[R-390] Netiquette

[2002tii]

Well, I'll give it one more shot to try to clarify what I thought was 
objectionable about the original post.  Once again, I intend my tone 
to be respectful and hope everyone takes it that way.

I promise this is the last I'll say about it, and encourage others to 
let the matter drop soon (if not immediately), as well.

>I respectfully disagree.  This really has nothing to do of my 
>opinion. I factually pointed out why I was exposing this individual 
>who was preying on the good will of those on the list.  I was 
>telling the proven facts about this persons actions.

Here is where we disagree most sharply.  This is the list of 
"offenses" you posted:  (i) he shows up on the list only to ask for 
parts to repair equipment that he then sells, possibly representing 
when he does so that he is using the radio in question in his own 
station; (ii) he did not respond to your suggestion about selling 
radios to list members instead of parting them out; (iii) he didn't 
want to pay the price you were asking for tube shields, although 
others were happy to pay it; and (iv) he described some knobs you 
bought as in great condition and you thought they were only average, 
then blacklisted you when you left him neutral feedback.

These are ALL assertions of opinions, not a fact among them, proven 
or otherwise.  Further, what possible relevance do (i) through (iii) 
have?  How is he cheating anybody by asking for parts on the list, 
not answering e-mail, not taking your suggestions about how to sell 
his radios, parting out radios, or refusing to pay what you were 
asking for items you were selling?  Some of these are things some of 
us might not do ourselves, and might even think are unseemly.  But 
they do not, by any stretch of the imagination IMO, constitute a 
fraud emergency about which a whole mailing list needs to be 
alerted.  The only possible real offense in this batch is speculation 
that the seller misrepresented that the radios were being used in his 
station when they really weren't.  But do you have any knowledge this 
was the case?  It appears you reached this conclusion by inference 
after seeing the item(s) for sale.  How long (or how much) does 
someone have to use a radio for it to be part of his own station, 
anyway?  I know any number of hams that have completely new stations 
every time I talk to them, every piece bought and sold 
on-line.  Should we declare an emergency and alert the list if one of 
them tries to buy parts for one of those radios here?  As to the 
other two of these first three "offenses," who are any of us to judge 
someone for wanting to dispose of his own radios as he sees fit 
rather than how we would prefer?  Or for having in mind what he 
thinks is a fair price for something (however wrong he might be), and 
declining to pay more than that?  Even if he insulted you and called 
you a thief for asking what you were asking for the tube shields, 
that is just not something the rest of us need to know -- it is 
between you and him.

Turning to item (iv), the two of you disagreed about the condition of 
some knobs you bought from him.  I don't know if you told him your 
assessment and asked for an adjustment or a refund, or just left 
neutral feedback.  In any case, it wasn't bad enough for you to leave 
negative feedback and you were willing to do business with him again 
(in fact, you seem irked that you weren't able to).  A dispute about 
the subjective condition of an item, which did not warrant negative 
feedback or even put you off dealing with the seller again, simply 
does not justify slamming him on a public mailing list.  IMO.

>I admit a bit of sarcasm in some of my comments.  It was earned.
>
>I'm not like some people who when kicked ones private anatomy say 
>"Why, that wasn't cricket!"

I'm just asking:  Could it be that you take offense quite easily, and 
turn every perceived slight into a hanging offense?  From your own 
characterizations, I just don't see that you were kicked anywhere -- 
certainly not in sensitive parts or in any way that would, IMO, 
justify calling someone out publicly.  I'm not saying it could never 
be justified -- I just don't see it here.

And that is my final on the topic.

Respectfully,

Don


ps.  For the record, I do not know either party other than by their 
posts on this list.