Brian - I wasn't so upset about a bad transaction; it happens. I was more upset about a member's reaction to a "Poor" chips he described as "nice."

First he tried to brush me off. Then he decided he didn't want me bidding on his autions. Since he knew I would hold him to ethical conduct, he figured it's be easier to avoid me altogether. That speaks volumes. He doesn't want to actually be ethical, but he wants to appear ethical.

The shipping charges are judged in the totality of the circumstances. It's triple what it costs to ship a chip which again speaks volumes.

Yes we disagree shipping charges. We do live in a free market, so why shouldn't a member get as much as he wants for a chip. Sure - describe Poor chips as nice and charge 3x the real shipping rate.

Why not drop the entire code of ethics and replace it with the words: caveat emptor. I think others here will dissagree - and gouging on shipping has everything to do with ethics.

Name calling?! Hey - if I missed that part in the code of ethics, let me know. I say what's on my mind and will continue to do so.

Seems a great many here don't like to hear the truth. I call them as I see them and if it offends you - exercise your rights in the free market - don't read my posts.

I'm here and will expose any and all members or non-members that are involved in questionable dealings.

So far I have called out several members "in good standing" and they have nothing to say, absent personal attacks that draw attention away from the issues raised.

The club has some underhanded members who like to appear proper but don't want to act proper. I'm here to tell you it won't fly. You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you will never fool all of the people all of the time.

I get more private emails that you may think and members are tired of the same garbage I am describing.

Thanks for your input,

Sonny (aka Mark Sutton #6337)