2nd Caucasian Kindjal for comment

Lew · 17th June 2008, 11:15 AM

Gav

I do not need a lesson in the english language

I am quite sure that everybody but you understood what I had meant by We. You have posted comments such as the silence is deafening comment which to some was a deliberate sarcastic and somewhat snide remark. My PM was not threatening to say the least I was just stating how I felt and it being a Private Message something we(yes I am speaking for the majority) here at the forum do not share or discuss on the public threads and that is why they are called Private.

I think you are missing the whole point, subjectively I would place this piece at 1880-1920 and of a very high standard, All I have heard thus far is that it is rubbish, a fake, poor quality and many other misleading comments from those who claim to be in the know and when I disprove these comments subjectively and with further imagery

Gav

Your imagery proves nothing anyone with a moderate level of skill and the right tools can produce the same work on your kindjal.

Lew

kronckew · 17th June 2008, 02:23 PM

We are not amused.

(the royal 'we').

we suggest this thread has gone as far as it needs to.
we are nicer people than where this is heading.

Andrew · 17th June 2008, 02:31 PM

Please take it off-board if you want to continue this, gentlemen.

I might also suggest you explore the "ignore" function of the forum's software.

Thread closed.

17th June 2008, 11:15 AM	#1
Lew (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: East Coast USA Posts: 3,191	Gav I do not need a lesson in the english language I am quite sure that everybody but you understood what I had meant by We. You have posted comments such as the silence is deafening comment which to some was a deliberate sarcastic and somewhat snide remark. My PM was not threatening to say the least I was just stating how I felt and it being a Private Message something we(yes I am speaking for the majority) here at the forum do not share or discuss on the public threads and that is why they are called Private. I think you are missing the whole point, subjectively I would place this piece at 1880-1920 and of a very high standard, All I have heard thus far is that it is rubbish, a fake, poor quality and many other misleading comments from those who claim to be in the know and when I disprove these comments subjectively and with further imagery Gav Your imagery proves nothing anyone with a moderate level of skill and the right tools can produce the same work on your kindjal. Lew Last edited by LOUIEBLADES; 17th June 2008 at 12:40 PM.

17th June 2008, 02:23 PM	#2
kronckew Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Room 101, Glos. UK Posts: 4,238	We are not amused. (the royal 'we'). we suggest this thread has gone as far as it needs to. we are nicer people than where this is heading.

17th June 2008, 02:31 PM	#3
Andrew Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: USA Posts: 1,725	Please take it off-board if you want to continue this, gentlemen. I might also suggest you explore the "ignore" function of the forum's software. Thread closed.