Rocna anchors - a happy ending!

I do not accept your point. I thought, from my original post, that it was obvious that I knew about the problems with Rocna. Some lowlifes then assume that I am ...what??...a salesman for CMP or Rocna or Piplers...?....that I am on commission...?...that I am on a bung...??

Utterly pathetic people.
 
captaina said:
I do not accept your point. I thought, from my original post, that it was obvious that I knew about the problems with Rocna. Some lowlifes then assume that I am ...what??...a salesman for CMP or Rocna or Piplers...?....that I am on commission...?...that I am on a bung...??
Click to expand...

Suit yourself.

I can find no suggestion on this thread that you were on commission, much less a bung. The question (but not the assumption) was raised as to whether you might be 'trade'. Frankly, I'd have been surprised if it hadn't, given your welter of threads here and elsewhere. It happens.

"It was obvious that I knew about the problems with Rocna": no, it was not obvious. To characterise the Rocna saga as "a dodgy batch" is to misunderstand it.

Fair winds and good holding.
 
Richard,

I'm with you. The OP had to be pretty committed to post an identical thread (at least 3 on YBW and reportedly 2 with the CA) on multiple sites. The subject matter is obviously of interest on the basis of the remarkable number of views. To suggest that YBW members are pathetic for not agreeing with the OP's views or shotguns approach looks to lack some sensitivity. Given the approach of the OP I thought the posts surprisingly muted, I have seen considerably more robust accusations on other Forum.
 
I have never seen anyone post a complementary post three or four times about any other product unless the person posting was advertising. What you did may have been for good reasons but the way you did it gave rise to some very understandable suspicion.

What is inexcusable is you appallingly rude response which was uncalled for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top