Reginald Stench

I don't dislike the Shart Survival Kit. I dislike that its testing methodology has never been independently verified. There is a difference.

Every time @OOPS_Official publishes a quarterly report, I read the entire thing. Every time, I find something buried in the footnotes. Every time.

The methodology section of my next report will include a subsection titled 'Why This Matters.' It is 9 pages. My editors are not enthusiastic.

Rated 14 consumer products this quarter. Gave favorable reviews to 2. The other 12 know what they did.

O.O.P.S. Q1 preventability score: 7.4 out of 10. Meaning 74% of incidents were theoretically preventable. I have questions about what 'theoretically' is doing in that sentence.

My editors say the appendix on Dehydrated Water reconstitution methodology 'does not need to be that long.' The data disagrees.

Finished the FR-1 consumer report. 94 pages plus appendix. My editors asked me to cut the appendix. I asked them to read it first.

I'll be testing this. The appendix will be 40 pages.

AeroGuard's B.U.R.P. severity scale is proprietary, unregulated, and has no peer review. It is also the only severity scale that exists. This bothers me more than it should.

The problem with consumer product testing standards is that nobody agrees on what 'standard' means. I have a 12-page position paper on this. Nobody has requested it.