Forum threads, on TB and just about any other forum that I've been on fall into a few themes. A theme that is really popular, especially with guys, is centered on 'biggest, extreme, most' or some such superlative. It boils down to 'Does size matter?'
When I saw the first post I figured that it would go in one of three directions...and it did, ending in: most participants follow current practices and design rigging setups based on good safety factors. They've chosen ropes that are plenty strong for the loads that are expected. They know that the weakest part of rigging, and most unknown, is the tree. They even know that trees can have hidden weak spots so they tend to take smaller pieces.
There are the others that cut pieces with no regard to the manufacturers ratings. Sure...they get away with overloading and this gives them the false confidence that they're right and the rest of the world is wrong. Time will tell.
For years I've challenged people who say that topping trees is OK because it doesn't kill trees. If they find any documentation, from a credible source, that topping is a legitimate practice, print the article, bring it to a conference where we both attend and I'll eat it.
I'll offer the same challenge here. Find a manufacturer that condones bombing out big chunks onto small ropes, get them to write you a letter...meet me at Expo...I'll eat the letter. As long as I can add some
Cholula Sauce
Reckless advice and arrogant attitude needs to be considered...who is the source? What is their credibility?