Beware of defective ineffective filters.

Pugsy wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 05, 2025 8:28 am

This is on the verge of being nothing but a pissing contest.

ENOUGH with this. Agree to disagree and move on. If you guys/gals persist in this argument I will lock the thread.
This is your one and only warning.

Thank you.

I just saw your warning after posting an explanation about my filters to another member. I am not in a contest. I am explaining what has happened with different filters. Why some find my experience offensive I do not understand. I am not attacking their products, I am criticizing products I've experienced with what I think are clear details. I do not understand why there are rebuttals.

ejbpesca wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 05, 2025 10:44 am

I do not understand why there are rebuttals.

I don't know either but all sides have REPEATEDLY stated their opinion but I guess they want to be the last to state it and that makes it right. News flash....doesn't make it right.

I think you have warned enough people......let it rest. You aren't going to change anyone's opinion by repeated your stated opinion.....that's what makes it a pissing contest. I recognize it clearly because I have participated in more than one myself.

I would hate to remove posts and threads but the arguing is really getting on my nerves.

This dead horse has been beaten to death a dozen times.

No more.

Thank you.

AusJ wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 05, 2025 8:18 am

Use without a filter will increase the amount of particulates that the user is exposed to.

The horse has been beaten to death, but you rode in on a new pony. Your comment is out of context. You introduced "without a filter".

ejbpesca wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 05, 2025 10:39 am

They had loose exposed fibers.

This was enough to reject those filters. All the discussion about color would have been moot.