Bob wrote:

And please Charlie, tells us you aren't the same Charlie Solak who is the registered owner of the domain name for the website from which you orders the product and which provided you such "excellent service".

Some degree of poetic justice... His web site is down.

I sent an email to webmaster@mpeg3.com complaining about Charlie's spam post. Mpeg3.com provides free email services and has explicit terms against this type of usage. I would suggest that other like minded individuals send a polite email express their displeasure as well.

Cheers,

Jim McCorison
M/V Maana - 38' DeFever, Hull #2
Seattle, WA

Bernard,

I purchased the BatteryMINDer this past summer and it worked on an old Rolls
battery after a prolonged period of time - around two weeks. There are
other, more expensive brands, but this one did work for me. Bought it online
from an outfit in Florida.

Ron Rogers
Annapolis, MD

----- Original Message -----
From: "bv" bvcom@mac.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2001 8:16 AM

you

any?

----- Original Message -----
From: "bv" bvcom@mac.com

you

Hi Bernard,

Charlie Solak is apparently a dealer of some sort for the BatteryMinder. He
is NOT  the manufacturer.

As I understand things, the BatteryMinder is built by VDC Electronics
http://www.vdcelectronics.com/ . They show a dealer list at
http://www.vdcelectronics.com/dealers.htm . FWIW: Mr. Solak's company
doesn't seem to be mentioned on that list.

I can't comment on the usefulness of the product but it's important that we
don't blame the manufacturer for the actions of one vendor who may have no
ties at all to them.

We are preparing a letter of protest about this situation; More info this
afternoon.

Alex Hirsekorn
TWL Help Team

you

any?

I was one of the first on the list to buy the BatterMinder and test it
on junked batteries.

If the battery is not shorted or lost a cell you have a very good chance
of bringing  the battery back to the CCA or AH rating of the battery.

I even have brought junked batteries back to ABOVE the CCA
rating on the battery's label!!!!

Yes, it takes about 2 to 3 weeks to wake up the dead!  If after that time
you cannot wake up the battery - it is time to replace it.

You do not toss out a bar of soap until it is completely used up, so why
toss a battery that still has much active material within?  Polish the
battery
plates with a de-sulphator.  I use BatteryMinder because the price
is right and I can buy it at my local battery store.

Brian Hall
CHB "Any Sea"
Old Bay Marina
Baltimore

At 08:16 AM 11/06/2001 -0500, bv wrote:

Arild replies:

Bernard,  the technology is still valid.  Perhaps  one person committed a
faux pas which violated the list rules but the technology  does work.
I have not personally tested the Battery MINDer but several  list members
did and reported  sucess.  I have  personal experience with  a couple of
other products which  cost  more.
Pulsetech  is apparently the  patent holder and originator of the
technology.  As with any other sucess,  it breeds copies that are more or
less  sucessful compared to the original.

CanPulse is one such product.  Intended for  trucks and engine start
batteries  which is always connected to an active charging source it will
only work  when the battery voltage is above 13.4V    but the advantage is
the pulses are much more powerful, so it works faster.

Pulsetech  wil continue to work  at voltages down to about 9.0V  or even
lower but  the pulses are fewer and  it takes a lot longer to reverse  a
badly sulfated  battery.    To compensate Pulsetech  offers two  variations
on the basic module.
One has a power cube ( much like the Battery MINDer)  which provides a
trickle charge current. The other  model has a solar panel for use  with
equipment  located away from  any  utility power source. ( at anchor etc.)

One Company - Rhino Chargers in CA - offers a series of chargers  which are
intended for bulk  charging and recovery of  many batteries such as you
might  find in a fleet operation or a battery  recovery  center.

My information is that the BatteryMINDer  product  while a look alike
does not have the exact same pulse wave shape and this is claimed ( by
Pulsetech)  to be critical  for  optimum performance.    The cost is about
half of the Pulsetech so if the  performance is about half as good you
still get  proportionately what you paid for.  The  bottom line is  several
list members  did  try it and did express satisfaction with the end result.
I can't recall names but  a search of the archives will get you that.

Cheers

Arild
Disclaimer - no financial interest - just an interested user and
experimenter  with the technology)

At 08:16 AM 11/06/2001 -0500, Bernard wrote:

REPLY

I am a little concerned at the implication  of this  letter.
Just because someone  posted a comment  about a product  which he had a
commercial intererst  in  does not automatically make the product bad.

Bernard's comment  suggest that he now feels  that a Battery MINDer  is
all of a sudden  no good just because  of Mr. Solak's post being in
violation  of the list rules.

This is an unfortunate  outcome of the  list rules which  I'm suer was
never intended.

Cheers

----- Original Message -----
From: "Arild Jensen" elnav@uniserve.com

Hi Arild,

This has been an unfortunate occurrence but I prefer to lay the blame on the
spammer rather than on the TWL rules.

Charlie Solak came to the list under false pretenses in order to promote his
business; Further, he configured his web sites to imply that his connection
to the manufacturer is closer than it actually is. BTW: While looking into
this I learned that Mr. Solak's technique is actually fairly common (&
commonly reviled) in the Usenet arena.

All that, quite understandably, led to some confusion but I think those
issues were laid to rest by posts from several TWListees pointing out the
facts of the matter.

In practice, the commercial prohibition on TWL has been limited to the
direct promotion of a product or service. Folks like Al Pilvinis, Joe Engle,
and Al Golden are encouraged to share their knowledge and to include a 'sig'
that indicates their business interests. Others, such as Mike Maurice and
yourself (in your Xantrex days) post extensively in your areas of expertise
without interference even though everybody "knows" about the commercial
interests involved. The difference between you, the others, and Charlie
Solak is that you folks are honest about your affiliations and that you
refrain from product promotion.

If Mr. Solak had chosen to take part in TWL discussions (even if he mainly
lurked) and limited his business exposure to a 'sig.'  then this uproar
never would have occurred.

Advertorially yours,

Alex

Thanks to all who suggested alternatives for BatteryMinder.

To Alrid, I don't necessary feel that Battery Minder could be suddenly no
good. I just want to put my money in companies and people I'm proud of, like
I choose the restaurants, not only for the food (I'd say 70%), but for the
quality of the people taking care of me (30%).

Same thing for my computer store, my local butcher or the fish market, more
expensive than Costco but closer to my "social" needs. Old southern French
village roots, I guess...

That said, I don't know if he answered privately or on the list, but Al
Pilvinis provided me with one of his one-liner answers which make sense. He
says : "It's called money to buy new ones with. No sense having batteries on
board that might die when you are on a trip."

Thanks, Al. BatteryMinder will wait. I'll buy new batteries. Now, golf
batteries or Die-Hard or else... Decisions, decisions!

Bernard