Dishonest - yes, take a look at all the pirated recordings they press up and profit from
dishonorable - yes, I don't think that review gave any respect to Larkin's album they don't have to give it a thumbs up - they can pan it - but an honourable and respectful review demands more than what they gave by writing reviews they have taken it upon themselves to become promoters if all they are doing is selling and not promoting I wouldn't expect to see ANY reviews and, you're right, it wouldn't be much of a "techno" store if they didn't stock it - so they have to stock it, but they give it a curt review that was insufficient in details for what purpose exactly? to dissuade people from buying it? so they stock it to keep their image up, but they publically slag the record without any given reasons - again, using and abusing dishonest, dishonorable, disrespectful MEK "rob" <[email protected]> wrote on 01/28/2009 04:48:07 PM: > Michael Elliot-Knight: > > > Honesty has it's root in honor aka "a showing of usually > > merited respect". It was an dishonorable review from a > > dishonest business. Period. > > Dishonourable and dishonest? They're rather serious words. > > If they don't like the record I would sooner they say so than give it the > old "huge record, killer, TIP!!!" nonsense in an effort to sell a few extra > copies. And as for them stocking it but not promoting it properly - it's > not their job to promote it, but they stock it so they can sell it to > customers who want to buy it. Wouldn't be much of a techno store if it > didn't stock the latest Kenny Larkin record, on Planet E, now would it?!?!? > > > > Rob > >
