My perspective is that if you tolerate a fraud and try to sweep it under the rug as
some here seem to be proposing to do, then you have only validated the bad action.
I have suggested that this matter be pursued in small claims court and if the facts
support the seller, then so be it. If the facts support Eric, then he should be
rightfully be entitled to a judgement. If such event occurs and the seller refuses
to pay up, the Eric has the judgement as a matter of public record and should
publicize widely that he has a judgement and that thus far "well known person XYZ"
has been ignoring a court order.
This is like terrorism, you are either fighting it or you are supporting it. I
cannot see why anyone would want to tolerate fraud just because we happen to know
the bad actor.
Of course there may be some facts that tend to exhonerate the seller that we've not
been told,. such as "this piece of &*#^# mount doesn't work worth a damn, but if
you will give me $50 for it, you can see what you can do with it". That would put a
completely different angle on the story. Thus far that's not the representation
I've heard from Eric.
By the way, being out of the mount for months is a cost to Eric. Figure at the very
least that the money he paid could have been collecting interest in the bank.
I say it sounds like he has an actionable case and would like to see him pursue it.
I hate it when some lousy #*#&#@ tries to use their position of prominence as a
shield to help them to perpetrate a fraud. If this happened to me, I'd make that
bastard so uncomfortable that they'd pay me double to shut me up.
Lesson: don't try to sell me anything that you know is screwed up without proper
disclosure.
rdc
Paul Sterngold wrote:
> Thank you, Eric. You have chosen wisely.
>
> Publicly discussing this issue wouldn't be fair unless the other party is
> provided with an opportunity to respond and tell his side of the story. I don't
> know how others feel about this, but IMO such a kangaroo court would be
> extremely inappropriate on TAC. Private email is well suited for this type of
> information passing, IMO.
>
> Cheers,
> Paul Sterngold
>
> --- "E. Ayres" <ngc4244@No-Spam> wrote:
> > As much as I would LOVE to impart this info on
> > everyone I do not know that this would be the proper
> > forum. If one needs to know this info ask me off list
> > or when you see me next. I am not sure that flaming
> > this person in public solves much, it does not get me
> > a new mount or my money back. Richard thanks for the
> > support though I appreciate it! When this mount is
> > fixed I may sell it and my C8 to finance a new
> > LX-200GPS if they are good.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Eric
> >
> >
> > --- Richard Crisp <rdcrisp@No-Spam> wrote:
> > > it seems to me that a very unethical person sold
> > > that mount to Eric. I think
> > > Eric ought to take the mask off of this unethical
> > > person and quit hiding their
> > > identity. Let's all collectively shun them if Eric
> > > does. :-)
> > > rdc
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > =====
> >
> > Eric Ayres
> >
> > 37.62N 121.6W
> >
> > LX-200 10" ST-7/MX-7C
> >
> > Celestron C8
> >
> > Vixen GP/102ED
> >
> > www.astrograph.net
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
> > http://personals.yahoo.com
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
> http://personals.yahoo.com
-- Richard Crisp rdcrisp@No-Spam
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 22 2001 - 06:17:29 MST