Klarinet Archive - Posting 000089.txt from 2004/04

From: "mark" <cpaok@-----.com>
Subj: Re: [kl] Brannon experience
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 12:34:19 -0400

It seems that the point being made has eluded some. Kelly had a bad
experience which he has recounted several times. The fact that Kelly has
first-hand experience is not & has ever been in question - no one has said
or implied otherwise. Many others have had experiences, too. No problem,
for me, with relating a bad experience. Anyone who thinks that every
transaction is a bed of roses is in for a dose of reality. Stuff happens.

The (original & only)) issue I raised is : Can anyone - Patricia, Gene,
Bill, Forest, etc - form an opinion based upon a posted comment from a
merchant's unhappy customer - to the point of validating by posted comment
wherein the "accused" merchant is found guilty.

Brannen has an "e".

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gene Nibbelin" <gnibbelin@-----.com>
To: "klarinet" <klarinet@-----.org>
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2004 10:37 AM
Subject: [kl] Brannon experience

> Kelly -
>
> How could you have neglected to strap a vidiocam on your shoulder so that
> you would have had ABSOLUTE proof for those parties who don't believe
> anything that they don't see and hear with their own eyes and ears? You
> could have avoided all this silly abuse. Or could you have?
>
> The accusations probably would have been that you either doctored the tape
> or staged the whole thing just to be nasty.
>
> (Does Klarinet have a penalty for perjury? Ha-Ha)
>
> Smiling regards,
>
> Gene N.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Klarinet is a service of Woodwind.Org, Inc. http://www.woodwind.org
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Klarinet is a service of Woodwind.Org, Inc. http://www.woodwind.org