| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Funny "oops!", possible "ouch!"
The August issue of one of our competing publications appeared on the
news stands today. This particular magazine is known for impressive photographs on the cover. This month's cover features a brand new (no state-reg numbers) Bayliner in front of some houseboats on Lake Union in Seattle. A shapely young woman in a blue bathing suit is sitting on the bow, and a well tanned, dark haired gentleman is standing, shirtless, behind the helm. Upon taking a closer look, the gentleman at the wheel is a dead ringer for one of the upper level people at a local boat dealership that *does not carry* Bayliners. (It's either him, or a virtually identical twin!) If this is the individual the photo almost certainly depicts, he must not have known he was being photographed. (Model releases aren't generally required for pictures taken in public places). Just after I got done chuckling over how awkward it would be to be photographed in a new Bayliner when one is not a Bayliner dealer, I had a horrifying thought: Since (if it's the guy it appears to be) he likely didn't know he was being photographed, I sure hope that if he's married it's to that woman on the foredeck! :-) Reminds me of a guy I once knew who got busted for cuddling with his mistress at a Sonics game. He phoned home to say he would be working late, "taking inventory." His now-ex wife had nothing better to do than watch the basketball game on TV while her hubby slaved away at the shop, and then the camera zoomed on a couple of lovers in the crowd........ |
Hehe. That would be tough to explain but a bit of creativity might
come up with some plausible explanation (sea trial of a trade in perhaps). There was a little incident a few years back in Mamaroneck Harbor, NY - right up the road from my old home town. A guy took his sweety out for an afternoon interlude on his sailboat. On his way back into the harbor he managed to park his boat atop a well known obstruction at the fork of the channel. The tide was going out, so by late day he, the boat, and the sweety were all attracting a fair bit of attention from the local town folk. But that was nothing compared to what happened when his wife arrived on the scene. |
wrote in message oups.com... The August issue of one of our competing publications appeared on the news stands today. This particular magazine is known for impressive photographs on the cover. This month's cover features a brand new (no state-reg numbers) Bayliner in front of some houseboats on Lake Union in Seattle. A shapely young woman in a blue bathing suit is sitting on the bow, and a well tanned, dark haired gentleman is standing, shirtless, behind the helm. Upon taking a closer look, the gentleman at the wheel is a dead ringer for one of the upper level people at a local boat dealership that *does not carry* Bayliners. (It's either him, or a virtually identical twin!) Who, the guy from Lake Union Sea Ray/Boston Whaler ? Right next door is Olympic Yacht Center - they are all in Ka-hoots with each other, right ? (not that this is a bad thing, just calls em as I see's em) If this is the individual the photo almost certainly depicts, he must not have known he was being photographed. (Model releases aren't generally required for pictures taken in public places). Just after I got done chuckling over how awkward it would be to be photographed in a new Bayliner when one is not a Bayliner dealer, I had a horrifying thought: Since (if it's the guy it appears to be) he likely didn't know he was being photographed, I sure hope that if he's married it's to that woman on the foredeck! :-) Reminds me of a guy I once knew who got busted for cuddling with his mistress at a Sonics game. He phoned home to say he would be working late, "taking inventory." His now-ex wife had nothing better to do than watch the basketball game on TV while her hubby slaved away at the shop, and then the camera zoomed on a couple of lovers in the crowd........ |
Mr Wizzard wrote: wrote in message oups.com... The August issue of one of our competing publications appeared on the news stands today. This particular magazine is known for impressive photographs on the cover. This month's cover features a brand new (no state-reg numbers) Bayliner in front of some houseboats on Lake Union in Seattle. A shapely young woman in a blue bathing suit is sitting on the bow, and a well tanned, dark haired gentleman is standing, shirtless, behind the helm. Upon taking a closer look, the gentleman at the wheel is a dead ringer for one of the upper level people at a local boat dealership that *does not carry* Bayliners. (It's either him, or a virtually identical twin!) Who, the guy from Lake Union Sea Ray/Boston Whaler ? Right next door is Olympic Yacht Center - they are all in Ka-hoots with each other, right ? (not that this is a bad thing, just calls em as I see's em) The individual on the cover is, or is a dead ringer for, a person associated with a large boat dealerhsip but not either of the firms you mentioned. In fact, the firm doesn't even have a sales office on Lake Union. I'd disagree about the local dealers all being in ka-hoots. The boat sales business doesn't (usually) get as competitively nasty as some other industries, but each firm is there to land your business rather than assist somebody else in doing the same. Buying boats from a common mfgr. corp (Brunswick) doesn't put these dealers in kahoots any more than the Buick and Cadillac auto dealers are conspiring together because they both buy cars from GM. Buying boats from a common mfgr *does* influence some things that are beyond the dealer's control, such as discount from retail to wholesale, overall warranty philosophy and remibuirsement, factory parts availability, etc. If this is the individual the photo almost certainly depicts, he must not have known he was being photographed. (Model releases aren't generally required for pictures taken in public places). Just after I got done chuckling over how awkward it would be to be photographed in a new Bayliner when one is not a Bayliner dealer, I had a horrifying thought: Since (if it's the guy it appears to be) he likely didn't know he was being photographed, I sure hope that if he's married it's to that woman on the foredeck! :-) Reminds me of a guy I once knew who got busted for cuddling with his mistress at a Sonics game. He phoned home to say he would be working late, "taking inventory." His now-ex wife had nothing better to do than watch the basketball game on TV while her hubby slaved away at the shop, and then the camera zoomed on a couple of lovers in the crowd........ |
wrote in message
oups.com... Reminds me of a guy I once knew who got busted for cuddling with his mistress at a Sonics game. He phoned home to say he would be working late, "taking inventory." His now-ex wife had nothing better to do than watch the basketball game on TV while her hubby slaved away at the shop, and then the camera zoomed on a couple of lovers in the crowd........ My friend Mike, whose name ends with a vowel, says his dad taught him that no matter WHAT you're caught doing, deny it. Period. Claims it's an Italian thing. Even if you're caught on videotape - "Nah...wasn't me". |
|
I would think that the person you are talking about would love to get a copy
of this post and thread to his lawyer. Shame on you for spreading rumors about someone without any basis of fact Chuck. |
*JimH* wrote: I would think that the person you are talking about would love to get a copy of this post and thread to his lawyer. Shame on you for spreading rumors about someone without any basis of fact Chuck. Great idea. If you know who it is, why not send him one? If you don't, then it would appear that there isn't sufficient information in the post to identify anyone, right? In fact, the only people who would know who the post referred to would be people who had seen the specific photograph and who happen to know the individual it appears to depict. That photo exists without my comment upon it- and as I said I do hope that if the guy is married it's to the woman on the foredeck. That goes for any man shirtless man photographed on a boat with a shapely young woman in a bathing suit. So sue me. :-) I'm so glad to see that you subscribe to a standard opposed to making statements about people without any basis in fact. |
wrote in message oups.com... *JimH* wrote: I would think that the person you are talking about would love to get a copy of this post and thread to his lawyer. Shame on you for spreading rumors about someone without any basis of fact Chuck. Great idea. If you know who it is, why not send him one? If you don't, then it would appear that there isn't sufficient information in the post to identify anyone, right? In fact, the only people who would know who the post referred to would be people who had seen the specific photograph and who happen to know the individual it appears to depict. That photo exists without my comment upon it- and as I said I do hope that if the guy is married it's to the woman on the foredeck. That goes for any man shirtless man photographed on a boat with a shapely young woman in a bathing suit. So sue me. :-) I'm so glad to see that you subscribe to a standard opposed to making statements about people without any basis in fact. Are you saying you would like for me to send a copy of your post via email to the dozen or so greater Seattle boat dealers who do not sell Bayliners, or are you saying that you made a mistake in posting this? I am not saying that I would send the link of your post to the dealers, but asking if you think there was anything you posted that you would not want to be sent? |
JimH,
I think you are getting carried away here. "*JimH*" wrote in message ... wrote in message oups.com... *JimH* wrote: I would think that the person you are talking about would love to get a copy of this post and thread to his lawyer. Shame on you for spreading rumors about someone without any basis of fact Chuck. Great idea. If you know who it is, why not send him one? If you don't, then it would appear that there isn't sufficient information in the post to identify anyone, right? In fact, the only people who would know who the post referred to would be people who had seen the specific photograph and who happen to know the individual it appears to depict. That photo exists without my comment upon it- and as I said I do hope that if the guy is married it's to the woman on the foredeck. That goes for any man shirtless man photographed on a boat with a shapely young woman in a bathing suit. So sue me. :-) I'm so glad to see that you subscribe to a standard opposed to making statements about people without any basis in fact. Are you saying you would like for me to send a copy of your post via email to the dozen or so greater Seattle boat dealers who do not sell Bayliners, or are you saying that you made a mistake in posting this? I am not saying that I would send the link of your post to the dealers, but asking if you think there was anything you posted that you would not want to be sent? |
Perhaps. But I just don't think that this was a proper thing for Chuck to
post. It could lead to some terrible things for the person he is talking about (if it ever got back to him) and has no business here as it is nothing but gossip. I am not going to send the link to anyone. I just wanted to let Chuck know that his post was not appropriate. "Mr. R. Name" wrote in message ... JimH, I think you are getting carried away here. "*JimH*" wrote in message ... wrote in message oups.com... *JimH* wrote: I would think that the person you are talking about would love to get a copy of this post and thread to his lawyer. Shame on you for spreading rumors about someone without any basis of fact Chuck. Great idea. If you know who it is, why not send him one? If you don't, then it would appear that there isn't sufficient information in the post to identify anyone, right? In fact, the only people who would know who the post referred to would be people who had seen the specific photograph and who happen to know the individual it appears to depict. That photo exists without my comment upon it- and as I said I do hope that if the guy is married it's to the woman on the foredeck. That goes for any man shirtless man photographed on a boat with a shapely young woman in a bathing suit. So sue me. :-) I'm so glad to see that you subscribe to a standard opposed to making statements about people without any basis in fact. Are you saying you would like for me to send a copy of your post via email to the dozen or so greater Seattle boat dealers who do not sell Bayliners, or are you saying that you made a mistake in posting this? I am not saying that I would send the link of your post to the dealers, but asking if you think there was anything you posted that you would not want to be sent? |
"*JimH*" wrote in message
... wrote in message oups.com... *JimH* wrote: I would think that the person you are talking about would love to get a copy of this post and thread to his lawyer. Shame on you for spreading rumors about someone without any basis of fact Chuck. Great idea. If you know who it is, why not send him one? If you don't, then it would appear that there isn't sufficient information in the post to identify anyone, right? In fact, the only people who would know who the post referred to would be people who had seen the specific photograph and who happen to know the individual it appears to depict. That photo exists without my comment upon it- and as I said I do hope that if the guy is married it's to the woman on the foredeck. That goes for any man shirtless man photographed on a boat with a shapely young woman in a bathing suit. So sue me. :-) I'm so glad to see that you subscribe to a standard opposed to making statements about people without any basis in fact. Are you saying you would like for me to send a copy of your post via email to the dozen or so greater Seattle boat dealers who do not sell Bayliners, or are you saying that you made a mistake in posting this? I am not saying that I would send the link of your post to the dealers, but asking if you think there was anything you posted that you would not want to be sent? Chuck is involved with publishing, so I suspect he knows better than you do what he can get away with. If you want to debate this, find someone who matches your qualifications in this area. How about the sponge next to your kitchen sink? |
*JimH* wrote: wrote in message oups.com... *JimH* wrote: I would think that the person you are talking about would love to get a copy of this post and thread to his lawyer. Shame on you for spreading rumors about someone without any basis of fact Chuck. Great idea. If you know who it is, why not send him one? If you don't, then it would appear that there isn't sufficient information in the post to identify anyone, right? In fact, the only people who would know who the post referred to would be people who had seen the specific photograph and who happen to know the individual it appears to depict. That photo exists without my comment upon it- and as I said I do hope that if the guy is married it's to the woman on the foredeck. That goes for any man shirtless man photographed on a boat with a shapely young woman in a bathing suit. So sue me. :-) I'm so glad to see that you subscribe to a standard opposed to making statements about people without any basis in fact. Are you saying you would like for me to send a copy of your post via email to the dozen or so greater Seattle boat dealers who do not sell Bayliners, or are you saying that you made a mistake in posting this? I am not saying that I would send the link of your post to the dealers, but asking if you think there was anything you posted that you would not want to be sent? Fire away, JimH. I stated that the party on the cover is either an individual associated with a non-Bayliner dealership or a dead ringer for that person- and it is. I stated that if it is the individual it appears to be, there is a good chance he did not know he was being photographed in a competitor's boat. I stated that if the gentleman did not know he was being photogrpahed, I certainly hope that if he is married it is to the woman in the bathing suit on the foredeck. Let's see- first you hope I get sued for slander and you now suggest that my comments be sent to every non-Bayliner dealer in the area? Are you OK today? No fever, or anything, I hope? Question: Who has been damaged by the observation and my comments in this thread? What is the party's name? What boat dealership or product line is he associated with? What remarks were made that would reflect in any way on persons or firms not depicted in the photo? Just because you consider me a major asshole, that doesn't mean that a post carefully crafted to *avoid* specfically identifying the person by name has done anybody any harm. People who see the cover shot and know the individual it appears to feature may draw the same amused conclusion as I have- others will wonder who it is, just as you are doing, and if they don't know who it is- or appears to be- they won't hear the name from me. |
wrote in message ups.com... *JimH* wrote: wrote in message oups.com... *JimH* wrote: I would think that the person you are talking about would love to get a copy of this post and thread to his lawyer. Shame on you for spreading rumors about someone without any basis of fact Chuck. Great idea. If you know who it is, why not send him one? If you don't, then it would appear that there isn't sufficient information in the post to identify anyone, right? In fact, the only people who would know who the post referred to would be people who had seen the specific photograph and who happen to know the individual it appears to depict. That photo exists without my comment upon it- and as I said I do hope that if the guy is married it's to the woman on the foredeck. That goes for any man shirtless man photographed on a boat with a shapely young woman in a bathing suit. So sue me. :-) I'm so glad to see that you subscribe to a standard opposed to making statements about people without any basis in fact. Are you saying you would like for me to send a copy of your post via to the dozen or so greater Seattle boat dealers who do not sell Bayliners, or are you saying that you made a mistake in posting this? I am not saying that I would send the link of your post to the dealers, but asking if you think there was anything you posted that you would not want to be sent? Fire away, JimH. I stated that the party on the cover is either an individual associated with a non-Bayliner dealership or a dead ringer for that person- and it is. I stated that if it is the individual it appears to be, there is a good chance he did not know he was being photographed in a competitor's boat. I stated that if the gentleman did not know he was being photogrpahed, I certainly hope that if he is married it is to the woman in the bathing suit on the foredeck. Let's see- first you hope I get sued for slander Where did I say that Chuck? A lie and an exaggeration. ..............and you now suggest that my comments be sent to every non-Bayliner dealer in the area? Nope, all I asked is if you would approve of it being sent and being proud of what you said. Again, more lies and exaggerations on your part...but not surprising. Are you OK today? No fever, or anything, I hope? I am fine. I am not the one starting girlie gossips about a boat dealership owner/executive I know and work with. I am also not in the boating business nor do I do rely on relationships with boat dealership owners in the Seattle area with my business. Question: Who has been damaged by the observation and my comments in this thread? What is the party's name? What boat dealership or product line is he associated with? What remarks were made that would reflect in any way on persons or firms not depicted in the photo? Just because you consider me a major asshole, that doesn't mean that a post carefully crafted to *avoid* specfically identifying the person by name has done anybody any harm. People who see the cover shot and know the individual it appears to feature may draw the same amused conclusion as I have- others will wonder who it is, just as you are doing, and if they don't know who it is- or appears to be- they won't hear the name from me. I repeat my original question Chuck, a question you never answered: "I am not saying that I would send the link of your post to the dealers, but asking if you think there was anything you posted that you would not want to be sent?" Seems like a simple enough question for you to answer. |
*JimH* wrote: wrote in message ups.com... *JimH* wrote: wrote in message oups.com... *JimH* wrote: I would think that the person you are talking about would love to get a copy of this post and thread to his lawyer. Shame on you for spreading rumors about someone without any basis of fact Chuck. Great idea. If you know who it is, why not send him one? If you don't, then it would appear that there isn't sufficient information in the post to identify anyone, right? In fact, the only people who would know who the post referred to would be people who had seen the specific photograph and who happen to know the individual it appears to depict. That photo exists without my comment upon it- and as I said I do hope that if the guy is married it's to the woman on the foredeck. That goes for any man shirtless man photographed on a boat with a shapely young woman in a bathing suit. So sue me. :-) I'm so glad to see that you subscribe to a standard opposed to making statements about people without any basis in fact. Are you saying you would like for me to send a copy of your post via to the dozen or so greater Seattle boat dealers who do not sell Bayliners, or are you saying that you made a mistake in posting this? I am not saying that I would send the link of your post to the dealers, but asking if you think there was anything you posted that you would not want to be sent? Fire away, JimH. I stated that the party on the cover is either an individual associated with a non-Bayliner dealership or a dead ringer for that person- and it is. I stated that if it is the individual it appears to be, there is a good chance he did not know he was being photographed in a competitor's boat. I stated that if the gentleman did not know he was being photogrpahed, I certainly hope that if he is married it is to the woman in the bathing suit on the foredeck. Let's see- first you hope I get sued for slander Where did I say that Chuck? A lie and an exaggeration. ..............and you now suggest that my comments be sent to every non-Bayliner dealer in the area? Nope, all I asked is if you would approve of it being sent and being proud of what you said. Again, more lies and exaggerations on your part...but not surprising. Are you OK today? No fever, or anything, I hope? I am fine. I am not the one starting girlie gossips about a boat dealership owner/executive I know and work with. I am also not in the boating business nor do I do rely on relationships with boat dealership owners in the Seattle area with my business. Question: Who has been damaged by the observation and my comments in this thread? What is the party's name? What boat dealership or product line is he associated with? What remarks were made that would reflect in any way on persons or firms not depicted in the photo? Just because you consider me a major asshole, that doesn't mean that a post carefully crafted to *avoid* specfically identifying the person by name has done anybody any harm. People who see the cover shot and know the individual it appears to feature may draw the same amused conclusion as I have- others will wonder who it is, just as you are doing, and if they don't know who it is- or appears to be- they won't hear the name from me. I repeat my original question Chuck, a question you never answered: "I am not saying that I would send the link of your post to the dealers, but asking if you think there was anything you posted that you would not want to be sent?" Seems like a simple enough question for you to answer. I thought "fire away" would have been plain enough for you. There is nothing in any portion of this thread that identifies a specific individual or business. If I had said "Joe Blow of Joe Blow Watercraft appears to be on the cover of a competing magazine piloting a brand of boat he doesn't sell, and as far as I know he's screwing around on his wife," you'd have an issue. But I didn't, you don't, and there's nothing to apologize for because I have not damaged anybody. The post reports a funny situation, without identifying the individual invovled any more specifically than the fact that he is not a Bayliner dealer. As the original post states, there's also a chance it could just be a dead ringer for the individual in question, (which would almost make it even funnier). There's nothing to retract. If the answer still seem obscure, let me know. |
wrote in message ps.com... *JimH* wrote: wrote in message ups.com... *JimH* wrote: wrote in message oups.com... *JimH* wrote: I would think that the person you are talking about would love to get a copy of this post and thread to his lawyer. Shame on you for spreading rumors about someone without any basis of fact Chuck. Great idea. If you know who it is, why not send him one? If you don't, then it would appear that there isn't sufficient information in the post to identify anyone, right? In fact, the only people who would know who the post referred to would be people who had seen the specific photograph and who happen to know the individual it appears to depict. That photo exists without my comment upon it- and as I said I do hope that if the guy is married it's to the woman on the foredeck. That goes for any man shirtless man photographed on a boat with a shapely young woman in a bathing suit. So sue me. :-) I'm so glad to see that you subscribe to a standard opposed to making statements about people without any basis in fact. Are you saying you would like for me to send a copy of your post via to the dozen or so greater Seattle boat dealers who do not sell Bayliners, or are you saying that you made a mistake in posting this? I am not saying that I would send the link of your post to the dealers, but asking if you think there was anything you posted that you would not want to be sent? Fire away, JimH. I stated that the party on the cover is either an individual associated with a non-Bayliner dealership or a dead ringer for that person- and it is. I stated that if it is the individual it appears to be, there is a good chance he did not know he was being photographed in a competitor's boat. I stated that if the gentleman did not know he was being photogrpahed, I certainly hope that if he is married it is to the woman in the bathing suit on the foredeck. Let's see- first you hope I get sued for slander Where did I say that Chuck? A lie and an exaggeration. ..............and you now suggest that my comments be sent to every non-Bayliner dealer in the area? Nope, all I asked is if you would approve of it being sent and being proud of what you said. Again, more lies and exaggerations on your part...but not surprising. Are you OK today? No fever, or anything, I hope? I am fine. I am not the one starting girlie gossips about a boat dealership owner/executive I know and work with. I am also not in the boating business nor do I do rely on relationships with boat dealership owners in the Seattle area with my business. Question: Who has been damaged by the observation and my comments in this thread? What is the party's name? What boat dealership or product line is he associated with? What remarks were made that would reflect in any way on persons or firms not depicted in the photo? Just because you consider me a major asshole, that doesn't mean that a post carefully crafted to *avoid* specfically identifying the person by name has done anybody any harm. People who see the cover shot and know the individual it appears to feature may draw the same amused conclusion as I have- others will wonder who it is, just as you are doing, and if they don't know who it is- or appears to be- they won't hear the name from me. I repeat my original question Chuck, a question you never answered: "I am not saying that I would send the link of your post to the dealers, but asking if you think there was anything you posted that you would not want to be sent?" Seems like a simple enough question for you to answer. I thought "fire away" would have been plain enough for you. There is nothing in any portion of this thread that identifies a specific individual or business. If I had said "Joe Blow of Joe Blow Watercraft appears to be on the cover of a competing magazine piloting a brand of boat he doesn't sell, and as far as I know he's screwing around on his wife," you'd have an issue. But I didn't, you don't, and there's nothing to apologize for because I have not damaged anybody. The post reports a funny situation, without identifying the individual invovled any more specifically than the fact that he is not a Bayliner dealer. As the original post states, there's also a chance it could just be a dead ringer for the individual in question, (which would almost make it even funnier). There's nothing to retract. If the answer still seem obscure, let me know. I figured that a spin such as the one you posted would be your final answer. Fair enough. Facts: The publication in question is regional (as you stated). However you chose to make it an international story by posting it to this NG......and you posted your name (and reputation) to it by posting it here.....bad call Chuck. Real bad call. But at least we now know where you stand on spreading rumors about folks that you work with that could ruin their life. What a guy you are! |
*JimH* wrote: wrote in message ps.com... *JimH* wrote: wrote in message ups.com... *JimH* wrote: wrote in message oups.com... *JimH* wrote: I would think that the person you are talking about would love to get a copy of this post and thread to his lawyer. Shame on you for spreading rumors about someone without any basis of fact Chuck. Great idea. If you know who it is, why not send him one? If you don't, then it would appear that there isn't sufficient information in the post to identify anyone, right? In fact, the only people who would know who the post referred to would be people who had seen the specific photograph and who happen to know the individual it appears to depict. That photo exists without my comment upon it- and as I said I do hope that if the guy is married it's to the woman on the foredeck. That goes for any man shirtless man photographed on a boat with a shapely young woman in a bathing suit. So sue me. :-) I'm so glad to see that you subscribe to a standard opposed to making statements about people without any basis in fact. Are you saying you would like for me to send a copy of your post via to the dozen or so greater Seattle boat dealers who do not sell Bayliners, or are you saying that you made a mistake in posting this? I am not saying that I would send the link of your post to the dealers, but asking if you think there was anything you posted that you would not want to be sent? Fire away, JimH. I stated that the party on the cover is either an individual associated with a non-Bayliner dealership or a dead ringer for that person- and it is. I stated that if it is the individual it appears to be, there is a good chance he did not know he was being photographed in a competitor's boat. I stated that if the gentleman did not know he was being photogrpahed, I certainly hope that if he is married it is to the woman in the bathing suit on the foredeck. Let's see- first you hope I get sued for slander Where did I say that Chuck? A lie and an exaggeration. ..............and you now suggest that my comments be sent to every non-Bayliner dealer in the area? Nope, all I asked is if you would approve of it being sent and being proud of what you said. Again, more lies and exaggerations on your part...but not surprising. Are you OK today? No fever, or anything, I hope? I am fine. I am not the one starting girlie gossips about a boat dealership owner/executive I know and work with. I am also not in the boating business nor do I do rely on relationships with boat dealership owners in the Seattle area with my business. Question: Who has been damaged by the observation and my comments in this thread? What is the party's name? What boat dealership or product line is he associated with? What remarks were made that would reflect in any way on persons or firms not depicted in the photo? Just because you consider me a major asshole, that doesn't mean that a post carefully crafted to *avoid* specfically identifying the person by name has done anybody any harm. People who see the cover shot and know the individual it appears to feature may draw the same amused conclusion as I have- others will wonder who it is, just as you are doing, and if they don't know who it is- or appears to be- they won't hear the name from me. I repeat my original question Chuck, a question you never answered: "I am not saying that I would send the link of your post to the dealers, but asking if you think there was anything you posted that you would not want to be sent?" Seems like a simple enough question for you to answer. I thought "fire away" would have been plain enough for you. There is nothing in any portion of this thread that identifies a specific individual or business. If I had said "Joe Blow of Joe Blow Watercraft appears to be on the cover of a competing magazine piloting a brand of boat he doesn't sell, and as far as I know he's screwing around on his wife," you'd have an issue. But I didn't, you don't, and there's nothing to apologize for because I have not damaged anybody. The post reports a funny situation, without identifying the individual invovled any more specifically than the fact that he is not a Bayliner dealer. As the original post states, there's also a chance it could just be a dead ringer for the individual in question, (which would almost make it even funnier). There's nothing to retract. If the answer still seem obscure, let me know. I figured that a spin such as the one you posted would be your final answer. Fair enough. Facts: The publication in question is regional (as you stated). However you chose to make it an international story by posting it to this NG......and you posted your name (and reputation) to it by posting it here.....bad call Chuck. Real bad call. But at least we now know where you stand on spreading rumors about folks that you work with that could ruin their life. What a guy you are! Round and round we go. Please provide a straight answer here. Who is the "rumor" about? In order to "ruin a life" one would have to know which life to ruin, correct? Once past that: What is the nature of the "rumor" itself? What is my alleged working relationship with this individual, and how does my comment that he (or a dead ringer) appears on a magazine cover "ruin his life". |
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 17:49:45 -0400, *JimH* wrote:
Perhaps. But I just don't think that this was a proper thing for Chuck to post. It could lead to some terrible things for the person he is talking about (if it ever got back to him) and has no business here as it is nothing but gossip. Uh, Jim, what are the chances it is *not* going to get back to him? If any terrible things happen, I suspect it is because the photo is on the *cover* of a boating magazine, not because of Chuck's post in this little newsgroup. I am not going to send the link to anyone. I just wanted to let Chuck know that his post was not appropriate. |
|
|
wrote in message oups.com... *JimH* wrote: wrote in message ps.com... *JimH* wrote: wrote in message ups.com... *JimH* wrote: wrote in message oups.com... *JimH* wrote: I would think that the person you are talking about would love to get a copy of this post and thread to his lawyer. Shame on you for spreading rumors about someone without any basis of fact Chuck. Great idea. If you know who it is, why not send him one? If you don't, then it would appear that there isn't sufficient information in the post to identify anyone, right? In fact, the only people who would know who the post referred to would be people who had seen the specific photograph and who happen to know the individual it appears to depict. That photo exists without my comment upon it- and as I said I do hope that if the guy is married it's to the woman on the foredeck. That goes for any man shirtless man photographed on a boat with a shapely young woman in a bathing suit. So sue me. :-) I'm so glad to see that you subscribe to a standard opposed to making statements about people without any basis in fact. Are you saying you would like for me to send a copy of your post via to the dozen or so greater Seattle boat dealers who do not sell Bayliners, or are you saying that you made a mistake in posting this? I am not saying that I would send the link of your post to the dealers, but asking if you think there was anything you posted that you would not want to be sent? Fire away, JimH. I stated that the party on the cover is either an individual associated with a non-Bayliner dealership or a dead ringer for that person- and it is. I stated that if it is the individual it appears to be, there is a good chance he did not know he was being photographed in a competitor's boat. I stated that if the gentleman did not know he was being photogrpahed, I certainly hope that if he is married it is to the woman in the bathing suit on the foredeck. Let's see- first you hope I get sued for slander Where did I say that Chuck? A lie and an exaggeration. ..............and you now suggest that my comments be sent to every non-Bayliner dealer in the area? Nope, all I asked is if you would approve of it being sent and being proud of what you said. Again, more lies and exaggerations on your part...but not surprising. Are you OK today? No fever, or anything, I hope? I am fine. I am not the one starting girlie gossips about a boat dealership owner/executive I know and work with. I am also not in the boating business nor do I do rely on relationships with boat dealership owners in the Seattle area with my business. Question: Who has been damaged by the observation and my comments in this thread? What is the party's name? What boat dealership or product line is he associated with? What remarks were made that would reflect in any way on persons or firms not depicted in the photo? Just because you consider me a major asshole, that doesn't mean that a post carefully crafted to *avoid* specfically identifying the person by name has done anybody any harm. People who see the cover shot and know the individual it appears to feature may draw the same amused conclusion as I have- others will wonder who it is, just as you are doing, and if they don't know who it is- or appears to be- they won't hear the name from me. I repeat my original question Chuck, a question you never answered: "I am not saying that I would send the link of your post to the dealers, but asking if you think there was anything you posted that you would not want to be sent?" Seems like a simple enough question for you to answer. I thought "fire away" would have been plain enough for you. There is nothing in any portion of this thread that identifies a specific individual or business. If I had said "Joe Blow of Joe Blow Watercraft appears to be on the cover of a competing magazine piloting a brand of boat he doesn't sell, and as far as I know he's screwing around on his wife," you'd have an issue. But I didn't, you don't, and there's nothing to apologize for because I have not damaged anybody. The post reports a funny situation, without identifying the individual invovled any more specifically than the fact that he is not a Bayliner dealer. As the original post states, there's also a chance it could just be a dead ringer for the individual in question, (which would almost make it even funnier). There's nothing to retract. If the answer still seem obscure, let me know. I figured that a spin such as the one you posted would be your final answer. Fair enough. Facts: The publication in question is regional (as you stated). However you chose to make it an international story by posting it to this NG......and you posted your name (and reputation) to it by posting it here.....bad call Chuck. Real bad call. But at least we now know where you stand on spreading rumors about folks that you work with that could ruin their life. What a guy you are! Round and round we go. Please provide a straight answer here. Who is the "rumor" about? As you surmised so would the person him/herself as would the many of the boat dealership salespersons and executives in your area. In order to "ruin a life" one would have to know which life to ruin, correct? Yep. See my earlier comment. If the *story* were kept to the magazine cover the *story* would be for the regional reader to imagine and the responsibility of the magazine that published it. You, however, narrowed the subject matter to a local Seattle dealership executive who did not deal with Bayliners and then made the allegation that the guy was perhaps cheating on his wife. ....a pretty broad leap and (legally) a potentially damaging post. To make matters worse you admitted that you have nothing to base your allegations on other than rumor and assumptions....yet you made the allegations in a public NG for the world to see. OMG You have set yourself up for one hell of a lawsuit Chuck. Rest assured however that I will not be the origin of it, although I certainly can. Think next time you post. Your initial post could indeed ruin a life and a marriage. Spin it any way you want....but I again say............shame on you Chuck. |
"*JimH*" wrote in message ... wrote in message oups.com... *JimH* wrote: wrote in message ps.com... *JimH* wrote: wrote in message ups.com... *JimH* wrote: wrote in message oups.com... *JimH* wrote: I would think that the person you are talking about would love to get a copy of this post and thread to his lawyer. Shame on you for spreading rumors about someone without any basis of fact Chuck. Great idea. If you know who it is, why not send him one? If you don't, then it would appear that there isn't sufficient information in the post to identify anyone, right? In fact, the only people who would know who the post referred to would be people who had seen the specific photograph and who happen to know the individual it appears to depict. That photo exists without my comment upon it- and as I said I do hope that if the guy is married it's to the woman on the foredeck. That goes for any man shirtless man photographed on a boat with a shapely young woman in a bathing suit. So sue me. :-) I'm so glad to see that you subscribe to a standard opposed to making statements about people without any basis in fact. Are you saying you would like for me to send a copy of your post via to the dozen or so greater Seattle boat dealers who do not sell Bayliners, or are you saying that you made a mistake in posting this? I am not saying that I would send the link of your post to the dealers, but asking if you think there was anything you posted that you would not want to be sent? Fire away, JimH. I stated that the party on the cover is either an individual associated with a non-Bayliner dealership or a dead ringer for that person- and it is. I stated that if it is the individual it appears to be, there is a good chance he did not know he was being photographed in a competitor's boat. I stated that if the gentleman did not know he was being photogrpahed, I certainly hope that if he is married it is to the woman in the bathing suit on the foredeck. Let's see- first you hope I get sued for slander Where did I say that Chuck? A lie and an exaggeration. ..............and you now suggest that my comments be sent to every non-Bayliner dealer in the area? Nope, all I asked is if you would approve of it being sent and being proud of what you said. Again, more lies and exaggerations on your part...but not surprising. Are you OK today? No fever, or anything, I hope? I am fine. I am not the one starting girlie gossips about a boat dealership owner/executive I know and work with. I am also not in the boating business nor do I do rely on relationships with boat dealership owners in the Seattle area with my business. Question: Who has been damaged by the observation and my comments in this thread? What is the party's name? What boat dealership or product line is he associated with? What remarks were made that would reflect in any way on persons or firms not depicted in the photo? Just because you consider me a major asshole, that doesn't mean that a post carefully crafted to *avoid* specfically identifying the person by name has done anybody any harm. People who see the cover shot and know the individual it appears to feature may draw the same amused conclusion as I have- others will wonder who it is, just as you are doing, and if they don't know who it is- or appears to be- they won't hear the name from me. I repeat my original question Chuck, a question you never answered: "I am not saying that I would send the link of your post to the dealers, but asking if you think there was anything you posted that you would not want to be sent?" Seems like a simple enough question for you to answer. I thought "fire away" would have been plain enough for you. There is nothing in any portion of this thread that identifies a specific individual or business. If I had said "Joe Blow of Joe Blow Watercraft appears to be on the cover of a competing magazine piloting a brand of boat he doesn't sell, and as far as I know he's screwing around on his wife," you'd have an issue. But I didn't, you don't, and there's nothing to apologize for because I have not damaged anybody. The post reports a funny situation, without identifying the individual invovled any more specifically than the fact that he is not a Bayliner dealer. As the original post states, there's also a chance it could just be a dead ringer for the individual in question, (which would almost make it even funnier). There's nothing to retract. If the answer still seem obscure, let me know. I figured that a spin such as the one you posted would be your final answer. Fair enough. Facts: The publication in question is regional (as you stated). However you chose to make it an international story by posting it to this NG......and you posted your name (and reputation) to it by posting it here.....bad call Chuck. Real bad call. But at least we now know where you stand on spreading rumors about folks that you work with that could ruin their life. What a guy you are! Round and round we go. Please provide a straight answer here. Who is the "rumor" about? As you surmised, so would the person him/herself, as would many of the boat dealership salespersons and executives in your area. In order to "ruin a life" one would have to know which life to ruin, correct? Yes. See my earlier comment. If the *story* were kept to the magazine cover the *story* would be for the regional reader to imagine and the responsibility of the magazine that published it. *You*, however, narrowed the subject matter to a local Seattle dealership executive who did not deal with Bayliners, and then made the allegation that the guy was perhaps cheating on his wife. ....a pretty broad leap and (legally) a potentially damaging post. To make matters worse you admitted that you have nothing to base your allegations on other than rumor and assumptions....yet you made the allegations in a public NG for the world to see. OMG You have set yourself up for one hell of a lawsuit Chuck. Rest assured however that I will not be the origin of it, although I certainly can. Think next time you post. Your initial post could indeed ruin a life and a marriage, not considering what it could do to your life and reputation. Spin it any way you want....but I again say............shame on you Chuck. edit |
I found the original post *quite* amusing!
....But not nearly as amusing as the [insert appropriate invective here] that followed it! ;-) -IMQTPI (Nancy) www.imqtpi.com |
wrote in message oups.com... Mr Wizzard wrote: wrote in message oups.com... The August issue of one of our competing publications appeared on the news stands today. This particular magazine is known for impressive photographs on the cover. This month's cover features a brand new (no state-reg numbers) Bayliner in front of some houseboats on Lake Union in Seattle. A shapely young woman in a blue bathing suit is sitting on the bow, and a well tanned, dark haired gentleman is standing, shirtless, behind the helm. Upon taking a closer look, the gentleman at the wheel is a dead ringer for one of the upper level people at a local boat dealership that *does not carry* Bayliners. (It's either him, or a virtually identical twin!) Who, the guy from Lake Union Sea Ray/Boston Whaler ? Right next door is Olympic Yacht Center - they are all in Ka-hoots with each other, right ? (not that this is a bad thing, just calls em as I see's em) The individual on the cover is, or is a dead ringer for, a person associated with a large boat dealerhsip but not either of the firms you mentioned. In fact, the firm doesn't even have a sales office on Lake Union. So whats the name of the mag? - I want to get a copy. I'd disagree about the local dealers all being in ka-hoots. Fair enough. I have little experience with them acutally since this new 2005 Bayliner 175 Capri is the first "real" boat that I ever bought. The Zodiac I got last year at Boaters World doesn't really count. The boat sales business doesn't (usually) get as competitively nasty as some other industries, but each firm is there to land your business rather than assist somebody else in doing the same. Buying boats from a common mfgr. corp (Brunswick) doesn't put these dealers in kahoots any more than the Buick and Cadillac auto dealers are conspiring together because they both buy cars from GM. Buying boats from a common mfgr *does* influence some things that are beyond the dealer's control, such as discount from retail to wholesale, overall warranty philosophy and remibuirsement, factory parts availability, etc. Agree. My comment was probably an unwarranted cheap-shot. Duely retracted. Actually, Olympic Yacht Center was nothing less than stand-up, professional, and very LOW pressure when I was hounding them for info. Actually, the folks at the main Olympic Boat Center were of the same caliber. I was impressed. If this is the individual the photo almost certainly depicts, he must not have known he was being photographed. (Model releases aren't generally required for pictures taken in public places). Just after I got done chuckling over how awkward it would be to be photographed in a new Bayliner when one is not a Bayliner dealer, I had a horrifying thought: Since (if it's the guy it appears to be) he likely didn't know he was being photographed, I sure hope that if he's married it's to that woman on the foredeck! :-) Reminds me of a guy I once knew who got busted for cuddling with his mistress at a Sonics game. He phoned home to say he would be working late, "taking inventory." His now-ex wife had nothing better to do than watch the basketball game on TV while her hubby slaved away at the shop, and then the camera zoomed on a couple of lovers in the crowd........ |
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... wrote in message oups.com... Reminds me of a guy I once knew who got busted for cuddling with his mistress at a Sonics game. He phoned home to say he would be working late, "taking inventory." His now-ex wife had nothing better to do than watch the basketball game on TV while her hubby slaved away at the shop, and then the camera zoomed on a couple of lovers in the crowd........ My friend Mike, whose name ends with a vowel, says his dad taught him that no matter WHAT you're caught doing, deny it. Niiiice ..... So am I to assume that you admire Mikes Dad's advice ? Period. Claims it's an Italian thing. Sounds more like a "Baghdad Bob" thing actually. actentThere are _no_ Americans at the airport, those people you see in the background are NOT American.../acent hehe Even if you're caught on videotape - "Nah...wasn't me". Yup!,.... Right from the official website: http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/ |
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 17:45:22 -0400, "Mr. R. Name"
wrote: JimH, I think you are getting carried away here. Agreed! -- John H. On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD |
"John H." wrote in message ... On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 17:45:22 -0400, "Mr. R. Name" wrote: JimH, I think you are getting carried away here. Agreed! -- John H. On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD Agreed. |
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 18:45:29 -0400, "*JimH*" wrote:
wrote in message ups.com... *JimH* wrote: wrote in message ups.com... *JimH* wrote: wrote in message oups.com... *JimH* wrote: I would think that the person you are talking about would love to get a copy of this post and thread to his lawyer. Shame on you for spreading rumors about someone without any basis of fact Chuck. Great idea. If you know who it is, why not send him one? If you don't, then it would appear that there isn't sufficient information in the post to identify anyone, right? In fact, the only people who would know who the post referred to would be people who had seen the specific photograph and who happen to know the individual it appears to depict. That photo exists without my comment upon it- and as I said I do hope that if the guy is married it's to the woman on the foredeck. That goes for any man shirtless man photographed on a boat with a shapely young woman in a bathing suit. So sue me. :-) I'm so glad to see that you subscribe to a standard opposed to making statements about people without any basis in fact. Are you saying you would like for me to send a copy of your post via to the dozen or so greater Seattle boat dealers who do not sell Bayliners, or are you saying that you made a mistake in posting this? I am not saying that I would send the link of your post to the dealers, but asking if you think there was anything you posted that you would not want to be sent? Fire away, JimH. I stated that the party on the cover is either an individual associated with a non-Bayliner dealership or a dead ringer for that person- and it is. I stated that if it is the individual it appears to be, there is a good chance he did not know he was being photographed in a competitor's boat. I stated that if the gentleman did not know he was being photogrpahed, I certainly hope that if he is married it is to the woman in the bathing suit on the foredeck. Let's see- first you hope I get sued for slander Where did I say that Chuck? A lie and an exaggeration. ..............and you now suggest that my comments be sent to every non-Bayliner dealer in the area? Nope, all I asked is if you would approve of it being sent and being proud of what you said. Again, more lies and exaggerations on your part...but not surprising. Are you OK today? No fever, or anything, I hope? I am fine. I am not the one starting girlie gossips about a boat dealership owner/executive I know and work with. I am also not in the boating business nor do I do rely on relationships with boat dealership owners in the Seattle area with my business. Question: Who has been damaged by the observation and my comments in this thread? What is the party's name? What boat dealership or product line is he associated with? What remarks were made that would reflect in any way on persons or firms not depicted in the photo? Just because you consider me a major asshole, that doesn't mean that a post carefully crafted to *avoid* specfically identifying the person by name has done anybody any harm. People who see the cover shot and know the individual it appears to feature may draw the same amused conclusion as I have- others will wonder who it is, just as you are doing, and if they don't know who it is- or appears to be- they won't hear the name from me. I repeat my original question Chuck, a question you never answered: "I am not saying that I would send the link of your post to the dealers, but asking if you think there was anything you posted that you would not want to be sent?" Seems like a simple enough question for you to answer. I thought "fire away" would have been plain enough for you. There is nothing in any portion of this thread that identifies a specific individual or business. If I had said "Joe Blow of Joe Blow Watercraft appears to be on the cover of a competing magazine piloting a brand of boat he doesn't sell, and as far as I know he's screwing around on his wife," you'd have an issue. But I didn't, you don't, and there's nothing to apologize for because I have not damaged anybody. The post reports a funny situation, without identifying the individual invovled any more specifically than the fact that he is not a Bayliner dealer. As the original post states, there's also a chance it could just be a dead ringer for the individual in question, (which would almost make it even funnier). There's nothing to retract. If the answer still seem obscure, let me know. I figured that a spin such as the one you posted would be your final answer. Fair enough. Facts: The publication in question is regional (as you stated). However you chose to make it an international story by posting it to this NG......and you posted your name (and reputation) to it by posting it here.....bad call Chuck. Real bad call. But at least we now know where you stand on spreading rumors about folks that you work with that could ruin their life. What a guy you are! Jim, you're starting to sound a lot like Kevin with this stuff. -- John H. On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD |
"John H." wrote in message ... On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 18:45:29 -0400, "*JimH*" wrote: wrote in message oups.com... *JimH* wrote: wrote in message ups.com... *JimH* wrote: wrote in message oups.com... *JimH* wrote: I would think that the person you are talking about would love to get a copy of this post and thread to his lawyer. Shame on you for spreading rumors about someone without any basis of fact Chuck. Great idea. If you know who it is, why not send him one? If you don't, then it would appear that there isn't sufficient information in the post to identify anyone, right? In fact, the only people who would know who the post referred to would be people who had seen the specific photograph and who happen to know the individual it appears to depict. That photo exists without my comment upon it- and as I said I do hope that if the guy is married it's to the woman on the foredeck. That goes for any man shirtless man photographed on a boat with a shapely young woman in a bathing suit. So sue me. :-) I'm so glad to see that you subscribe to a standard opposed to making statements about people without any basis in fact. Are you saying you would like for me to send a copy of your post via to the dozen or so greater Seattle boat dealers who do not sell Bayliners, or are you saying that you made a mistake in posting this? I am not saying that I would send the link of your post to the dealers, but asking if you think there was anything you posted that you would not want to be sent? Fire away, JimH. I stated that the party on the cover is either an individual associated with a non-Bayliner dealership or a dead ringer for that person- and it is. I stated that if it is the individual it appears to be, there is a good chance he did not know he was being photographed in a competitor's boat. I stated that if the gentleman did not know he was being photogrpahed, I certainly hope that if he is married it is to the woman in the bathing suit on the foredeck. Let's see- first you hope I get sued for slander Where did I say that Chuck? A lie and an exaggeration. ..............and you now suggest that my comments be sent to every non-Bayliner dealer in the area? Nope, all I asked is if you would approve of it being sent and being proud of what you said. Again, more lies and exaggerations on your part...but not surprising. Are you OK today? No fever, or anything, I hope? I am fine. I am not the one starting girlie gossips about a boat dealership owner/executive I know and work with. I am also not in the boating business nor do I do rely on relationships with boat dealership owners in the Seattle area with my business. Question: Who has been damaged by the observation and my comments in this thread? What is the party's name? What boat dealership or product line is he associated with? What remarks were made that would reflect in any way on persons or firms not depicted in the photo? Just because you consider me a major asshole, that doesn't mean that a post carefully crafted to *avoid* specfically identifying the person by name has done anybody any harm. People who see the cover shot and know the individual it appears to feature may draw the same amused conclusion as I have- others will wonder who it is, just as you are doing, and if they don't know who it is- or appears to be- they won't hear the name from me. I repeat my original question Chuck, a question you never answered: "I am not saying that I would send the link of your post to the dealers, but asking if you think there was anything you posted that you would not want to be sent?" Seems like a simple enough question for you to answer. I thought "fire away" would have been plain enough for you. There is nothing in any portion of this thread that identifies a specific individual or business. If I had said "Joe Blow of Joe Blow Watercraft appears to be on the cover of a competing magazine piloting a brand of boat he doesn't sell, and as far as I know he's screwing around on his wife," you'd have an issue. But I didn't, you don't, and there's nothing to apologize for because I have not damaged anybody. The post reports a funny situation, without identifying the individual invovled any more specifically than the fact that he is not a Bayliner dealer. As the original post states, there's also a chance it could just be a dead ringer for the individual in question, (which would almost make it even funnier). There's nothing to retract. If the answer still seem obscure, let me know. I figured that a spin such as the one you posted would be your final answer. Fair enough. Facts: The publication in question is regional (as you stated). However you chose to make it an international story by posting it to this NG......and you posted your name (and reputation) to it by posting it here.....bad call Chuck. Real bad call. But at least we now know where you stand on spreading rumors about folks that you work with that could ruin their life. What a guy you are! Jim, you're starting to sound a lot like Kevin with this stuff. -- John H. On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD That is the 2nd time you said that (or something similar). Are you going to go for a 3rd John? I am entitled to my opinion and I stated it. Chuck is as guilty as I am for drawing the stupid discussion out to the point that he did. End of story for me....go ahead Chuck.....you always have to have the last word. |
JimH,
Don't take any of the crap in here seriously. Sometimes I think you take it way too seriously. This is mindless entertainment. Harry cut and pasting articles so he can pick fights with conservatives. Kevin missing 3/4 of what is going on, living in a fog. Chuck pretending this is serious discussion, trying to pretend he is not in the mud with the rest of us. I would not let anything anyone said in here upset you. "*JimH*" wrote in message ... "John H." wrote in message ... On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 18:45:29 -0400, "*JimH*" wrote: wrote in message roups.com... *JimH* wrote: wrote in message ups.com... *JimH* wrote: wrote in message oups.com... *JimH* wrote: I would think that the person you are talking about would love to get a copy of this post and thread to his lawyer. Shame on you for spreading rumors about someone without any basis of fact Chuck. Great idea. If you know who it is, why not send him one? If you don't, then it would appear that there isn't sufficient information in the post to identify anyone, right? In fact, the only people who would know who the post referred to would be people who had seen the specific photograph and who happen to know the individual it appears to depict. That photo exists without my comment upon it- and as I said I do hope that if the guy is married it's to the woman on the foredeck. That goes for any man shirtless man photographed on a boat with a shapely young woman in a bathing suit. So sue me. :-) I'm so glad to see that you subscribe to a standard opposed to making statements about people without any basis in fact. Are you saying you would like for me to send a copy of your post via to the dozen or so greater Seattle boat dealers who do not sell Bayliners, or are you saying that you made a mistake in posting this? I am not saying that I would send the link of your post to the dealers, but asking if you think there was anything you posted that you would not want to be sent? Fire away, JimH. I stated that the party on the cover is either an individual associated with a non-Bayliner dealership or a dead ringer for that person- and it is. I stated that if it is the individual it appears to be, there is a good chance he did not know he was being photographed in a competitor's boat. I stated that if the gentleman did not know he was being photogrpahed, I certainly hope that if he is married it is to the woman in the bathing suit on the foredeck. Let's see- first you hope I get sued for slander Where did I say that Chuck? A lie and an exaggeration. ..............and you now suggest that my comments be sent to every non-Bayliner dealer in the area? Nope, all I asked is if you would approve of it being sent and being proud of what you said. Again, more lies and exaggerations on your part...but not surprising. Are you OK today? No fever, or anything, I hope? I am fine. I am not the one starting girlie gossips about a boat dealership owner/executive I know and work with. I am also not in the boating business nor do I do rely on relationships with boat dealership owners in the Seattle area with my business. Question: Who has been damaged by the observation and my comments in this thread? What is the party's name? What boat dealership or product line is he associated with? What remarks were made that would reflect in any way on persons or firms not depicted in the photo? Just because you consider me a major asshole, that doesn't mean that a post carefully crafted to *avoid* specfically identifying the person by name has done anybody any harm. People who see the cover shot and know the individual it appears to feature may draw the same amused conclusion as I have- others will wonder who it is, just as you are doing, and if they don't know who it is- or appears to be- they won't hear the name from me. I repeat my original question Chuck, a question you never answered: "I am not saying that I would send the link of your post to the dealers, but asking if you think there was anything you posted that you would not want to be sent?" Seems like a simple enough question for you to answer. I thought "fire away" would have been plain enough for you. There is nothing in any portion of this thread that identifies a specific individual or business. If I had said "Joe Blow of Joe Blow Watercraft appears to be on the cover of a competing magazine piloting a brand of boat he doesn't sell, and as far as I know he's screwing around on his wife," you'd have an issue. But I didn't, you don't, and there's nothing to apologize for because I have not damaged anybody. The post reports a funny situation, without identifying the individual invovled any more specifically than the fact that he is not a Bayliner dealer. As the original post states, there's also a chance it could just be a dead ringer for the individual in question, (which would almost make it even funnier). There's nothing to retract. If the answer still seem obscure, let me know. I figured that a spin such as the one you posted would be your final answer. Fair enough. Facts: The publication in question is regional (as you stated). However you chose to make it an international story by posting it to this NG......and you posted your name (and reputation) to it by posting it here.....bad call Chuck. Real bad call. But at least we now know where you stand on spreading rumors about folks that you work with that could ruin their life. What a guy you are! Jim, you're starting to sound a lot like Kevin with this stuff. -- John H. On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD That is the 2nd time you said that (or something similar). Are you going to go for a 3rd John? I am entitled to my opinion and I stated it. Chuck is as guilty as I am for drawing the stupid discussion out to the point that he did. End of story for me....go ahead Chuck.....you always have to have the last word. |
Harry,
You are correct, but they do know my comments about you are very accurate. Everyone, including those who agree with your position on issues, know you have a real problem with the truth. "HarryKrause" wrote in message ... Mr. R. Name wrote: JimH, Don't take any of the crap in here seriously. Indeed, Smithers. That's why no one in here should take you seriously. |
"Mr. R. Name" wrote in message ... Harry, You are correct, but they do know my comments about you are very accurate. Everyone, including those who agree with your position on issues, know you have a real problem with the truth. The funny thing is that you can go back 6-7 years and find posts pointing out harry's lies..........it is a real sickness with him, and progressively getting worse. "HarryKrause" wrote in message ... Mr. R. Name wrote: JimH, Don't take any of the crap in here seriously. Indeed, Smithers. That's why no one in here should take you seriously. |
Harry,
Why do you spend so much time trying to make up a imaginary persona in rec.boats? I see you are now going for the nicer sweeter Harry who takes care of animals. That is much more becoming. "HarryKrause" wrote in message ... P. Fritz wrote: "Mr. R. Name" wrote in message ... Harry, You are correct, but they do know my comments about you are very accurate. Everyone, including those who agree with your position on issues, know you have a real problem with the truth. The funny thing is that you can go back 6-7 years and find posts pointing out harry's lies..........it is a real sickness with him, and progressively getting worse. Shouldn't you be meeting with your self-help friends, Paul, trying to find out where you went wrong as a husband and father? |
Harry,
I only have one ID, this is me and has always been me. Did you see where Kevin thinks only an idiot would make up a story about being a Dr. Dr.? "HarryKrause" wrote in message ... Mr. R. Name wrote: Harry, Why do you spend so much time trying to make up a imaginary persona in rec.boats? You're the expert in that area, dip. How many IDs have you used in here to date? 60? |
"Mr. R. Name" wrote in message ... Harry, Why do you spend so much time trying to make up a imaginary persona in rec.boats? Poor harry is projecting his own shortcomings again. I see you are now going for the nicer sweeter Harry who takes care of animals. That is much more becoming. "HarryKrause" wrote in message ... P. Fritz wrote: "Mr. R. Name" wrote in message ... Harry, You are correct, but they do know my comments about you are very accurate. Everyone, including those who agree with your position on issues, know you have a real problem with the truth. The funny thing is that you can go back 6-7 years and find posts pointing out harry's lies..........it is a real sickness with him, and progressively getting worse. Shouldn't you be meeting with your self-help friends, Paul, trying to find out where you went wrong as a husband and father? |
Harry,
You and everyone else have always known who I am, so obviously I have only one ID. When you change your nick to hkrause or h_krause and many other spin-offs were you changing your ID? Of course not, everyone knew who you were. The same with me any my nicks, they are always me. Now when you changed your name to a fictious boater on the Chesapeake and carried on a online conversation between Harry Krause and this new fictious boater. This new person in rec.boats loved Harry Krause's Lobster Boat. It just looked so great. Too bad you didn't realize you and your fake sock puppet had the exact same IP. Now that is using a fake ID. and you used it very poorly. ; ) "HarryKrause" wrote in message ... Mr. R. Name wrote: Harry, I only have one ID, this is me and has always been me. Liar. You use multiple IDs in this newsgroup. Probably 50 at least. |
What about the guy you made up so you could try to "prove" you owned a
Lobster Boat? You know they guy who was using your computer to chat with you in rec.boats. ; ) I love the way you post pictures of YoHo, but the infamous Lobster Boat is never seen. "HarryKrause" wrote in message ... Mr. R. Name wrote: Harry, You and everyone else have always known who I am, so obviously I have only one ID. The boring boor? Sorry, your dog won't hunt. You have used about 50 different IDs in here. For you to claim something contrary is a lie. |
Harry,
Do you think anyone in rec.boats believes any of your lies? You are struggling to hold onto a tale that has died a long time ago. Give it up. It will make you feel better to fess up to your sins. ; ) "HarryKrause" wrote in message ... Mr. R. Name wrote: I love the way you post pictures of YoHo, but the infamous Lobster Boat is never seen. I'm glad you love it. I'm also glad that my refusal to post certain photos so aggravates so many of you dipsticks. By the way, I also have not posted photos of my canoe, my old motor scooter, my even older sports cars, my everyday car, my wife's car, my Maryland house, my Florida house, the commercial property we own, my bank pin numbers or even my pets. Too bad, eh? And I won't. I have, however, posted precise locations from time to time where said lobster-like boat may be seen. Right now, she's up at a marina in the Deale, Maryland, area, for a spot of scheduled maintenance. |
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:27:47 -0400, "*JimH*" wrote:
"John H." wrote in message .. . On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 18:45:29 -0400, "*JimH*" wrote: wrote in message roups.com... *JimH* wrote: wrote in message ups.com... *JimH* wrote: wrote in message oups.com... *JimH* wrote: I would think that the person you are talking about would love to get a copy of this post and thread to his lawyer. Shame on you for spreading rumors about someone without any basis of fact Chuck. Great idea. If you know who it is, why not send him one? If you don't, then it would appear that there isn't sufficient information in the post to identify anyone, right? In fact, the only people who would know who the post referred to would be people who had seen the specific photograph and who happen to know the individual it appears to depict. That photo exists without my comment upon it- and as I said I do hope that if the guy is married it's to the woman on the foredeck. That goes for any man shirtless man photographed on a boat with a shapely young woman in a bathing suit. So sue me. :-) I'm so glad to see that you subscribe to a standard opposed to making statements about people without any basis in fact. Are you saying you would like for me to send a copy of your post via to the dozen or so greater Seattle boat dealers who do not sell Bayliners, or are you saying that you made a mistake in posting this? I am not saying that I would send the link of your post to the dealers, but asking if you think there was anything you posted that you would not want to be sent? Fire away, JimH. I stated that the party on the cover is either an individual associated with a non-Bayliner dealership or a dead ringer for that person- and it is. I stated that if it is the individual it appears to be, there is a good chance he did not know he was being photographed in a competitor's boat. I stated that if the gentleman did not know he was being photogrpahed, I certainly hope that if he is married it is to the woman in the bathing suit on the foredeck. Let's see- first you hope I get sued for slander Where did I say that Chuck? A lie and an exaggeration. ..............and you now suggest that my comments be sent to every non-Bayliner dealer in the area? Nope, all I asked is if you would approve of it being sent and being proud of what you said. Again, more lies and exaggerations on your part...but not surprising. Are you OK today? No fever, or anything, I hope? I am fine. I am not the one starting girlie gossips about a boat dealership owner/executive I know and work with. I am also not in the boating business nor do I do rely on relationships with boat dealership owners in the Seattle area with my business. Question: Who has been damaged by the observation and my comments in this thread? What is the party's name? What boat dealership or product line is he associated with? What remarks were made that would reflect in any way on persons or firms not depicted in the photo? Just because you consider me a major asshole, that doesn't mean that a post carefully crafted to *avoid* specfically identifying the person by name has done anybody any harm. People who see the cover shot and know the individual it appears to feature may draw the same amused conclusion as I have- others will wonder who it is, just as you are doing, and if they don't know who it is- or appears to be- they won't hear the name from me. I repeat my original question Chuck, a question you never answered: "I am not saying that I would send the link of your post to the dealers, but asking if you think there was anything you posted that you would not want to be sent?" Seems like a simple enough question for you to answer. I thought "fire away" would have been plain enough for you. There is nothing in any portion of this thread that identifies a specific individual or business. If I had said "Joe Blow of Joe Blow Watercraft appears to be on the cover of a competing magazine piloting a brand of boat he doesn't sell, and as far as I know he's screwing around on his wife," you'd have an issue. But I didn't, you don't, and there's nothing to apologize for because I have not damaged anybody. The post reports a funny situation, without identifying the individual invovled any more specifically than the fact that he is not a Bayliner dealer. As the original post states, there's also a chance it could just be a dead ringer for the individual in question, (which would almost make it even funnier). There's nothing to retract. If the answer still seem obscure, let me know. I figured that a spin such as the one you posted would be your final answer. Fair enough. Facts: The publication in question is regional (as you stated). However you chose to make it an international story by posting it to this NG......and you posted your name (and reputation) to it by posting it here.....bad call Chuck. Real bad call. But at least we now know where you stand on spreading rumors about folks that you work with that could ruin their life. What a guy you are! Jim, you're starting to sound a lot like Kevin with this stuff. -- John H. On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD That is the 2nd time you said that (or something similar). Are you going to go for a 3rd John? I am entitled to my opinion and I stated it. Chuck is as guilty as I am for drawing the stupid discussion out to the point that he did. End of story for me....go ahead Chuck.....you always have to have the last word. I don't think I made the same, or similar, comment to the *same* post. As you say, I am entitled to my opinion and I stated it. -- John H. On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:29 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com