Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "AdventureCam 
Photo" <email@...> wrote:
>
> I found your rant quite amusing.  Man, you're going to give 
yourself ulcers.
> The question for you is why you would attack someone who helped 
answer a
> list member's question when you obviously have no interest in the 
product
> that was the subject of the thread?  It seems that you're the one 
with the
> stake in sales of papers since you hide behind your wall of 
anonimity
> supporting Wilhelm and enthusiastically deterring people from 
buying papers
> that don't have his stamp of approval.  Sounds rather suspicious to 
me.  Oh,
> and by the way, when I have a question about Inkpress products, I 
speak
> directly to the vice president of the company, that's why I offered 
to
> answer anyone's questions.
> 
> Michael J. Pach
> AdventureCam Photo
> 719-260-6637
> mike@...
> www.adventurecamphoto.com
> AOL IM: mikep1967
> 
> 
I found your rant quite amusing.  Man, you're going to give yourself 
ulcers.
The question for you is why you would attack someone who helped 
answer a
list member's question when you obviously have no interest in the 
product
that was the subject of the thread?





Sorry you feel "attacked". My response to your initial post where you 
touted Inkpress papers was rather mild. You were not attacked in any 
way. Here is the post (#77630) in which you feel that you were being 
attacked.


YOU . . .
>I spoke with my Inkpress rep and was told the Inkpress Luster is the
same as Epson's as far as fade resistance and longevity.  Contact me 
off line
if you have other questions about Inkpress products.

ME: "Well, perhaps someone other that a person who has a stake in the 
sales
of a product might be a better judge of fade, longevity, etc. of a
given product."


So . . .where is the attack, and who or what exactly is being 
attacked?


Perhaps you perceive that I meant you as someone with a stake in the 
sales was you. Sorry for the confusion. In this post I mean the rep 
as the person having a stake in the sales of Inkpress papers, not you.

What I'm questioning is reliance in a sales person as a source of 
unbiased opinion about a given product, in this case Inkpress paper. 
THE PERSON MAY BE RIGHT  . . . however  . .  where is the proof other 
than the person's words?

You haven't answered the questions I posed in post #77642

What reports did the rep offer? 

How does the rep know what he or she is talking about? 

What reports other than his or her boss's word has the rep seen?

Did the rep describe in detail how the fade resistance 
and "longevity" of Inkpress papers are tested? 

Where are the results published?

?Why is it fine for you to call Wilhelm's ethics into the 
conversation and not fine for me to be skeptical about a salespersons 
report to you?

Show me the independent tests, show me something more than a company 
man's story and I'll show them the money.

Jules