To: fahrenheit451 who wrote (22413 ) 7/23/2006 12:15:46 PM From: queen90700 Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 42834 Wow, fahrenheit, I don't think we've been introduced, but I'm surprised to see you taking gratuitous swipes at queen, when we haven't even spoken before. Or have we? I think I read that you apparently adopted and imped someone else's discarded ID, an ID strongly identified with someone here who used the ID before. This sort of apparently deliberate attempt at deceit makes me suspect ye olde Yahoo Imp. AAR, hello again. "Fahrenheit" wrote: "Now I suspect the queen will say that this is hearsay and I can't prove that is what Brinker's website said last Sunday. Well sorry but there is an archive and here is that statement on the web page last year." I'm not sure why I'm in there at all since I have said NOTHING about the Hulbert-Marketimer dispute, (except to say that it remains to be seen) since I have seen neither of them. To comment on them would be speculation on my part and there's enough of that here already, in fact it is voluminous. If I had to speculate, I'd say it's a tempest in a teapot which is the usual m.o. of those who live to bash and jump like vultures on carrion on any possible misstatement that they can shred to pieces. Perhaps a distraction from the "Third" place ranking, which is excellent in my book. I WILL say that the nit-picky semantic holocaust regarding the way Brinker worded anything is old, old, old but at least the nitpickers have manufactured something new to scream "LIE!" about. Seems to keep them entertained. I don't know what Brinker said or didn't say, but I know you can always trust the Bashers to make a "lie" out of something that could have been worded better. It seems to be what they live for.