[Coco] A warning to readers regarding Roger Taylor

[Fedor Steeman]

All right, Blake, I do apologize for veering off like that at first
instance. That is the emotional response one might expect when a situation
like this is handled as Mark explains very well here. I mean, you could
also have asked other people here about their experiences before starting a
campaign like that. Reading your blog again, I acknowledge that you only
state the dry facts and how you feel about it, and are not actually
slandering anyone there.

It goes without saying that Roger got himself into trouble. We here at the
CoCo community have been overbearing with Roger for a very long time,
because he actually has been contributing so many good things, often for
little or no money at all.

I am sorry about your experiences. Since Roger actually may not be capable
of a deserved refund, I was wondering if some of us would chip in to
compensate? Eighteen of us contributing 10 dollars would be enough, I
reckon. I know we have in a similar manner been contributing to keep the
coco3.com website running while he was in charge of it. I also remember we
helped Diego out when he got into trouble. I believe Roger deserves another
chance, but shouldn't he close down those eBay deals that he cannot deliver
first, though?

Cheers,
Fedor

On 12 January 2012 09:48, Blake Patterson <blakespot at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Mark McDougall <msmcdoug at iinet.net.au>
> wrote:
> > I'm adding my $0.02 against my better judgement...
> >
> > IMHO Blake your only mistake in all of this was to urge readers to avoid
> > Roger Taylor. Up until that point you offered an impartial, factual
> account
> > of your dealings and for anyone to suggest you were slandering him is
> > completely absurd. Some of the responses to your post have themselves
> been
> > well, you couldn't say slanderous but at the very least - childish.
> >
> > What you should have done is ended your blog with a caveat and simply
> > recommend that any potential customer consider your experience and at
> least
> > they'll go in with their eyes open.
>
> You may have a point here. It was not my intention going in to destroy
> Roger's operation, but to share an experience that to me seems
> entirely unreasonable (particularly the eBay scenario).
>
> I have adjusted the conclusion of my article in a fashion that leaves
> more to the discretion of the reader. I appreciate your comment, here.
>
>
>
> bp
>
>
> --
> Heisenberg may have slept here.
>
> --
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>