPK


No matter if well intended*
apologist twaddle at this point
comes across as paid posts
by unsavory businessmen.

*if in fact you are a magician you've evidently forgotten that intention is something inferred by the audience while you do whatever it is for whatever reasons or lack thereof.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
silverking
View Profile
Inner circle
4586 Posts

Profile of silverking
Quote:
On 2010-01-02 00:43, FredNarlo wrote:
We need to know SOMETHING.

Possible point of clarification......you only want to know.

When it comes to unreleased magic tricks nobody really "needs" to know anything at all.
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27087 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Quote:
On 2010-01-02 02:00, silverking wrote:
Quote:
On 2010-01-02 00:43, FredNarlo wrote:
We need to know SOMETHING.

Possible point of clarification......you only want to know.

When it comes to unreleased magic tricks nobody really "needs" to know anything at all.


FredNarlo expressed how he feels.

Possible point of clarification......you only want to type.

When it comes to making impudent comments about other folks feelings, nobody really "needs" to type anything at all.

;)
...to all the coins I've dropped here
Gilgamesh_The_Librarian
View Profile
Elite user
408 Posts

Profile of Gilgamesh_The_Librarian
Quote:
On 2010-01-02 00:20, JPK wrote:
Good evening all.
I understand the disappointment with the marketing of this effect. I just don't understand how anyone could be so harsh with how long it is taking.
Did you pay for it as a pre-order?
If you did and don't like the time it's taking, get your money back.
If you didn't, and your just upset this isn't your newest thing to have then I can understand that as well.
They admitted they may a have made a boo-boo in talking about this to early.
The actual item might have had potential but wasn't up to PH's standards.
Or maybe he had some better ideas.
At this point I don't think any one of us knows.
Can you make a good argument that an effect shouldn't be released without real world experience? Yup.
But we don't even know that.
It might work right in the proper hands. This is being marketed for the general public.
That can't be easy. I can't imagine what that would be like.

I'm not trying to excuse what PHP has done.
Just trying to understand.
I refuse to believe that PHP is trying to deceive us.
Just my opinion.
JPK


Oh for heavens sake !!!!

We've had a team of people building a stake in the town centre and gathering kindling.

We've had people recruiting for the mob and buying pitchforks ( which aren't that easy to come by) and a a team making good old fashioned torches from pitch and chunks of wood.

And, after all that effort, you want to get reasonable !!!!


Seriously the question for me is how much info the pre-order folk are getting since they are the important ones in this. Of course the advert is still out there spouting on about the on-line demo but there has been enough noise about that now that, unless you have money invested in this thing, the majority of us should remain schtum.

As I said though I would be interested to hear from anyone who has pre-ordered to see what info they are getting.
Mr. Mystoffelees
View Profile
Inner circle
I haven't changed anyone's opinion in
3615 Posts

Profile of Mr. Mystoffelees
Haiku calls...

"They also serve who..."
dreaming of a white christmas,
"... only stand and wait."

Jim
Also known, when doing rope magic, as "Cordini"
silverking
View Profile
Inner circle
4586 Posts

Profile of silverking
Quote:
On 2010-01-02 02:22, Jonathan Townsend wrote:
Quote:
On 2010-01-02 02:00, silverking wrote:
Quote:
On 2010-01-02 00:43, FredNarlo wrote:
We need to know SOMETHING.

Possible point of clarification......you only want to know.

When it comes to unreleased magic tricks nobody really "needs" to know anything at all.


FredNarlo expressed how he feels.

Possible point of clarification......you only want to type.

When it comes to making impudent comments about other folks feelings, nobody really "needs" to type anything at all.

;)

Apparently as do you Jonathan (you seem incapable of not typing).

Pot, meet kettle.
ebinary
View Profile
New user
53 Posts

Profile of ebinary
Just read this thread. The premarketing of a non-demonstrable effects brings up an interesting question on copyright. From the description of the trick, I am virtually certain I know the method. Self-contained, don't have to be present, squashable at the end, reset time.

Of course, since the trick has not been delivered or demonstrated, I couldn't be stealing the actual solution, as we don't even know the actual solution exists. Nor has there been a public performance to enter it into copyright.

I'm thinking of mocking up a model this week. Is that un-ethical? If I post it on youtube, do I earn the copyright based on first public performance? And what if my method turns out to be different?

Surely simply describing a narrative is not copyrightable as a performance, or one could simply copyright trick ideas:

"with no setup, a woman is levitated in any location".

"A man thinks of an item and without any communication, it is produced out of thin air".

"Wearing nothing more than a speedo, a man produces a physical pile of coins from his fingertips".

Then when someone solves these problems, I claim copyright for pre-describing the effect.

Perhaps this would deter the pre-introduction of vaporware tricks? Comments?

Eric

P.S. the speedo trick does not involve any artificial limbs

Posted: Jan 2, 2010 1:52pm
I certainly can understand why a magician doesn't like being decontructed on video, however don't all magic video performance violate the 2nd rule of magic: "Don't repeat a trick."? A video trick is infinately repeatable, and that's the real problem (especially for sleights). Too bad YouTube doesn't have a setting for a "one-time-view" video.

I think the promos for Powerball 60 and Flicker are about right in their detail, though I'll admit they are frustrating.

Of course, in this case, we have only heard an idea for a trick... Like most folks here, I'd love to see the demo: once.

Eric
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27087 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
EBinary, pigeons copy. artists take tooks to create their own works (in our case performances) to express what they will for audiences.

one of the differences between people and pigeons is the notion of permission.

not to worry about this item - the golem has been a part of literature etc for a century or so in magic as an animation effect and in our culture's literature since at least as far back as the ancient Greeks.

the tough question is what it means to folks here to be copying at all - with or without permission.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
Dan Bernier
View Profile
Inner circle
Canada
2298 Posts

Profile of Dan Bernier
Quote:
On 2010-01-02 13:08, ebinary wrote:
Just read this thread. The premarketing of a non-demonstrable effects brings up an interesting question on copyright. From the description of the trick, I am virtually certain I know the method. Self-contained, don't have to be present, squashable at the end, reset time.

Of course, since the trick has not been delivered or demonstrated, I couldn't be stealing the actual solution, as we don't even know the actual solution exists. Nor has there been a public performance to enter it into copyright.

I'm thinking of mocking up a model this week. Is that un-ethical? If I post it on youtube, do I earn the copyright based on first public performance? And what if my method turns out to be different?

Surely simply describing a narrative is not copyrightable as a performance, or one could simply copyright trick ideas:

"with no setup, a woman is levitated in any location".

"A man thinks of an item and without any communication, it is produced out of thin air".

"Wearing nothing more than a speedo, a man produces a physical pile of coins from his fingertips".

Then when someone solves these problems, I claim copyright for pre-describing the effect.

Perhaps this would deter the pre-introduction of vaporware tricks? Comments?

Eric

P.S. the speedo trick does not involve any artificial limbs


Not only do you make a valid point, but I encourage you to further develope your idea. If you can provide a demo, and it looks good, you'll have my money that's for sure. Nothing unethical about your points you make in my opinion.

There is nothing about "Little Man" at this point to actually prove that it can live up to it's advertisment or hype. The only thing people can hang onto is the reputation of Paul Harris, and to be honest, that's not enough for me to invest in something that doesn't exist. Despite what the ad claims, it's apparent that "Little Man" does not live up to it. At least not at this time it does. I wonder if that constitutes false advertising. I'm no expert at advertising laws, but I always thought that if a product doesn't live up to what it is being advertised then it is false advertising.

Nothing in the advertisment says "It Will one day be able to do...". The advertisment claims and implies that it already can do what it says it can do.
"If you're going to walk in the rain, don't complain about getting wet!"
bekralik
View Profile
Inner circle
Canada
1090 Posts

Profile of bekralik
Nope, no false advertising here, Dan. The product isn't out yet, remember?

It's funny how the people who are most vehemently against it and who swear they will never order it are the ones who have posted the most in this thread. If I wasn't interested anymore, I would move on and not keep littering this thread ... but that's me.
Dan Bernier
View Profile
Inner circle
Canada
2298 Posts

Profile of Dan Bernier
Advertising and asking for pre-orders for a product that doesn't exist isn't false advertising? Are you just saying that or do you know enough about advertising that you are offering your expert opinion?

As for littering the thread, you might want to read the rules of the forum. Also, please, (with all respect) get your facts straight. No one is against the product. We are against the marketing, lack of a demo, broken promises and continued delays. I would say that everyone who is posting here has had an interrest for "Little Man" ever since it was advertised. But as time goes by there still remains no proof or evidence it can do what it claims it can do.

Please show where anyone has sworn that they would never order it. I know that I have a few times mentioned that I have lost interrest in it, but rereading the posts I could not find anyone who "swore" they would never buy it once a demo was released.

I have noticed however, that some who are upset with the majority of the posts being made here will offer nothing but criticism of the posters making them.

I hope we can all learn to respect each others views and opinions without resorting to attacking those with whom we disagreee with.

Doing a little research does not deem me to be an expert but I have read that if an advertisment implies that a product exists and is able to do something which later is discovered cannot do, by later discovering from out sources that the original product was not able to do what the ad claimed it can do, sending the prototype back to the drawing board so it can do what it claims to do, can be regarded as misleading and false advertising.

In otherwords, if I say I have a product that can make money grow on tree's, but my prototype can not do it at the time, even though I intend to make it work, the advertising could be considered misleading.

When I read the advertisment for "Little Man" I was under the impression as I sure many were that there was an actual product already made that did as it was said it could do. We of course have learned that the original prototype that the ad was based on could not do what it was claimed to do and needed to be further worked on.

Again, I'm not expert on advertising, and I am willing to be corrected with my opinion. Just as long as someone explains more about it to me from a legal stand point.
"If you're going to walk in the rain, don't complain about getting wet!"
FredNarlo
View Profile
Veteran user
Been waiting for John Dough for the last
317 Posts

Profile of FredNarlo
I NEED, NEED to do a haiku!

Little Man, this thread
I keep coming back for more
Me, a Dough junkie
The Great Smartini
View Profile
Inner circle
2280 Posts

Profile of The Great Smartini
I think that magic will have reached a new low if someone is able to bring a copy cat version of an effect before the original item itself comes to market. How could anyone in their right mind even consider or encourage such foolishness?

As for false advertising in magic, well let's get real. Some magic creators can be trusted sight unseen and many not. We all know who to trust and continue to support their work. For me that would be folks like Steve Axtell, Chance Wolf, Doug Malloy, Lee Alex and a few others.

If people truly were outraged at PHP they wouldn't post about Little Man and they would ask for their money back. I'd like to start my own Little Man contest...how many days can you go without posting about it? My guess not that long.

Jeff
FredNarlo
View Profile
Veteran user
Been waiting for John Dough for the last
317 Posts

Profile of FredNarlo
24 minutes...I guess we lose!
bekralik
View Profile
Inner circle
Canada
1090 Posts

Profile of bekralik
To me, the very notion of the word "pre-order" implies that a product does not yet exist!
Dan Bernier
View Profile
Inner circle
Canada
2298 Posts

Profile of Dan Bernier
It should also imply that a working prototype that lives up to the advertisment doesn't exist either. In fact, it should imply that the said product doesn't exist at all, which it doesn't. Wouldn't that just make it a pipe dream then? Or, just an idea?

For something to be a copycat it would have to be of something that actually exists. "Little Man" doesn't exist. The only thing that exists is the advertisment. There is no product. Don't you think we would of seen a demo of it by now? It's been 3 months since we were first told that a rough demo was being made. Over a month ago we were told it was almost finished.

Can anyone actually provide even a shed of evidence that "Little Man" actually exists? Even the picture of it isn't real.

I will continue to wait and see if any shed of evidence ever surfaces that proves "Little Man" exists. In the meantime, I will also choose to continue to post my thoughts and opinions. It is after all what this forum is for. Those who have a problem with that should bring it up to Steve Brooks.

I don't believe in Bigfoot or UFO's either, and there have been people who have claimed to see one. I would have to have more doubt in "Little Man" existing when no one has seen it, or claims to have seen it.
"If you're going to walk in the rain, don't complain about getting wet!"
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27087 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Quote:
On 2010-01-02 21:03, The Great Smartini wrote:
I think that magic will have reached a new low if someone is able to bring a copy cat version of an effect before the original item itself comes to market. How could anyone in their right mind even consider or encourage such foolishness?...


Foolish is NOT exploring what you can get working with a real clay figure. Go to it. No need to bring anything to market just see what you can get working.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
Dan Bernier
View Profile
Inner circle
Canada
2298 Posts

Profile of Dan Bernier
In all respect to Paul Harris, (even though I have never met the man) I am going to try and refrain from posting further comments here in this forum until the end of January. At that point if no demo or proof that "Little Man" actually exists I think it's a safe bet to assume that we have been mislead. Until then, I still have some hope left that "Little Man" will surface.
"If you're going to walk in the rain, don't complain about getting wet!"
Steve Hook
View Profile
Inner circle
Raleigh, NC, USA
1264 Posts

Profile of Steve Hook
Quote:
On 2010-01-02 23:09, Gospel Dan wrote:
In all respect to Paul Harris, (even though I have never met the man) I am going to try and refrain from posting further comments here in this forum until the end of January. At that point if no demo or proof that "Little Man" actually exists I think it's a safe bet to assume that we have been mislead. Until then, I still have some hope left that "Little Man" will surface.


zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..............

.
Like Bonnie Raitt said, "I miss Little Feat more than I miss being 8 years old." Thanks for the concerts + recordings, Lowell, Richie, and Paul!
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Latest and Greatest? » » Little Man [Paul Harris Presents...] » » TOPIC IS LOCKED (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..9~10~11~12~13..23~24~25 [Next]
X
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2020 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.23 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL