Describing this as a half-full, half-empty situation is a swing and miss. It is not a conflict between good and evil, it is a disconnect between misinformation and exaggeration against the evidence driven pursuit of the truth.
It is reasonable to participate in a discussion or debate about whether there is a need to improve the company's marketing to take advantage of an assumed product superiority by logically:
- supporting/disputing the premise about better marketing, and/or
- supporting/disputing the question of whether product superiority is real.
It is literally off-topic (not in an iHub TOS way), and a predictable emotional overreaction, to defensively inject, "What about Nanoco?" into any discussion one misreads as an assault on QMC. That's a "Protect the homeland from all perceived slights!" doctrine, not a half-full outlook.
