[Tuberoller]

Well,

I really wasn't looking for sympathy but I feel better anyway

.It is against my very nature to roll over on anyone,so I won't be giving any names.If this member choses to hide,so be it.I'm sure he has read all the posts in this thread and I doubt he cares.

As with any gift of music I have passed on,the condidtion has always been to pass that music on as a gift.I don't know if that is an unreasonable condition but it was made clear before the first record was ever sent.This person agreed to it and accepted the records under that single condition.I have sent people records they have requested and I always send a "Mystery box" of records along with the requested records.This is always music that I think they might like.I have always said if that person didn't like that music or any of the other records or CDs that I sent,they should give them away.This has never been a problem for any of the other folks I sent music.I probably would have never known about his betrayal had he not complained about the cut-out and perhaps my ingnorance was rewarded with deception.

I don not wish portray this person as a Thief.That is just not the case.He has proven himself untrustworthy in this instance and unwilling to face the firing squad.I hope he never comes back here,fearing he may at any moment be exposed.The other person that damaged the cables did offer to lend my an amp( I declined) but contends they were "Screwed up when I got them" and offered no compensation or apology.I was able to replace both cables at miminal cost but the damage was done.The cables were fine when I sent them out(they were the very same cables used at the Chicago Meet) so guess that one gets chalked as a learning experience as well.

 

[ai0tron]

I think you have a duty to post his name for the benefit of other head-fier's.... Otherwise I think you are exaggerating the situation. It's simply not right of you to protect the criminal element. This person has no moral code, he/she is not going to confess you must confess for them.

 

[Russ Arcuri]

Quote:

Originally posted by Tuberoller It is against my very nature to roll over on anyone,so I won't be giving any names.

It isn't "rolling over" on someone to name somebody who has done you wrong. "Rolling over" on someone is when you and somebody else do something wrong, and you implicate them for your own benefit.

There's a distinct difference -- one I hope you see.

Furthermore, by withholding the name of the unethical person, you're letting down the rest of the Head-Fi community. We may or may not have similar dealings with him now or in the future. Knowing how he has acted in a past situation may prevent some of us from making the mistake of trusting him. Instead you're protecting the very person who least deserves such protection, and denying those of us who agree with you and support you potentially valuable information.

 

[Todd]

HI Tubes,

I too am very disappointed in you - not. I received from you a bunch (and I mean a big bunch!) of records, cleaned and placed in the highest of quality inner and outer sleeves. You sent me stuff I couldn't possibly sell. Someone would have to kill me to get them. I cherish the gift you sent me and can not thank YOU enough. The records have brought a ton of enjoyment and to profit from your generousity would make me a pathetic being.
I did share one album you sent with Mr John Grado and passed a number of albums from my collection, that I no longer listened to, on to Mike here at HeadRoom. He is now hooked on vinyl and is coming over my house tonight to have a listen.
I look forward to seeing you in a few days at CES. I have a few small vinyl goodies for you so... see you there and keep your chin up.

AND NO I'm not the schmuck that is the object of this thread!!!!

 

[elipsis]

Quote:

Originally posted by ai0tron I think you have a duty to post his name for the benefit of other head-fier's.... Otherwise I think you are exaggerating the situation. It's simply not right of you to protect the criminal element.

Yeah, except they didn't commit a crime.

If he is going to post the name, he should give them negative feedback in buyer/seller. That's it. No discussion, no 4-page thread.

 

[ServinginEcuador]

It's pretty obvious that Tuberoller will NOT reveal this person's name, so we should all drop it. Tubes is a really nice guy who doesn't want to smear someone's name, justifiably or no.

Tuberoller, I applaud both your character and heart for what you have done and are doing for the participants of this and other forums. Stick to your guns, and don't let a coupe of people who burned you callouse your heart. These things will happen, you'll just have to take it in stride and focus more on those good dealings you've had. I bet the good outnumber the bad at least 10-1. Please focus on those 10 good dealings, and let those guide your decisions more than the one bad one.

 

[Audio Redneck]

I'm for dropping it, BUT, if the person is active in the Gear for Sale forum, I don't think it is unwise for Tuberoller to notify the Moderators of the GfS forum so that they can monitor this person's activities.

Gift or favor, this guy is profiteering at worst and being EXTREMELY rude at best.

 

[braillediver]

I’d go along with what Audio Redneck suggested:

“I don't think it is unwise for Tuberoller to notify the Moderators of the GfS forum so that they can monitor this person's activities.”

Usually when people are unethical it carries into many aspects of their lives. I don’t really care who it was but I’d hate to unknowingly deal with them in anyway.

 

[darkclouds]

I think Tuberoller should do as he please. He's definitely one guy that I wouldn't mind sending things out to.

 

[Audio-Me]

Fred, please reply to my latest PM.

 

[Tuberoller]

Wait a minute.

How do I now become the guy that does a disservice to fellow head-fi members? Have you never told someone how you were screwed over by someone else? That's all I was doing in the first place. I never called the guy a thief and never suggested the he be lynched. At what point in any of my posts did I make any claims that could have possibly been misunderstood to the point that any exaggeration is possible on my part.Ask anyone who I have ever sent records to.Before the first record is ever sent I expressly state that the records are not to be sold.I do not care if you give them away the very next day or who you give them to.I don't care if you give them all away.The records are a gift and are to be passed on as gifts.Todd's gift to John Grado is exactly what I'm talking about.I gave the record to him and he passed it on as a gift.There is no noble purpose to any of this,It is simply the right thing to do.Would you sell something that your Mother,Wife or Kid's gave you? Would you give it away,say to Charity? I'm sure you would.

As for giving the guy's name,that's just not gonna happen.Where I'm from that's called "rolling over" or being a "Stoolie" or a "rat" or "Dropping a Dime".I just don't do that.I'm the type of guy that might tell you I got screwed but I'll deal with the guy myself.It's just how things get done around here.Am I looking to do violence to the guy? Nope,but if I ever meet him I will certainly offer him a verbal thrashing.

I don't think this guy is coming forward so let this one die.

 

[KR...]

Quote:

Originally posted by Tuberoller As for giving the guy's name,that's just not gonna happen.Where I'm from that's called "rolling over" or being a "Stoolie" or a "rat" or "Dropping a Dime".I just don't do that.

The only reason why we want the name is so that no one else here would get screwed by this person or simply never make any deals with this person, nothing more.

Your stance makes no logical sense, I for one blame the military. Damn their brainwashing! But, hey at least we know it works

 

[Russ Arcuri]

Quote:

Originally posted by Tuberoller How do I now become the guy that does a disservice to fellow head-fi members?

By protecting the identity of somebody who's clearly untrustworthy and whom the rest of us may now or may in the future have dealings with. Your definition of "rolling over" is nonsense. It's not "rolling over" on someone for a person who was treated unfairly to name the person who treated them unfairly. It's this kind of attitude that allowed all the top executives at Enron to sell off their stock while the price was still reasonable, while the peons got shafted. Quote:

Before the first record is ever sent I expressly state that the records are not to be sold.

So the fact that this person has proven himself untrustworthy isn't reason enough to let us know who he is? If that's the case, then yes -- you really are doing a disservice to the rest of Head-Fi.

 

[Tuberoller]

Quote:

Originally posted by Russ Arcuri By protecting the identity of somebody who's clearly untrustworthy and whom the rest of us may now or may in the future have dealings with. Your definition of "rolling over" is nonsense. It's not "rolling over" on someone for a person who was treated unfairly to name the person who treated them unfairly. It's this kind of attitude that allowed all the top executives at Enron to sell off their stock while the price was still reasonable, while the peons got shafted. So the fact that this person has proven himself untrustworthy isn't reason enough to let us know who he is? If that's the case, then yes -- you really are doing a disservice to the rest of Head-Fi.

That's just.........funny.The comparison to the Enron scandal was classic.No money changed hands,nothing was stolen.Relax.I have not seen the guy lurking and he knows he ain't welcome.Your suggestion that I am protecting the guy is insane,He has not gotten away clean.This deserves to die,please allow it to do so.

 

[Russ Arcuri]

Quote:

Originally posted by Tuberoller The comparison to the Enron scandal was classic.

The comparison is valid, if not on the same scale. There were people within the company, within the accounting firms, and within analyst firms that knew what the management was doing was wrong, and didn't say anything. The Enron execs were protected by many of the people they were screwing over.

I realize no money changed hands in your case, and I realize this is nowhere near the same scale. But you are INDEED protecting the identity of this person.

If you don't understand how protecting his identity is potentially hurtful to the rest of the Head-Fi community, that's fine. You just don't get it. Maybe the next person that gets screwed over by this guy, possibly worse than you were, will stand up and name him so the rest of us won't make the same mistake. Your assurances that you haven't seen him lurking around are absurd. We don't need your ever-vigilant watch to make sure he "isn't welcome here" -- we just need his name. What are you going to do if you DO see him "lurking around," read his mind and send PMs to specific people warning that he may not be trustworthy?

I'll let this die now, as you requested. But make no mistake -- the only person you're doing a favor for is the person that abused your trust.