Since you've been the only one providing a representation of peril I wonder if your strenuous efforts of refutation might me triggered by you perception of AMTSO as a peril for the supposedly endangered aspects you described and that I summarized in my previous post.
Okay, in relation to the whole AV industry, that is what I meant. But, to narrow it down to what COMODO feels, it is the AMTSO-believers who think that non-AMTSO tests are "dangerous". I don't think that I have ever said that an organization such as AMTSO should not exist, instead I say that it just shouldn't indirectly attempt to dictate (not literally) to the all testers on the subject of "AV testing".
It wouldn't really appear a matter of testing anymore as I gather you wish for test as a mere container to express the tester's "ideology" without regard for anything else.
Though it would be seemingly possible to replicate your arguments to any field of scientific research it would be unlikely to revert them back to the state you're wishing for AV tests.
Again, you haven't quite understood me. Where have I ever said anything that is equivalent to "AV testing exists for one and only purpose - the intriguing ideologies behind the testing methodologies" - that would be insane, seriously.
Aren't there different different ways to catch malware? Don't AV vendors promote their own products as being unique and special from all others'? Don't we, the users, know that we differentiate malware products based on numerous detection techniques? So, what is wrong if one test measures the leak-prevention prowess of firewalls, and another measures the detection power of AVs in catching static malware, while the third one is about dynamic capabilities? That is basically what I said when I said "different ideologies for testing".
I understood you point is that everybody ought to decide the value of something. Why it should works in an one-sided way?
This was a statement directed towards COMODO for considering non-AMTSO tests as "weak". Whereas I have never said that COMODO should submit CAV ONLY to non-AMTSO tests.
My opinion is, until AMTSO tests arrive, why not, just for the sake of testing, enter CAV into these "weaker" tests?
To Kyle: I believe I was at least slightly less incoherent there, or should I say - incoherently less incoherent, if that makes sense... again.