Chip wrote: And certainly to cease their spy games of PMing members of TeaChat to see what they might say about them via PMs.
!!!!

Chip wrote: And certainly to cease their spy games of PMing members of TeaChat to see what they might say about them via PMs.
As right as this may feel to most, this seller still leaves me with a very foul taste in my mouth and spirit.churng wrote:There's just a certain comforting calmness I get from yuuki's tea in general. I'm sure it has something to do with my mind knowing that they are organic, but sometimes I feel it is more then just in my head. They just seem so right.
Actually, no.alan logan wrote:ok, I get your point: as you say you reported having blackballed and if I understand what you say now no other member was.
thanks for clarifying, I was a bit puzzled.
haha i think the point is that if the 'affected' members do not wish to mention it themselves on the forums, then Chip isn't in a position to talk about their experience publicly.alan logan wrote:omg
back to being puzzled then.
but facts are facts, if it is a fact that other people here encountered the same thing how could the vendor litigate.
it actually occurred to me that Chip realized he could not go deeper into the subject were it the case, which is why I edited my post as you can see, as I realized myself this could be potentially embarrassing for him to talk about something that would have been said and maybe not proved. but, as you go back to the subject, I don't think the vendor would take the risk of litigation if they know it is a fact because then they are not sure what evidence can be opposed (and no one litigates if their file is that unsure)the_economist wrote:haha i think the point is that if the 'affected' members do not wish to mention it themselves on the forums, then Chip isn't in a position to talk about their experience publicly.alan logan wrote:omg
back to being puzzled then.
but facts are facts, if it is a fact that other people here encountered the same thing how could the vendor litigate.
+1the_economist wrote: haha i think the point is that if the 'affected' members do not wish to mention it themselves on the forums, then Chip isn't in a position to talk about their experience publicly.
I do not know what 'blackballed' means and I'll look it up at Meriam-Webster but in the meanwhile, I have a question that is unrelated, I think, to the meaning of that word:Chip wrote:My opinion was not even on the forum. My comment was obtained by this seller via a TC account created so he could contact me via PM w/o my knowing it was him, testing me ... seeing what I might say if asked.
Blackballed was born as a voting process where members of an organization would for instance secretly vote on a new member via a white or black marble. Often the vote had to be unanimous. So a single black marble would eliminate the candidate from consideration, he/she was blackballed. Since no explanation ever had to be given, it often carries with it a meaning of lack of fairness.skilfautdire wrote:I do not know what 'blackballed' means and I'll look it up at Meriam-Webster but in the meanwhile, I have a question that is unrelated, I think, to the meaning of that word:Chip wrote:My opinion was not even on the forum. My comment was obtained by this seller via a TC account created so he could contact me via PM w/o my knowing it was him, testing me ... seeing what I might say if asked.
Since, as mentioned above, the opinion was never posted on the forum (I make the assumption: "not posted publicly") then what could have triggered the 'spying' action if they had no idea about your opinions ?