>On Mon, 26 Feb 1996, Graydon D. Stuckey wrote:
>I also have read his comments with interest. But, when he says in open
>forum that his Superchips company has this item available, that is
>advertising, and should have gone to private email. First time is no
>biggy either. But it has to stop.
Can I take it then, that if I have a solution to a problem you have, you
would rather not hear about it? If someone else poses the question, you
won't hear the answer. If he tells the world that I have the solution, then
that is second hand advertising. if he doesn't then your problem remains. I
think that discretion is needed in this situation and I have tried to
exercise it. I have not advertised, but simply stated that I have a product.
If I advertised it you would definitely have something to complain about.
Why don't you stop complaining about my sig and concentrate on the cars?
There are others who have sigs with a commercial flavor, although they may
not sell you a part for your car, they may sell you a phone to use in it :)
>No, but his slam of the competition was very much out of hand. I'd like
>to hear BBR's comments on the subject.
My comment on the competition was not a slam out of hand, it was
informative. I don't care if you buy this part or not, I was simply trying
to warn you of its pedigree. If you wanted one of my parts you would have
bought it but I never even mentioned we had a part for that car in the US.
Trying to be discrete again.
You would definitely not want BBRs comments, unless you want to learn some
new Anglo Saxon verbs and adjectives:)
>I also think that if Peter Wales was here primarily for the Quattro
>commeraderi, that his .sig would tell us which Audi he drives, not what
>company he owns. Does he even drive an Audi? Peter?
No Graydon, I don't drive foreign cars. I have a Chevy.
My wife has a small RS2 in England though, does that count?