But it obviously wasn't settled to Shel's satisfaction. I assume that Shel accepted a compromise, being the least unsatisfactory option open to him. Had he known what he was going to get, Shel would not have contracted with JCO in the first place.
And he won't again! That shows how satisfied he was. John On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 19:47:17 +0100, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In a message dated 10/24/2006 11:12:09 AM Pacific Daylight Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Shel didn't share email with the list. He claimed that when he > raised an issue about an eBay transaction JCO responded with an > abusive email message. That's a very different thing. > > Accusing Shel of offences of which he is innocent isn't helping things. > =========== > > An issue discussed in private email (or in person) is private -- > confidence > is confidence. We don't know if it was an abusive email, as our own > feelings > about constitutes abuse may differ from Shel's. I have seen both JCO and > Shel be > about what I would call equally abusive back and forth in the JCO survey > thread. > > So I withhold judgment. About the only way Shel could "prove" anything at > this point in time, is to actually share JCO's email that he thinks was > abusive > on list. Which would further violate confidence and Net Etiquette. And > it would > have to be all the emails they shared back and forth. > > IMHO, if the buyer/seller matter was settled to both parties satisfaction > privately, then it really shouldn't be brought up out of context later > to make a > point in a public forum. > > Marnie aka Doe But I will shut up on this now. > -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
