Interesting Story

[PhilNap]

Originally Posted by thetruthisoutthere

I believe Richard answered your question twice. Why the hassle?

Chris

Richard responded twice. However . . . stating that he elects not to answer the question is not in fact answering it. I wasn't aware that asking a question constitutes a "hassle". Richard's a big boy. I'm sure he can speak for himself. But thanks for your input.

Originally Posted by RichardSimon

I noticed how active you have been in all these threads Phil.
You have not posted in almost a month and most of your posts are for the purposes of selling autographs.
Get active, tell us what you think.
Nobody here knows your opinions Phil, be they 12 years old or 1 day old.
At least I posted a list of dealers I think are trustworthy. How about you posting one.
You have bought from me,, who would you recommend?

You are correct, I am not real active on here. Like the large majority, I mostly just lurk. I try to post only when I think I have something productive to add. Voicing opinions and piling on in a public forum really isn't my style. I simply had a legitimate question which for some reason you choose not to answer. That's your choice and to be quite honest I wasn't surprised.

I have bought from everyone you mentioned and I'm pretty sure you are aware that I have bought from you as well (multiple times in fact). My question had nothing to do with disparaging you or questioning whether you are a trustworthy dealer. Rich, I don't have a dog in this fight. Its just that if you are going to put yourself out there as much as you do, you are bound to elicit questions. I simply had a question. A question I'm sure others would like to hear the answer to as well.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by PhilNap

Chris

Richard responded twice. However . . . stating that he elects not to answer the question is not in fact answering it. I wasn't aware that asking a question constitutes a "hassle". Richard's a big boy. I'm sure he can speak for himself. But thanks for your input.




You are correct, I am not real active on here. Like the large majority, I mostly just lurk. I try to post only when I think I have something productive to add. Voicing opinions and piling on in a public forum really isn't my style. I simply had a legitimate question which for some reason you choose not to answer. That's your choice and to be quite honest I wasn't surprised.

I have bought from everyone you mentioned and I'm pretty sure you are aware that I have bought from you as well (multiple times in fact). My question had nothing to do with disparaging you or questioning whether you are a trustworthy dealer. Rich, I don't have a dog in this fight. Its just that if you are going to put yourself out there as much as you do, you are bound to elicit questions. I simply had a question. A question I'm sure others would like to hear the answer to as well.

Well, if there are several active posters who would like an answer , post that guys, and I will answer.
I don't usually respond to lurkers who use the board to sell and write nothing of value.

[PhilNap]

Originally Posted by RichardSimon

Well, if there are several active posters who would like an answer , post that guys, and I will answer.
I don't usually respond to lurkers who use the board to sell and write nothing of value.

I have posted a couple of times in the BST. Is that a crime? Remove all of your redundant, piling on, inuendo filled posts and your BSTs will probably out number your posts of value.

Several active posters? Maybe you should start a poll. You seem to be into them lately.

If you don't want to answer, dont answer. Don't use the excuse that the source of the question isn't active enough for you. I don't claim to be important here but maybe you should check your ego with a condescending response like that.

[Forever Young]

Originally Posted by PhilNap

I have posted a couple of times in the BST. Is that a crime? Remove all of your redundant, piling on, inuendo filled posts and your BSTs will probably out number your posts of value.

Several active posters? Maybe you should start a poll. You seem to into them lately.

If you don't want to answer, dont answer. Don't use the excuse that source of the question isn't active enough for you. I don't claim to be important here but maybe you should check your ego with a condescending response like that.

LIKE

Guess someone lost a customer. This is something else....

Ben Weingarten

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by PhilNap

Chris

Richard responded twice. However . . . stating that he elects not to answer the question is not in fact answering it. I wasn't aware that asking a question constitutes a "hassle". Richard's a big boy. I'm sure he can speak for himself. But thanks for your input.




You are correct, I am not real active on here. Like the large majority, I mostly just lurk. I try to post only when I think I have something productive to add. Voicing opinions and piling on in a public forum really isn't my style. I simply had a legitimate question which for some reason you choose not to answer. That's your choice and to be quite honest I wasn't surprised.

I have bought from everyone you mentioned and I'm pretty sure you are aware that I have bought from you as well (multiple times in fact). My question had nothing to do with disparaging you or questioning whether you are a trustworthy dealer. Rich, I don't have a dog in this fight. Its just that if you are going to put yourself out there as much as you do, you are bound to elicit questions. I simply had a question. A question I'm sure others would like to hear the answer to as well.

Richard answered the question.

[PhilNap]

Originally Posted by thetruthisoutthere

Richard answered the question.

Ok Chris maybe its me. It was a Yes or No question so perhaps you can interpret the answer that he gave. "Yes" Spence would have been on his list 12 years ago or "NO" he would not have been? I will hold my follow up question pending your answer.

[thecatspajamas]

Originally Posted by PhilNap

Chris

Richard responded twice. However . . . stating that he elects not to answer the question is not in fact answering it. I wasn't aware that asking a question constitutes a "hassle". Richard's a big boy. I'm sure he can speak for himself. But thanks for your input.

What's with the inquisition here? Richard gave an answer, and just because it wasn't one of the one-word choices you want to pigeonhole him with, you get all pissy? This isn't a courtroom here and Richard isn't on the witness stand, so he can choose to answer you (or not) any way he sees fit. To me, your question sounds like more like a set-up for a follow-up slam than a question borne solely out of curiosity. Maybe I'm wrong, but your continued baiting of Richard isn't helping to change that.

[David Atkatz]

It's not an inquisition, Lance. It's someone who's noticed that Richard plays his cards very close to his vest. He'll titillate you with hints of his vast knowledge, but when directly questioned on it, will always have some excuse as to why he'd rather not say.

(And then, of course, his little lap dog will start nipping at the questioner's heels.)

[brownscollector78]

LOL sorry to have started such a storm. I wasn't intending to call out Richard Simon specifically..my comments were geared towards the hobby in general.

[PhilNap]

Originally Posted by thecatspajamas

What's with the inquisition here? Richard gave an answer, and just because it wasn't one of the one-word choices you want to pigeonhole him with, you get all pissy? This isn't a courtroom here and Richard isn't on the witness stand, so he can choose to answer you (or not) any way he sees fit. To me, your question sounds like more like a set-up for a follow-up slam than a question borne solely out of curiosity. Maybe I'm wrong, but your continued baiting of Richard isn't helping to change that.

If asking a simple yes or no question is pigeonholing then fine. Call it what you will. Either way the question wasn't out of line, it wasn't a "set-up" and it was hardly an inquisition.

I just think if you are going to use a public forum as your soap box then you should be open to some discussion. If he didn't want to answer publicly he could have done so privately. Instead he chose to respond with a sarcastic non-answer thereby prompting my response of, "Predictable". That's not "pissy" thats a proportionate response to sarcasm. Rather than leave it at that Richard decided to engage me further, with more sarcasm and rudeness. That's when I got pissy. Again a proportionate response. So really, who is baiting who? I commend the man for his passion to clean things up. His social skills are clearly another story. It's certainly his prerogative not to answer the question but no matter how many times Chris wants to tell me he did, I will be happy to point out that he did not.