In this place, Ty Ford was recorded uttering these words:
Ty - with respect, we have an outright, official denial of any
involvement in that message on behalf of Behringer. Andy Cullen was
speaking on behalf of his company when he wrote that message. What is it
- other than prejudice - that leads you to suggest he was lying?

1. Richard Nixon, "I am not a crook."

Still living in Salem, are we?

In your mind, everyone who denies an action is guilty by their own
words. Interesting if topsy-turvy view of what the rest of us call
natural justice.


2. My response is not based on prejudice, thank you very much.

You could have fooled me. But, taing you at your word, perhaps you'd
like to set out the substance that supports your view?


3. Nothing I've seen has been said about who the posters are and what's up
with them. Were Cullen interested in clearing the air, his best energies
could be applied to rectifying the situation, repairing the damage to his
company's reputation and to make the position clear himself, personally.
That way he'd be on record.

Andy Cullen's message was polite and to the point. Behringer is the
injured party here. Andy Cullen *is* on record (as are we) and the
message states clearly to anyone not too blind or unwilling to see that
Behringer was not responsibl for the original posts.

It won't be the first time a company made (in retrospect) a rather obvious
error in how they would be perceived by the event.

Maybe so - and it's not the first time folks have jumped on Behringer on
the flimsiest of excuses.

Flimsiest of excuses? That comment is not even worthy of response.

Until you manage to say *anything* of substance to support your position
it remains more valuable than anything you have said in this thread.


Nobody from Behringer was responsible for that original "review".

What's so hard to understand?

Please review all of my comments above and below.

OK - done that. Behringer is still not responsible for the original
"review" and you haven't said anything that even hints otherwise.

Maybe I should start a rumour about you so we can measure how many
milliseconds it takes you to respond? ;)

With all due respect;

1. It's been done. In every case, the number of people who responded on my
behalf before I got the chance to was really quite heart-warming.

Did I just miss soemthing again? Who (apart from Will Miho in one of his
odd moods) responded on your behalf?

Mr. Cullen
could possibly curry such favor, but he'd have to some cleanup work to do.
Even then, it might not work, because of the current dynamics of this
newsgroup and Mr. Cullen's communicational abilities. Very few company
people are accepted here. Those who have been accepted know how to
communicate to the group.

Am I missing something again? Is this some kind of popularity contest
that you think you are winning?

If so, I apologise - I thought we were having a civil discussion about
whether Behringer wrote a stupid message.


2. That you have had such a vituperous idea is not to your credit.

Aah - it took even less time for you to respond than I imagined.

And I didn't even have to start a rumour!


Point: The use of language in the posts is too refined to have come off the
hip. It was obviously concocted by a marketing person. It doesn't fit the
mold of something from the mind of an overzealous dealer.

Interesting interpretation. It reads to me as if it was written by a
youngster trying to ape the puffy reviews in many magazines. Not one
word of it looked as if it came from a professional.

You are either pulling my leg or you need a wakeup call. Please take the
opportunity to make this that opportunity.

OK - I took two nights sound sleep, woke myself up and you still look
wrong.


Somebody farted in church. It was a big fart and we all got a nice whiff.
With all the lack of reverence due, that's the way I see it.


Please yourself.

As long as we're all clear that it wasn't Andy Cullen who farted.

Apparently not, although he or someone else from the company might have
served the beans.

Sigh - nothing anyone says here is going to alter your position, is it?

It's not smart or clever to issue these pronouncements of yours.
Attacking supplier companies does nothing to establish your
independence. And, when you take your attacks to these extremes - and
include individual employees in your target list, your real prejudices
are clear to see.

I'm sure you'd have us all believe that you can put on a cloak of
professional detachment and impartiality when you write your reviews.

Personally, I don't buy it.


--
George
Newcastle, England
(Please remove leading 'NOSPAM' to reply by email)

Problems worthy of attack
Prove their worth by hitting back - Piet Hein