Wouldn't they have to prove damage? I am generaly of the view that noboby pays the least attention to anything said on these kind of BBSs.

I think just as mater of what is right, and also what is prudent, one should not go out of one's way to put things in a nasty light. For instance I saw a Magnatec at a local dealer recently. I am just as happy as can be that we have milled Al risers today, and the days of cheap looking Magnesium risers are gone. I consider magnesium risers to be crap. On the other hand with the Magnatec, I had to look twice to be sure what it was. It looks very nice, It may be a good bow for certain people. And even though it is more costly, and conceivably more high tech to have a milled Al riser, I really can't prove such a bow works better.

If my review were to say all Mag. risers are crap, could I defend that in a court situation (just as an exercise, nobody is going to sue me I suppose). Could I defend it anyway? What is my evidence? Basicaly I think in the old days we needed a better product, we now have it in both the milled and cast products, we also have products that are cast and milled etc... Milled remains my preference. If I just say "I really like a milled riser, for the following reason who could object? If we take the high road, and state what we know for a fact only, or if we are going beyond fact, present it as opinion, I can't see how that is a problem.