🚀 go-pugleaf

Bring Me The Head Of Sanford Wallace wrote:

> Wrong again!  Charlie was treated with respect right up to the time when
> he became unreasonable (Sorry Charlie, I really do think you've gone WAY
> over the top).  

I don't believe I've been shown anything but disrespect from the
initiation  of my original post which was not insulting or combative. 

You've stated your opinion that I'm way over the top and I respect that.
I've also admired your restraint in respecting my right to stay in the
ring.

> See my above comment about people that will never be pleased no matter
> what you do.

This is not the case with me at all. In fact the opposite is true.
Especially with regards to Primenet.

A couple of years ago Primenet falsley accused me of forging email or ng
posts.  Jim Lippard apologized publicly, privately (on the phone) and
via email. 

I wasn't combative then, and I wouldn't be now except for primenet's
evident decision to bull their way through this one. 

> *yawn*  Defending oneself from an abusive jerk != having ego.  Or do you
> believe that abused women (to take the analogy one step further) should
> simply curl up into a little ball and let their assailants beat them to
> death?  From what you have said, you most certainly DO believe that!

I agree with this completely. And coupling that with primenet's
willingness to bludgeon, and in light of the following statement made by
you, can you better understand why this struggle persists ?

Camille said on 23 April

"IF the woman is in reality working for an outside agency that has been
contracted by Primenet, THEN you have every right to bitch--as do I[1]
and
other people who have asked Primenet to never EVER under ANY
circumstances
give our phone number(s) out."


Charlie 
-- 
The fact is that Primenet turns over confidential/personal customer
information from their data base to Telemarketing Firms to be used for
purposes never intended by their customers.