In a message dated 1/9/2006 6:16:52 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If I may Marnie, your reaction is exactly that I initially offered. What a diatribe it launched. Why is it so difficult for many to grasp? Kevin, would like to learn your decision when reached.
Jack ======= Well, for one thing, I wasn't agreeing with the majority, though I haven't finished the thread yet. :-) But for me, it changed, when Kevin said he was personally involved even at a distance. That's a different kettle of fish. And I am not aware that he is under any "gag order" not to mention it. As a parent and a victim and a customer, Kevin is entitled to his reactions. And has the freedom of speech to voice them. And the vendor has the right to know they may have hired someone, unknowingly, that might turn customers off. Although the store owner may know already and he/she also has the right to hire whom he/she wants. Customers also have the right not to patronize his/her store. I think it's because, Jack, people do get accused that later turn out to be innocent. And that is something to be concerned about. But I don't think, personally, it negates the above. Marnie aka Doe
