Free Electric Multi-use motor - Home gen-Car motor-Boat Motor-lawn mower

[Magluvin]

No but it does do exactly what the title says .

'Free Electric Multi-use motor - Home gen-Car motor-Boat Motor-lawn mower'


I dont get it. what happened to the teams? 

Mags

[truesearch]

@Mags:


Take a look at post #167.


truesearch

[TinselKoala]

@Mags:


Take a look at post #167.


truesearch

Take a look at the header on the first page of this forum. It says:

Welcome to OverUnity.com

[/size] The International Open Source Free Energy Research Forum

I wonder what "OPEN SOURCE" means.

Does it mean that researchers must sign non-disclosure agreements with the claimant in order to be on the distribution list of the information that's shared privately? Does it mean that there are secret "teams" that have information that the other poor fools reading the thread don't have?

The post #167 is clearly violating the fundamental tenets of open-source research. Fine... if you want to do things that way, fine, it's your party.  But what are you doing soliciting help on an OPEN SOURCE forum then?

What if someone wanted to see PROOF that the claimant is actually running his household electric needs from his device and is not connected to the grid? Would that someone have to sign away his open source rights of knowledge and discussion,  in order to see that proof?

I'll conjecture right here in the OPEN that you will never see such proof, regardless of how many NDAs and secret agreements and "teams" you are on.

[truesearch]

@TinselKoala


I agree with the "open source" concept and didn't mean to come across as supporting the approach taken on this thread.


However, that is what has happened here and if someone (such as Mags) wanted to see or get involved with the "team" then co-operating with the directions in post #167 appears to be the only way. . . . . without seeing proof.


sincerely,
truesearch

[JouleSeeker]

Take a look at the header on the first page of this forum. It says:
I wonder what "OPEN SOURCE" means.

Does it mean that researchers must sign non-disclosure agreements with the claimant in order to be on the distribution list of the information that's shared privately? Does it mean that there are secret "teams" that have information that the other poor fools reading the thread don't have?

The post #167 is clearly violating the fundamental tenets of open-source research. Fine... if you want to do things that way, fine, it's your party.  But what are you doing soliciting help on an OPEN SOURCE forum then?

What if someone wanted to see PROOF that the claimant is actually running his household electric needs from his device and is not connected to the grid? Would that someone have to sign away his open source rights of knowledge and discussion,  in order to see that proof?

I'll conjecture right here in the OPEN that you will never see such proof, regardless of how many NDAs and secret agreements and "teams" you are on.

I share Koala's concerns.  Particularly, the NDA requirement is a big concern:
1.  Let's suppose I'm working on a motor-generator concept myself
2.  But I sign inventacom's NDA in order to be on the private "Team"
3.  Then I learn something that will help me with my own motor-gen developments...
4.  Can I freely discuss MY motor-gen ideas at that point, open source?  or am I bound by the NDA?

That's why I was dismayed as soon as I saw the NDA requirement....

5.  With the NDA, can anyone even tell us when the device works, or doesn't work? (for sure)

The departure from freedom of speech, "free" energy and open source is a valid concern IMO.