[meteorite-list] Fraudulent Trade?

From: Eric Twelker <twelker_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Wed Jun 28 01:02:18 2006
Message-ID: <C0C74DB7.25BE7%twelker_at_alaska.net>

Michael,

    I don't often comment on this list, but I will this time to disagree.
In this dispute the two sides are McCartney's detailed complaint and Bob
Evans' email basically telling McCartney to stuff it.

    That's not what I or most people would consider "two sides" to a
dispute. That's an abuse that people should know about and condemn.

    And what does the IMCA have to do with this. So far as I can see Bob
Evans isn't a member--and perhaps the reason why is evident.

    Eric Twelker

> Hi Mike and all,
> Well, it just goes to demonstrate once more how there are more
> than one side to every issue and each side can be "right" in its own
> way and that doesn't necessarily make the other side "wrong."
> Best wishes, Michael
>
>
>
> on 6/27/06 12:40 PM, Mike Fowler at mqfowler_at_mac.com wrote:
>
>> 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
>
Received on Wed 28 Jun 2006 01:03:51 AM PDT