It is apparent there is some bad blood/business under your bridge with them and I have no issue with that. Again, I am not tied to nor am I a Horus fan boy but I do conceded that their reticle does work and is prefered by some people. That's it, no more, no less. Given your history, I can see why it's a stickler with you. However, it's no reason to belittle or attack others who like or use the product here.
My original post never mentioned a single person, or quoted a single word posted prior...
You didn't like reading what I posted, even though it was all the truth and felt it was a direct threat to your decision making. That is what prompted you to post in response. Then you quoted Graham from the Old School thread saying the "results point to the relevance"... well the only data we have to show results over any period of time, doing this type of shooting was that "tactical shooter's equipment post"... now you can try and spin the data, you can say it is too narrow, irrelevant, shows nothing, in order to justify your decision but it is based on actual use and is certainly telling in this matter.
You were never questioned, my post was based on experience over 10 years directly related to this system.
I gave the pros to system, use in a Spotter, or as a training tool... I gave the history of the system, the original intent as it was designed. I also qualified my observations as it goes to the very heart of the matter, better shooting. Why we hold off and why we should know when and where to do so based on the target and good shooting principles, ie the Fundamentals of Marksmanship.
Reading between the lines and overlaying past posts is a function of your mind and not what others see or what i have posted here. I have no decision to justify here like someone who bought and paid for the reticle. Interestingly, we have Horus charging $400 per upgrade while groups like FinnAccuracy or Premier charge less than $50 per licensing fee. That, along with their history of suing companies who "infringe" on the hold over reticle concept should be enough to turn people off the whole idea from this company. But because of their efforts, most recently through the military channels, people believe, wrongly in many people's opinion it has merit worthy of the costs.
There are people who are embracing the concept with real innovation, Like David Tubb and the DTR... Based on the principle of the hold off, it uses MPH for wind and then matches the reticle to the bullet using a DA formula to adjust based on the conditions. Their is merit and innovation out there, however a Mil Based "grid" is not it. Mils are not new, nor are they construct of Horus, they simply gridded it out... and again, Initial Impressions are correct and telling. if you have to be convinced of its merit that is a big red flag. I would rather see a new shooter embrace the DTR concept than jump into a Horus. The DTR is as simple as it gets, Wind in MPH, nothing to convert, smaller aiming points, less clutter in the FOV and then a solid method for adjustment based on the conditions at the time of the shot.
Pros and Cons are not hard to point out, the fact i did and you protested directly is telling in, you bought and paid for the system. I never have, in fact quite the opposite I was given it on more than one occasion and still I manage to give you both sides of the story. Reading disdain into my post, not a problem to me... the history speaks for itself. Still I gave both sides... not just one.
I wont waste me time with other comment, you;re not being honest as we both known they camped out at Range 37 and influenced a lot of people. These are not large orders, but small ones controlled at the unit level. I know I taught the classes bringing them into the fold. Horus employes guys to "teach" the reticle at this level, because more than 2 scope were bought. There are several levels of decision making at work here.