Open letter to STAT and Christopher Morales

[shelly]

Bob, I am really not trying to insult you but if you can please reply to question below I would greatly appreciate it.

Do you remember Ted Taylor of Stat Authentic's? Now better known as "TTA" one of CC's best known experts. Could you or all the other people that you blame not see the conflict of interest between SCD and CC then? At some time in your comments it would be nice if you just admit somewhere along the line you let a lot of this happen.
It also would be nice if you could stop what is happening now. I would think that you still have some say with the people at SCD

[travrosty]

I think the standing offer of allowing scd to pick up any of his blog posts in return for a free subscription should be rescinded by bob in light of this.

or maybe make a lot of blog posts about what is currently happening in the hobby regarding these organizations that continue to offer this junk and urge scd to pick up those posts?

[Bob Lemke]

Michael, Now you are simply being obtuse. You are evidently not going to let facts get in the way of your crusade. You're going to have to continue your rants without further participation from me.

[RichardSimon]

Evasive action always occurs on Net54 when the person being questioned cannot answer the questions any longer.

[thetruthisoutthere]

This all started because because Mr. Lemke asked me "Do you have authorization from SCD to reprint its copyrighted content?"

Why would you care, Mr. Lemke?

First of all, I asked Mr. Bartsch if he could send me past articles from SCD containing the interviews SCD had with Chris "I Never Saw An Autograph I Didn't Like" Morales and Drew Max. I wanted them for a blog I was going to write titled "Christopher L. Morales May 2005 SCD Interview Revisited."

The moderator of the blog received direct permission from Mr. Bartsch to use those articles and Mr. Bartsch emailed those articles to me.

So why would you care?

Why the defensive attitude?

[Bob Lemke]

Richard,

I'm not hiding. I'm just refusing to play Michael's silly little game and participate in his self-aggrandizing agenda.

I believe I answered, some more than once, all of his questions. It seems to me he is unwilling to accept the facts as I have presented them.

[Bob Lemke]

Christopher,

That question was posted about two years ago. It was my subtle attempt to point out that while you were so strident in your self-appointed role as hobby savior that you were also engaging in (technically) illegal activity, i.e., copyright violation.

If I seem to be defensive, it's because I feel that I am being unfairly assailed for events in which I had no hand.

I'll be here as long as anybody -- except Michael -- has legitimate questions for me, providing they have not alreay been asked and answered in this interminable thread.