... positions, Archie?

With respect to David Whalen, against whom there has never been even a hint that he deceived or defrauded anyone and against whom no complaint has ever been filed by anyone, you said:

>> Bottom line is that David Whalen DID DO wrong and the club took
>> proper action.... and that is my gut feelings.

Yet, with respect to Joe Benon, for whom David Whalen produced a "non-genuine" brass core chip with complete disclosure, and who in turn sold it to Don Lueders without such disclosure, you said:

( at: http://www.ccgtcc.com/cgi-bin/mb/webbbs_config.pl?read=12775 )

>> IF Joe Benon is misrepresenting fake brass core chips as being genuine...
>> then the club should take some action against Joe Benon ....
>> IF accompanied by a complaint from a deceived buyer who claims
>> he/she was cheated.

Whose conduct is worse here? Someone who produces a "non-genuine" chip and sells it with complete disclosure? Or someone who takes that same item and uses it defraud an unsuspecting third party?
The answer to that is (or at least should be) self-evident.

Yet, you think the former can (and should be) summarily barred from membership in the club forever even though no complaint has ever been filed against him ... and that the latter should be allowed to get off scotfree because (for whatever reason) the guy he screwed won't stand up and file a complaint.

Why don't you also think it necessary, before punitive action is taken against David Whalen, that there be "a complaint from a deceived buyer who claims he/she was cheated"?

Never mind what your gut says, Archie. What does your head say about the fairness and equity of these two results?

----- jim o\-S