John Atkinson wrote:

Howard Ferstler wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:
As I pointed out, damaged from the scratches that could result
from the ArmorAll application. These scratches can be polished
out.

So, you basically say that it is no big deal.

No, that is not what I said.

OK, so we both agree that it is a big deal, at least for
some of your readers in those old days.

If somebody damaged a couple of dozen (or more) compact discs,
they can get to work and polish out the scratches.

Yes, but if they applied the Armorall correctly, they would
not have scracthed the discs.

Sure. Frankly, given the nature of Armor All and the at
least initial durability of the plastic side of typical
discs, it is likely that anyone who did scratch the things
during application was a jerk. I think that your writer
should have taken into consideration the limited mental
abilities of some of your gullible readers.

it is also possible that Armor All could potentially damage
the label side of a disc.

It is possible, which is why Armor All should not be applied
to the label side.

Are you saying that it still should be applied to the
playing side? You appear to still believe that the
application has some kind of benefit.

I suggest you read what Stereophile actually
wrote about this tweak before you wonder off into your own world
of wander, Mr. Ferstler.

It has been years since I read it, and actually once I had
read into it a bit and realized the basic premise I went on
to only scan it and meditate on the stupidity of it all.
Even if the application of Armor All to the playing side had
not resulted in problems for some of your readers, the whole
premise of what it was supposed to do was idiotic. I only
heard about the retraction article, and thought the whole
thing had become comic.

Given the interest in this subject here on RAO and
audio.pro, I think you should skip ahead with your
Stereophile internet archival transfer work and put the
original article and any follow-up, retraction-topic
articles on your web site, along with all of the now-posted
self-congratulatory materials.

Howard Ferstler