Re: [meteorite-list] Clarification Of A Clarification

2017-11-09 Thread Adam Hupe via Meteorite-list

Anne,

There is a difference between the terms defaulting and stealing. 
Stealing is a criminal term and defaulting is a civil one.  I never used 
the word stealing so please do not put words in my mouth.  I also never 
admitted to using faulty information either as you state but will not 
post word of mouth statements in the future since they are only as 
reliable as the person supplying them and one has to rely on memory to 
recount them. I agree that written statements are always better.


I was publicly accused of self-pairing and "Gaslighting" by the person 
you are trying to defend who injected himself into the debate with these 
false accusations and this was not the first time.  Anne, where is your 
concern for others reputations that were accuse of similar things, by 
the same person, which are well documented in the archives?  I am not 
asking for an apology but if it makes this situation right,


I apologize.

Adam



On 11/9/2017 4:37 PM, Anne Black wrote:

Adam,

On behalf of probably quite a few people, thank you for your not-very-clear 
Clarification of a Clarification. And for admitting that you used faulty 
information to accuse someone of stealing.
However we all live in a world where trust is everything and where someone's 
reputation can be wrecked by one single email, so this is not enough.
You accused someone of stealing Publicly, now you need to take back that 
accusation and apologize just as Publicly.

It is only fair.

Anne M. Black
IMPACTIKA.com


-Original Message-
From: Adam Hupe via Meteorite-list <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>
To: metlist <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Thu, Nov 9, 2017 4:11 pm
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Clarification Of A Clarification

I was asked how this information was "conveyed" to me and to clarify the phrase "This information was conveyed to me at a later date."This information was conveyed to me by word of 
mouth without supporting documentation by a person who claimed to have first-hand knowledge and involvement in the deal.I am not interested in addressing syntax-semantics any further since it could easily 
escalate into a sub-debate not related to meteorites,AdamOn 11/7/2017 6:06 PM, Adam Hupe via Meteorite-list wrote:> > In an attempt to be as clear as possible, I must clarify a statement I > 
posted to the list on November 5th:> > The statement below which was made during the debate that escalated into > arguments, was not clearly articulated and could be taken as a single > event, 
when in actuality, it was two:> > > The complaint against you, on the other hand, about self-pairing a Black > Beauty 
stone, which was never paid for according to the seller, resulted > in a different outcome.> > > > The part that reads 
"which was never paid for according to the seller" > was a qualifying statement in regards to the stone and not part of the > original self-pairing complaint to the IMCA.  This information 
was > conveyed to me at a later date.> > The IMCA doesn't consider complaints about non-paying parties that > default on agreements.> > Adam> 
__> > Visit our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and > the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com> Meteorite-list 
mailing list> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list> __Visit our Facebook page 
https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.comMeteorite-list mailing 
listMeteorite-list@meteoritecentral.comhttps://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list


__

Visit our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and the 
Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list


Re: [meteorite-list] Clarification Of A Clarification

2017-11-09 Thread Anne Black via Meteorite-list
Adam,

On behalf of probably quite a few people, thank you for your not-very-clear 
Clarification of a Clarification. And for admitting that you used faulty 
information to accuse someone of stealing.
However we all live in a world where trust is everything and where someone's 
reputation can be wrecked by one single email, so this is not enough. 
You accused someone of stealing Publicly, now you need to take back that 
accusation and apologize just as Publicly. 

It is only fair.

Anne M. Black
IMPACTIKA.com


-Original Message-
From: Adam Hupe via Meteorite-list <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>
To: metlist <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Thu, Nov 9, 2017 4:11 pm
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Clarification Of A Clarification

I was asked how this information was "conveyed" to me and to clarify the phrase 
"This information was conveyed to me at a later date."This information was 
conveyed to me by word of mouth without supporting documentation by a person 
who claimed to have first-hand knowledge and involvement in the deal.I am not 
interested in addressing syntax-semantics any further since it could easily 
escalate into a sub-debate not related to meteorites,AdamOn 11/7/2017 6:06 PM, 
Adam Hupe via Meteorite-list wrote:> > In an attempt to be as clear as 
possible, I must clarify a statement I > posted to the list on November 5th:> > 
The statement below which was made during the debate that escalated into > 
arguments, was not clearly articulated and could be taken as a single > event, 
when in actuality, it was two:> > 
> The 
complaint against you, on the other hand, about self-pairing a Black > Beauty 
stone, which was never paid for according to the seller, resulted > in a 
different outcome.> > 
> > The 
part that reads "which was never paid for according to the seller" > was a 
qualifying statement in regards to the stone and not part of the > original 
self-pairing complaint to the IMCA.  This information was > conveyed to me at a 
later date.> > The IMCA doesn't consider complaints about non-paying parties 
that > default on agreements.> > Adam> 
__> > Visit our Facebook page 
https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and > the Archives at 
http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com> Meteorite-list mailing list> 
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> 
https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list> 
__Visit our Facebook page 
https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and the Archives at 
http://www.meteorite-list-archives.comMeteorite-list mailing 
listMeteorite-list@meteoritecentral.comhttps://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
__

Visit our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and the 
Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list


Re: [meteorite-list] Clarification Of A Clarification

2017-11-09 Thread Adam Hupe via Meteorite-list
I was asked how this information was "conveyed" to me and to clarify the 
phrase "This information was conveyed to me at a later date."


This information was conveyed to me by word of mouth without supporting 
documentation by a person who claimed to have first-hand knowledge and 
involvement in the deal.


I am not interested in addressing syntax-semantics any further since it 
could easily escalate into a sub-debate not related to meteorites,


Adam




On 11/7/2017 6:06 PM, Adam Hupe via Meteorite-list wrote:


In an attempt to be as clear as possible, I must clarify a statement I 
posted to the list on November 5th:


The statement below which was made during the debate that escalated into 
arguments, was not clearly articulated and could be taken as a single 
event, when in actuality, it was two:



The complaint against you, on the other hand, about self-pairing a Black 
Beauty stone, which was never paid for according to the seller, resulted 
in a different outcome.




The part that reads "which was never paid for according to the seller" 
was a qualifying statement in regards to the stone and not part of the 
original self-pairing complaint to the IMCA.  This information was 
conveyed to me at a later date.


The IMCA doesn't consider complaints about non-paying parties that 
default on agreements.


Adam
__

Visit our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and 
the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com

Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list


__

Visit our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and the 
Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list