nicobie wrote:*Do not post in this thread*
Are you saying thats what my "warning" messages reads as? Or literally telling people not post at all?
I think what he means is, 'Playing it SAFE' in this and some other electric communities has different connotations than you think; that 'Do not post. . . .' was bringing back some unpleasant memories. NEVER try to dictate that we only vote if we vote YOUR way.
If you want to have a better presentation, maybe you should rethink this after reading these paragraphs, for what comes to mind. Your MassChallenge page brings back memories of the kid who was angrily proclaiming that a guy built a car that got 87mpg with a "Train Carburetor" but the oil companies killed him. I just kept saying "Trains don't have carburetors." He screetched louder and louder about this "Train Carburetor" car and the FACT they even had a picture of the guy, to which I responded "Trains don't have carburetors." Of course he really got to flinging insults about me being a know it all and acting like I can argue with the National Enquirer, Argosy, or whatever reputable publication he was claiming he'd found this in. I offered to let him read my report I'd just gotten an 'A' on in the 8th grade, with all the drawings and descriptions of how a modern train works. Oh, I also offered to read his little article about this "Train Carburetor," if he could at all find it.
I'd say most of the people who look at your page will fit into one of two groups: The biggie is people who have no idea what train technology is, who couldn't tell you when they stopped stoking the boilers in the locomotive. These people are going to have no reason to see yours stand out, you give them nothing to wrap their mind around. The other is the people like me; still not experts but knowing enough to say the Chevy Volt is already a lot like some trains that have been in use for decades. (Electric drive with a diesel generator. NO CARBURETOR.) Gee, I never knew for sure how common the sort of train I wrote my report on actually was. In your effort to protect your idea, you're not giving us anything to fire our imagination.
Also, my Bachelors is in English, AA in Mass Media, I taught writing, I worked in marketing communications, I've cut these parts from your text for a reason. People tell themselves they're writing a 'Call to Action' with phrases like this:
blend of existing
locomotive, automotive & industrial technologies
turnkey hybrid drivetrain conversion
solutions for people
real world range limitations
taking the "lead" (Great double entendre, by the way.)
This is most of your text and it says nothing. What if someone else wanted you to invest in something using your exact text? You would ask "But what IS it?" In school we were taught expressions such as 'Weasel Words,' 'False Triggers,' even 'Back Filler' to sum up the lack of substance. Think of all the multilevel marketing schemes that just keep hyping all the money you're supposed to believe you'll make, never telling you what you'd be selling. The problem is that it's easy for me to think that your 'Synfuel' is a gassification system and 'Blend of existing locomotive, automotive & industrial technologies' is a stirling engine running on the gasification byproducts to power a generator for an electric car. That scary thought is 100% compatible with what you've written. The dangers of leaving too much to the imagination. I'll bet people here could come up with a dozen or so more unimpressive ideas that fit exactly with what you've written.
Your technology really isn't endangered by telling a little about it. A123 said a whole lot about their batteries before they were on the market, they just didn't tell how to BUILD them. You're just going to have to tell us something unique to your ideas. Until people get a picture of you're being on to something, they're not likely to vote for you. I daresay people who register and vote on that site are bound to be of an activist personality, voting the vague and general down just to protect the more specific ideas that they are impressed with. So you have to be so specific as to be one of the ideas that impresses them, there needs to be some detail that does the exciting, rather than just adjective selection.
Just for the fun of it, let me try to sell you my own version of what your text could mean:We are turning to the same synfuel that saved much of Europe during World War II, when the Nazi's had taken control of that continents' oil. But the lack of oil could not stop these people from making this fuel. In fact we'll be producing two synfuels, either of which can power our vehicle or be put to other industrial uses. These fuels will be made from old tires, yard wastes, things people are paying to get rid of. We'll even be able to drive our vehicle on roads paved with the solid wastes from our synfuel production. In fact nothing will be wasted.
The existing technology of our engine has been relied on for nearly 200 years without ever reaching it's full potential. It has always been considered one of the most efficient, most reliable engines ever made, so we've decided it's time to reuse this old idea. . . .
Now don't go running out and buying a bunch of those dingfutsers, it was just an example of how anything can be made to sound exciting with a few details. NOBODY in Europe was thrilled about resorting to gassification, although it is still useful even today. Such as for separating gas vapors and flammable liquid from the casings of old tires, then using the solid remains in composts for pavement."Hey, Johnny, did you know your last name is an adjective?"
- From Johnny Dangerously