Hallett's Howlers

For discussions about bikes and equipment.
thatsnotmyname
Posts: 595
Joined: 23 Jan 2020, 10:23am

Re: Hallett's Howlers

Postby thatsnotmyname » 5 Jun 2020, 10:47am

Jdsk wrote:
thatsnotmyname wrote:
531colin wrote:Apart from duff technical advice, the man < . . is an ad hoc frame and bike builder working purely on a private commission basis>.
How can that not be a conflict of interest with being CTC technical officer?


Perhaps you could explain why you think it IS a conflict?

I've no idea if there's any conflict of interest or not. But transparency is essential, and I didn't know this.

Jonathan


One of his bikes was featured in the CUK magazine. It had his name on it and everything. I think he was even standing next to it. How much more transparency do you need?

Carlton green
Posts: 1006
Joined: 22 Jun 2019, 12:27pm

Re: Hallett's Howlers

Postby Carlton green » 5 Jun 2020, 10:51am

thatsnotmyname wrote:
Jdsk wrote:
thatsnotmyname wrote:
Perhaps you could explain why you think it IS a conflict?

I've no idea if there's any conflict of interest or not. But transparency is essential, and I didn't know this.

Jonathan


One of his bikes was featured in the CUK magazine. It had his name on it and everything. I think he was even standing next to it. How much more transparency do you need?


Having apparently not accepted the moderator’s judgement it must surely be not much longer before you are placed on the naughty step.

pwa
Posts: 13638
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Hallett's Howlers

Postby pwa » 5 Jun 2020, 10:51am

fausto99 wrote:
Graham wrote:Please note that any further "head-of-a-pin" arguments will invoke the dreaded . . . . naughty step. !


Please explain. I'd never heard of "head-of-a-pin" arguments, so I consulted Mrs fausto99, who is a retired English teacher, and she explained about academic clerics and futile theoretical arguments re fitting angels onto pins, but I still fail to see the relevance to any of the posts in this thread.

It did occur to me that it was "head of a pin" stuff while it was going on.

What it means is that the discussion became focused in on a tiny little detail so unimportant to the main discussion about technical advice that it became a bit silly. It became a discussion over what is a "shop", whether it has to be a bricks-and-mortar place you can visit, whether it can be just online, whether it can be called a shop if it is just a customer asking for something directly, in a conversation...... And since it all implies the possibility of dishonourable intent it ventures into possible libel, with (to my mind) no solid evidence, it all becomes a bit dodgy.

It is legitimate, however, to ask whether, in principle, it is right for someone who has a commercial interest in selling bike stuff should be put forward to offer impartial technical advice. Regardless of whether we call his operation a "shop". But this was not the objection of the OP, which was simply concerned with the dubious nature of some of the advice offered.

Carlton green
Posts: 1006
Joined: 22 Jun 2019, 12:27pm

Re: Hallett's Howlers

Postby Carlton green » 5 Jun 2020, 10:55am

squeaker wrote:
IMHO, CJ, having been made redundant, IIRC, has behaved exceedingly well towards his former employer by not sniping constantly at, shall we say, differing advice of variable quality that has appeared in the CTC mag. over the ensuing years.


Plus one and I’m always delighted to see his comments on these pages.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 16581
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Hallett's Howlers

Postby mjr » 5 Jun 2020, 11:00am

thatsnotmyname wrote:
531colin wrote:Apart from duff technical advice, the man < . . is an ad hoc frame and bike builder working purely on a private commission basis>.
How can that not be a conflict of interest with being CTC technical officer?


Perhaps you could explain why you think it IS a conflict?

Because of his other activities and commercial relationships with other businesses, he is potentially unable to render impartial advice, or his objectivity might be otherwise impaired, or he might have an unfair competitive advantage.

Without declarations, it's a pretty textbook example of conflict of interest. Do you disagree, or just take the view that it doesn't matter?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

thatsnotmyname
Posts: 595
Joined: 23 Jan 2020, 10:23am

Re: Hallett's Howlers

Postby thatsnotmyname » 5 Jun 2020, 11:19am

mjr wrote:Because of his other activities and commercial relationships with other businesses, he is potentially unable to render impartial advice, or his objectivity might be otherwise impaired, or he might have an unfair competitive advantage.

Without declarations, it's a pretty textbook example of conflict of interest. Do you disagree, or just take the view that it doesn't matter?


You have never actually been able to identify what these commercial relationships might be though - and how they have influenced the advice he gives. If it is a 'textbook example', then presumably you have specific evidence which you can link to?

thatsnotmyname
Posts: 595
Joined: 23 Jan 2020, 10:23am

Re: Hallett's Howlers

Postby thatsnotmyname » 5 Jun 2020, 11:22am

Carlton green wrote:
Having apparently not accepted the moderator’s judgement it must surely be not much longer before you are placed on the naughty step.


The moderator has already amended Colin's comments, at my request for a fair and balanced debate, rather than the one-sided pitchfork riot which others would clearly prefer...

Jdsk
Posts: 5166
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Hallett's Howlers

Postby Jdsk » 5 Jun 2020, 11:50am

thatsnotmyname wrote:
Jdsk wrote:
thatsnotmyname wrote:
Perhaps you could explain why you think it IS a conflict?

I've no idea if there's any conflict of interest or not. But transparency is essential, and I didn't know this.

Jonathan


One of his bikes was featured in the CUK magazine. It had his name on it and everything. I think he was even standing next to it. How much more transparency do you need?

I'd like to see that other interest declared every time that advice is given. The fact that it has been declared somewhere else doesn't help me to know that it exists, although it certainly suggests that it hasn't been kept secret.

Jonathan

thatsnotmyname
Posts: 595
Joined: 23 Jan 2020, 10:23am

Re: Hallett's Howlers

Postby thatsnotmyname » 5 Jun 2020, 11:59am

Jdsk wrote:I'd like to see that other interest declared every time that advice is given. The fact that it has been declared somewhere else doesn't help me to know that it exists, although it certainly suggests that it hasn't been kept secret.

Jonathan


If he's recommending that everyone buys a Hallett frame, then that would be fair enough. But I doubt if he is doing that, and if he was, I'm sure the CUK mag editorial board (assuming there is one), might have something to say about it.

Otherwise, if he suggests someone goes out and buys a Shimano rear mech - is he going to get criticised for not declaring an interest as he previously fitted one to a bike he built for a customer?

Surely you can see that the speed/absurdity curve is going to increase rapidly if we go down that route..

pwa
Posts: 13638
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Hallett's Howlers

Postby pwa » 5 Jun 2020, 12:00pm

Personally, I think Hallett is, like many good folk I know, a bike geek, totally obsessed with bikes, not money. So I don't doubt that any advice he offers is the honest product of his musings. And there can be few if any "experts" able to write these articles without having some other sideline, probably bike related. What is needed is simply an open and clear statement about any relevant interests, if there are any, with each article.

Carlton green
Posts: 1006
Joined: 22 Jun 2019, 12:27pm

Re: Hallett's Howlers

Postby Carlton green » 5 Jun 2020, 12:07pm

thatsnotmyname wrote:
531colin wrote:Apart from duff technical advice, the man < . . is an ad hoc frame and bike builder working purely on a private commission basis>.
How can that not be a conflict of interest with being CTC technical officer?


Perhaps you could explain why you think it IS a conflict?


With your post here above the thread started to drift in an unhelpful direction again. As far as I can tell you somehow resurrected comments from Colin 531 so that you could then challenge them again in what’s seemingly a trivial and distracting argument about a relatively small point. If the way that I read things is correct then IMHO the Mod’s would be perfectly correct to place you on the naughty step. I think that it would be good if you were able to just let your issue drop so that others members aren’t distracted from discussing more constructive aspects of the original post, any chance of that please?

Jdsk
Posts: 5166
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Hallett's Howlers

Postby Jdsk » 5 Jun 2020, 12:10pm

pwa wrote:What is needed is simply an open and clear statement about any relevant interests, if there are any, with each article.

Exactly.

Jonathan

Carlton green
Posts: 1006
Joined: 22 Jun 2019, 12:27pm

Re: Hallett's Howlers

Postby Carlton green » 5 Jun 2020, 12:13pm

thatsnotmyname wrote:
Carlton green wrote:
Having apparently not accepted the moderator’s judgement it must surely be not much longer before you are placed on the naughty step.


The moderator has already amended Colin's comments, at my request for a fair and balanced debate, rather than the one-sided pitchfork riot which others would clearly prefer...


I would agree that debate should be fair and balanced, many posts have been but the moderator will have had his own good reasons for trimming the post back and IMHO all sides should respect that.

MartinC
Posts: 1906
Joined: 10 May 2007, 6:31pm
Location: Bredon

Re: Hallett's Howlers

Postby MartinC » 5 Jun 2020, 12:15pm

I hope CJ has written to the editor to get a correction issued. It would be interesting to see if it's published. Andy Blance from Thorn had to do this recently when the technical advice published was inviting readers to void their warranty on their Rohloff hub. Perhaps we could have a regular section where expert readers put corrections to the technical articles. Maybe we could cut out the middleman and get them to write them in the first place.

There may be an idea in Cycling UK that all this tech advice stuff is a throwback to the old CTC but if we want to encourage cycling across the board making CUK a go to place for definitive advice on real world cycling would be valuable.

thatsnotmyname
Posts: 595
Joined: 23 Jan 2020, 10:23am

Re: Hallett's Howlers

Postby thatsnotmyname » 5 Jun 2020, 12:16pm

Carlton green wrote:With your post here above the thread started to drift in an unhelpful direction again. As far as I can tell you somehow resurrected comments from Colin 531 so that you could then challenge them again in what’s seemingly a trivial and distracting argument about a relatively small point. If the way that I read things is correct then IMHO the Mod’s would be perfectly correct to place you on the naughty step. I think that it would be good if you were able to just let your issue drop so that others members aren’t distracted from discussing more constructive aspects of the original post, any chance of that please?


My only issues are accuracy and balance. Suggesting that someone has a vested interest in influencing the advice they give is hardly a 'small point'. And as long as people here persist with that line, I will try to balance it.