[meteorite-list] Fraudulent Trade

From: Dave Carothers <david.carothers_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Tue Jun 27 15:55:57 2006
Message-ID: <01ca01c69a22$c4315210$6401a8c0_at_WINBOOKJ>

I'm afraid I have to agree with Mike Fowler on this and I couldn't state my
rationale any better than what he states below.

Dave
IMCA 2052

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Fowler" <mqfowler_at_mac.com>
To: <meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Cc: "Mike Fowler" <mqfowler_at_mac.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2006 3:40 PM
Subject: [meteorite-list] Fraudulent Trade


> Dear Michael Blood,
>
> I couldn't disagree with you more on this issue.
>
> When transactions take place between members of the meteorite
> community there is a high degree of mutual trust involved.
> I trust the people I'm dealing with because I'm sure that the vast
> majority of them are intrinsically honest persons.
>
> I also trust members of the meteorite community I've NEVER DEALT WITH
> BEFORE, because the meteorite community is very small and I know that
> a dishonest person would not last long, because in a small community,
> bad news travels fast.
>
> I think McCartney Taylor did the right thing to bring this to a
> public forum because:
>
> 1) It gives all of us a heads up about a possible rotten apple in our
> midst.
> 2) It gives the other party a chance to state his case and correct
> the facts, or pay up as the case may be.
>
> I think this is much better than a bunch of private emails where the
> "accused" has no chance to respond, or even know he is being besmirched.
>
> My future trust in members of the meteorite community would be
> considerably reduced if I thought that cooks would not be exposed
> publicly.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Mike Fowler
>
> > Comment to all:
>
> > I was very sad to see the original post regarding this private
> > issue. As is almost always the case, it would also appear there is
> > more
> > than one side to the story, as Bob indicates below.
> > This is an example of why private issues should not be brought
> > up on the list and why people should be very hesitant about "taking
> > sides" when they are. If the accusations have merit, they should have
> > gone directly to the board of the IMCA, and I encourage both parties
> > to pursue that action now.
> >
> > While it appears there may be significant other issues in this case,
> > it is none of my business - nor anyone else's on the list, other
> > than board
> > members of the IMCA, if this issue is presented to them.
> > I have had multiple interactions with both parties involved and
> > found each of them to be, in every instance, honest, open and above
> > board. Whatever there differences are - they are between the two of
> > them
> > and I hope they are able to resolve them. In any event, I hope we
> > are not
> > exposed to the issue further on this list. If it does go before the
> > board of
> > the IMCA, then, perhaps there will be action taken of which we will be
> > made aware. As I said, however, even then, I would hope rather
> > for an amicable resolution being reached leaving all parties
> > satisfied,
> > but in any event, off the list.
> >
>
> > Best wishes, Michael
> ______________________________________________
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.5/377 - Release Date: 6/27/2006
>
>
Received on Tue 27 Jun 2006 03:49:12 PM PDT