We didn't want bullshit, supposition, guessing, lies to replace correct information and data. There was already too much of that on the interwebs.
In general the members of OSG have policed themselves and called out in obvious crap that is being shopped around, whether that is about a new or vintage instrument. But it is always good to remind everyone to never believe everything you read and always do your homework. I.e. take everything with a pinch of salt.
Just as an example of utter bullshit I give you the following.
I came across this today while ready the Gibson-talk.com website [how I got there I have no fucking idea ].
Anyway, some newbie asked the question : In the market for a J 200, How do the Montana made J 200's compare to the 60's and 70's Kalamazoo models.
A long time member of that site (Wally) replied with the following [note: I have corrected typing mistakes].
You don't have to have even played let alone owned a Gibson acoustic from the 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s to know this guys is talking through his arse hole, just listen to multitude of magnificent music recorded with these guitars from the 40s - 70s.
So please be on your toes and don't let BS become accepted fact.
From a posting on Gibson-talk.com
I would buy a new Gibson any day over a Gibson acoustic from the '60's or '70's. Those are the worst years for Gibson Acoustics.
In fact, the only reason I buy Gibson Acoustics from the years before 1960 is for resale. From the '50's on back, Gibson's have the bridge and saddle positioned too far away from the 12th fret.
Every Gibson acoustic from the late '50's on back that I have measured is this way except one J200. When I measured it and remarked to the owner that the saddle position was correct, he said that a luthier in Seattle had corrected it with a new bridge with a proper saddle position.
IMHO, with everything considered, I think the Montana plant has produced Gibson's best acoustics.