Critic's Corner

Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

Re: The End of the Affair?

Posted by john curl on March 8, 2007 at 14:43:18:
Now, I'm the 'bad guy' for pointing out that cables sometimes do not get returned, even if the company that made them still considers them of some value. I know that Bob wanted something for his cables, he told me himself. What about Nordost? Did they really want something for their (loaner) cables as well? Perhaps. Also, they might have taken exception to them being sold in the marketplace, because this might inhibit a potential retail sale for them. I don't know, but I will accept JV's explanation of what happened, just as I will accept JS's explanation as well. Why not, and why was JV's explanation not accepted here in the first place? Why one, and not the other?
My original input here was NOT to impune anyone, but create a more level playing field, since this sort of thing happens on occasion, I will leave it at that.