Cornerstone! Is this true?!? Gus and Barry titlist?
- Thread starter pharaoh68
- Start date
dave sutton
Banned
i can understand the comparison.
in 1998-2000 i built a all original numbers matching 1972 chevelle LS6. frame off resto
i went through hell to prove it when i sold it bc there isnt great history on chevys (unlike pontiacs)
i had reciepts for everything
if i bought that car at 25,000$+ and i found out numbers didnt match id be upset. means alot
..............
that being said bill did not misrep this cue on purpose. just got bad info. ESP with mark k being a previous owner
he didnt act like a guilty man acts.
bill you handled yourself well...
we do have the right to protect eachother on here
i agree with both sides just could have been a little more private
in 1998-2000 i built a all original numbers matching 1972 chevelle LS6. frame off resto
i went through hell to prove it when i sold it bc there isnt great history on chevys (unlike pontiacs)
i had reciepts for everything
if i bought that car at 25,000$+ and i found out numbers didnt match id be upset. means alot
..............
that being said bill did not misrep this cue on purpose. just got bad info. ESP with mark k being a previous owner
he didnt act like a guilty man acts.
bill you handled yourself well...
we do have the right to protect eachother on here
i agree with both sides just could have been a little more private
Last edited:
dave sutton said:
I don't know if you're trying to sling hash, but I am here. This cue was sold exactly as I said it was, as Mark has verified. I don't know why Martyne was bought up she had ZERO to do with the cue. Even when it changed ownership from Mark to Don. This is called name dropping to confuse the reader. Second, as far as the religion. Being religious is ok, but using the bible as a shield to do things that the bible says not to do, well you get the picture.
JV
here as far as my beliefs , iam a imperfect man trying to follow a perfect God! andI will defend that till the day i die. I do not push my beliefs on any one! that is there choice. as far as the cue, it is going off to be verified and if it comes back to not be what joe v and pharo said they know it is . well there will be attorneys involved! because of the slander .and they are the only 2 verifing this cue. and all others saying somthing else. as far as joev he is not worth a response! and as far as pharo well the same they are both on my ignore list merry christmas even joev and brian! to all the others here I hope your christmas is blessed!!
Last edited:
Painpool?????
Weren't you formerly known as PAINPOOL and banned off this website for ripping people off???
bish4201 said:
Weren't you formerly known as PAINPOOL and banned off this website for ripping people off???
pharaoh68
Banned
cornerstone said:here as far as my beliefs , iam a imperfect man trying to follow a perfect God! andI will defend that till the day i die. I do not push my beliefs on any one! that is there choice. as far as the cue, it is going off to be verified and if it comes back to not be what joe v and pharo said they know it is . well there will be attorneys involved! because of the slander .and they are the only 2 verifing this cue. and all others saying somthing else. as far as joev he is not worth a response! and as far as pharo well the same they are both on my ignore list merry christmas even joev and brian! to all the others here I hope your christmas is blessed!!
I'll wait with baited breath.
Bill, take a look at all of my posts in this thread.
A) I never outright accused you of scamming anyone. I merely pointed out the differences in two listings for the same cue and questioned whether the present information was accurate. As part of the consumer-based public, I have every right.
B) Secondly, its only slander if I'm wrong.
Not to split hairs, but.....pharaoh68 said:
SLANDER - A type of defamation. Slander is an untruthful oral (spoken) statement about a person that harms the person's reputation or standing in the community. Because slander is a tort (a civil wrong), the injured person can bring a lawsuit against the person who made the false statement. If the statement is made via broadcast media -- for example, over the radio or on TV -- it is considered libel, rather than slander, because the statement has the potential to reach a very wide audience. ( http://www.nolo.com/definition.cfm/term/85BAB88B-0660-4AB6-A2F5C32E716A6D52 )
Two very important parts of the issue are articulated verbage and intent, too. If pharoah's question is posed in order to obtain clarification....nothing was inappropriate.
Hope this all works itself out. I very much doubt that Bill INTENDED to post up info that was not accurate.....but, at the same time, it is important for a seller to post only KNOWN and FACTUAL information. Either way, it was a hell of a nice cue....and hope the new owner is happy with it.
Mark
She's a hack!!!Matt_24 said:
You know I live and breathe this stuff, bro....I couldn't help myself!
Anyone know the outcome on this....whether it was indeed represented correctly or just an uninformed oversight/not knowing the product ?? 
this is classic joeclassiccues said: