This is what you said "Of course you'd like us all to believe you were there for all these conversations and while the cops where there and everything " The insinuation is clear that I wasn't there and what I posted what not true. In reality you statement is purely a lie. Like many others. Now you know I have all kind of time and could go to CCB and cut and paste your support that was clearly before the Bushka photo issue and then your last half dozen posts against Mark accusing him of "shady deals" and stuff much worse. And I will repeat, when called out, you bailed like you normally do.
Joe my opinons don't change, sorry that really bugs you since you like to be told who you should like and who you should talk nice about at any given time. I said you weren't there when the cop came to talk with both parties because you weren't, you stayed in the booth and they went over near the snack shop, I happen to be there, you happen to not be there, hang your hat on a phone call you made all you want, you just weren't there. I was at Mark's when the cue came in and had a long talk about the cue, you weren't there, not even on speaker phone, sorry this bothers you, get over it, who cares?
Really, how about you're just to thick to understand basic reasoning. My personal attack on you? Now look I don't mind a debate, but when you clearly forget what actually happens in the course of 24 hours I have to believe you are showing the beginning stages of Alzheimers. YOU, not me, bought this thread on. I commented on cues designs and my OPINIONS and YOU not me, made the attack.
Yes Joe personal, there was no reason for you to bring up my name twice in your post, don't act like I shocked you with my replies. You poke me with a stick and sometimes I respond. What was the saying again?? O yeah, bring a pit bull to a .... O nevermind you know the rest LOL. I don't forget what happens it's just that in an attempt to look good you can't stay on topic, you feel a need to drag in 10 other issues and then if you look good on 7 you're happy even though you look stupid on the case in point.
Jimbo world saver. LOL Open eyes, you have probably closed as many as you have opened. There are way more buyers who will continue to buy inspired and for you, copied, cues than those who won't. Its the style they love, you are just blind to that single fact. All your ranting and raving on the issue is not going to change what is the case. You cannot clearly point to anything, I have admitted that its also a style that I like. I choose to sell cues and I choose to sell cues in styles that I like. If it was purely "economic" I would choose to sell all kinds of cues, just to be a salesman, but thats not the case. So again, don't insinuate and don't comment on something you know nothing about.
Nope, not saving the world Joe, just bringing something to light, and believe it or many people here never gave it a second thought. probably because they never really sat down with someone who has created something new and different. many here thik it's fine and would continue to think it was fine if not for these debates. I for one encourag everyone to talk with cuemakers who do their own designs and ask them how they feel, don't listen to some nobody (me) or some internet know-it-all wannabe who has an agenda (joe) go straight to the source, ask the artists, don't ask fools. Sure Joe thinks it's no big deal, he never created anything in his life original, all he wants to do is defend cues his boss sells. As for the cues *you* choose to sell LOL let'ss just say you choose to sell whatever mark tells you, and it's a good thing because you ain't that bright. hang on to the coat tails joe it's made you almost famous LOL.
Is Pauls version of feathers an exact copy? Was any of Phillipi's exact copies? You have failed to show this in all the posts. I have never, ever said if a cuemaker makes a copy then all his cues are no good. But since you bought it up, let me reiterate that if you support someone that does something you are so vehiemetly against, then you are no better than that person. Second it makes anything you say regarding that issue, as hollow and transparant as you are. Like I said, its like going to an anti-fur rally wearing chinchilla.
I never said if a cue maker made copies he's no good or his cues are no good, these are your words you are pushing on me. Sorry Joe I ain't buying it anjother one of your black or white written in stone theories, it's just not mine. Cue design theft is wrong and shouldn't be done, that doesn't make anyone who's ever done it evil. I disagree with the practice, I can also see that some people don't need to do it and that's the real loss to us all. I'm not sure why you can't seperate the 2, but I can and since I can only voice my own opinions that what I'll continue to do. Of course you can continue to voice yours and then tell us all what mine is and should be, why stop now.
To intelligent? Hardly.. the fact is if you took to a written in stone definition it would give you no wiggle room. You have differing opinions depending on the case? Really.. actually you said you didn't, I believe I can go back and find where you have said where you would treat all cuemakers that did the the same way. So which is it? Is it a case by case basis, or are all cuemakers that do this bad? Nobody will examine my every line? No maybe not, but when they seem to disagree with my opinion, and when I hold them to something they cannot prove, they need to attack everything from my business relationships to my personal relationships. Nice try a$$hole.
I don't need wiggle room, I've been very clear from day one that I am not the final say on the issue, just throwing it out there for debate, I've also said who cares what you or I think ask the people being robbed, but to you that makes to much sense and it takes the spotlight off you "the internet expert" and you hate to see that happen. In this very paragraph you try to twist you go from cues to cuemakers. I never said Phillippi's cues were all copies, all I said was that he's notorious for making copies, does that mean I have a problem with the cues he designed on his own?? Nope, sorry Joe I know you think it should, but I don't. As far as attacking your business relationship goes I never attacked anything, you take the truth as an attack because you want everyone here to think you are Mark's 50/50 partner and that you are a bighot, now sure the truth hurts when you are trying to be something you aren't, but it's far from an attack.
Case in point, SC cues, Mottey is not "design theft" by your criteria, and the Feathers facsimile is. Your reasoning has been Paul had a picture of the Gina when he made the cue. When Paul initially designed the Szambotiesque inlay patterns he used in SC's cue, don't you think he had a picture. or maybe even an actual cue in his hand? So I am asking you point blank, how can a cue that has 100% of inlays and pattern placement, designed initially by another cuemaker not be design theft, yet when another cue is made leaving out a good 20% of the original cue, is. Keeping in mind that I am sure Gus put similar amounts of effort in designing his tracks, his peacocks, and his "S" ring, his split daimond etc.. This is exactly what I am talking about, you have such a hard on for Ernie and his cues, anything close you are going to cry foul and with Szamboti, a design you don't rate as hi, your attitude is "ahh well, so what".
No I don't think he copied a cue for the Szamboti style cue, I do know he took a bunch of Szamboti inlays and designed his own work. But I will comment further if you produce a Szamboti cue with the same layout of inlays. I'm sure since *you* are Classiccues you have one in *your* inventory, so dig it out of *your* safe and show us *your* cue, or even one of *your* pictures that *you* took (LOL this is fun). But the fact is the cue prolly doesn't exist, amking tht cue a Szamboti style cue and not a design theft of course IMO as always. Now the feather cue that you seem to want to defend has never been called anything other then a copy by anyone involved, even Paul admits he made it as a copy, so why you feel a need to fight over symantics is just funny. As far as Ernie goes I have a great respect for his work, he's a HOF cuemaker and a living legend, but that's a far cry from a hard on. I'm sorry your boss doesn't buy cues from him, if he did we'd see a different side of you here, but again it's that fair weather friend thing you guys like so much.
Disclaimer to avoid twisting by Jimbo "Chubby Checker" Brennen: I don't think either cue is offensive and I stll say Paul and Jim do some of the nicest and cleanest work in cues today.
Joe
