CLEARANCE: Top Secret
- Mar 18, 2008
- Reaction score
Not quite. There are some statements above that appear to be latching onto some of the Stavetti claims for legitimacy.Lauge said:As for "naive"? - well, no-one here seems to claim that Stavatti is anything other than some neat graphics on a website. "Naive" would be if you actually believed any of it was real.
And as Tophe put it there is a naïve appreciation of good looking aerotech. Which I’m as vulnerable too as the next guy.
But the difference is like that between leafing through a copy of Playboy at your mate’s place (just for the articles of course) and becoming a promoter of pornography. Trying to encourage a serious discussion about the technical merits of Stavetti provides them a forum for their vapourware.
By promoting (by discussion, detail and historical exploration) of the aircraft and other activities of the Nazis one does not inherently promote Nazism. To argue that would be to say the Yad Vasham promotes mass murder of people with gas and then burning their bodies in industrial ovens. Of course some people may positively link the Nazis politics with the weapons technology but not here or anywhere else most of us travel.Lauge said:As for "lacking a basic level of ethics"? No question that the originators of Stavatti fall under this heading, if they are using their designs to scam money from people. But do we, by extension, become morally deficient if we discuss the creations (valid or otherwise) of people with low or nonexistent ethics? If so, this would immediately exclude any discussion of, e.g., designs from WWII-era Germany, certainly those designs produced using slave labour, wouldn't it?
The difference is that the bad thing about Stavetti is their aircraft designs. It is the cool looking aircraft which is designed to support a honey trap for uninformed and overly greedy speculators (>40% per annum returns). They are inherently the poison not some ideology represented by a symbol painted on the tail.