Jeff Maynard looking for a 968 ?
- Thread starter Mr968
- Start date
Fred Hindle
New member
Mental telepathy, you obviously weren't tuned in correctly
]
Jeff was probably thinking that the 968 was just a 944 Mk.II []
Cheers,
]Jeff was probably thinking that the 968 was just a 944 Mk.II [
]Cheers,
Mr968
New member
Jeff you made this comment,
"looking for all Porsche models since February for the birthday souvenir book - the 968 was conspicuous by its absence"
This statement (certainly the second part) either intentionally or unintentionally carries some weight in terms of somebody has failed in finding you a 968.
and now this comment,
"I was not looking specificaaly for a 968 but for a selection of cars for the souvenir book"
The 2 statements do not exactly equate.
I suppose question 2 has been answered, and that then begs the question that if Robin did not find you a 968, why you never attempted contacting myself or as Ian says put a post on the 968 section, in fact we have spoken since then so why not mention it at the time.
Please answer question 1, your answer is "conspicuous by its absence".
Thanks,
Stuart.
"looking for all Porsche models since February for the birthday souvenir book - the 968 was conspicuous by its absence"
This statement (certainly the second part) either intentionally or unintentionally carries some weight in terms of somebody has failed in finding you a 968.
and now this comment,
"I was not looking specificaaly for a 968 but for a selection of cars for the souvenir book"
The 2 statements do not exactly equate.
I suppose question 2 has been answered, and that then begs the question that if Robin did not find you a 968, why you never attempted contacting myself or as Ian says put a post on the 968 section, in fact we have spoken since then so why not mention it at the time.
Please answer question 1, your answer is "conspicuous by its absence".
Thanks,
Stuart.
911sse
New member
As a club member, I find these posts which attack those 'who do' a great deal for our club, highly dissapointing.
This is a CLUB, socially based around a car brand.
The countless hours that people donate for free is imeasurable in term of what those costs would be to an industry or business, which, low and behold our club happens to be.
I think a more relaxed attitude and at times, that is from both ports is required.
This is one of the reasons I am no longer an RO. I wish my time spent socially with my car to be enjoyable, not to be lambasted by all (especially over a forum, which is at most faceless and unaccountable) who feel a tiny grievence.
Various threads over the past year, from the articles of the club to the accounts and how they are presented have taken up, in my opinion, pages upon pages of embarresment on this forum.
I do truly wonder if I will renew my membership this year.
This is a CLUB, socially based around a car brand.
The countless hours that people donate for free is imeasurable in term of what those costs would be to an industry or business, which, low and behold our club happens to be.
I think a more relaxed attitude and at times, that is from both ports is required.
This is one of the reasons I am no longer an RO. I wish my time spent socially with my car to be enjoyable, not to be lambasted by all (especially over a forum, which is at most faceless and unaccountable) who feel a tiny grievence.
Various threads over the past year, from the articles of the club to the accounts and how they are presented have taken up, in my opinion, pages upon pages of embarresment on this forum.
I do truly wonder if I will renew my membership this year.
Mr968
New member
911sse, what are you going on about, I haven't lambasted anybody.
Considering the tone of Jeff's public comment "the 968 was conspicuous by it's absence" I've been laid back about it.
Considering that the original question ("I have been told recently that Jeff Maynard has been looking for a 968 for a photoshoot, I haven't been contacted by him, which I find a bit baffling, has anybody else been contacted.") was aimed at the membership and not Jeff I'm not even sure why he decided to put such a controversial comment other than to make his feelings known that he was not happy and so it is Jeff who in your words must "feel a tiny grievence."
If you read the posts I simply asked him which article in which PP did he put the request in, so that I can form my own opinion of whether I have failed in some way. Jeff has chosen to not answer the question to date publically or to contact me privately to either apologise for the comment or give any sort of explanation. Can you offer an answer.
In short it is Jeff who has made what amounts to a public derogatory comment and then chosen not to offer an explanation. It is I who you should be defending from his comment and not Jeff for me asking for an explanation. Please re-read my postings and I hope you will find this to be true.
If not, then obviously you must feel that Jeff is able to make whatever public comments he wishes and then not have to explain them.
Regards,
Stuart.
Considering the tone of Jeff's public comment "the 968 was conspicuous by it's absence" I've been laid back about it.
Considering that the original question ("I have been told recently that Jeff Maynard has been looking for a 968 for a photoshoot, I haven't been contacted by him, which I find a bit baffling, has anybody else been contacted.") was aimed at the membership and not Jeff I'm not even sure why he decided to put such a controversial comment other than to make his feelings known that he was not happy and so it is Jeff who in your words must "feel a tiny grievence."
If you read the posts I simply asked him which article in which PP did he put the request in, so that I can form my own opinion of whether I have failed in some way. Jeff has chosen to not answer the question to date publically or to contact me privately to either apologise for the comment or give any sort of explanation. Can you offer an answer.
In short it is Jeff who has made what amounts to a public derogatory comment and then chosen not to offer an explanation. It is I who you should be defending from his comment and not Jeff for me asking for an explanation. Please re-read my postings and I hope you will find this to be true.
If not, then obviously you must feel that Jeff is able to make whatever public comments he wishes and then not have to explain them.
Regards,
Stuart.
Guest
New member
what nonesense!
I posted an article in PP asking for cars for a number of photo shoots (no models specified) and received enough replies to proceed and take many thousands of photographs (subsequently culled to some 50-60 for the finished layout). The project was undertaken by my daughter, Helen, and me - between us the project consumed in excess of 150 man days between March and August this year. I did not chase any particular model or models simply becasue I did not have any time to so do...
Mr968
New member
Thanks Jeff, but again which article in which PP.
Just wondering why I missed it.
Your comment that "the 968 was conspicuous by it's absence" is a cause for concern or did you not mean to be derogatory. An explanation would be helpful.
911sse you appear to have missed the key elements of my last posting, you appear to be saying that I have an "attitude" for asking for an explanation.
Please re-read my posting. Thanks.
Just wondering why I missed it.
Your comment that "the 968 was conspicuous by it's absence" is a cause for concern or did you not mean to be derogatory. An explanation would be helpful.
911sse you appear to have missed the key elements of my last posting, you appear to be saying that I have an "attitude" for asking for an explanation.
Please re-read my posting. Thanks.
Posts made and opinions expressed are those of the individual forum members
Use of the Forum is subject to the Terms and Conditions
