Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
The Solid Bullet Debate
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="noel carlson" data-source="post: 289629" data-attributes="member: 16138"><p>Michael,</p><p> </p><p>I do not offend easily, and neither do I have much patience for foolishness. I accept your comments in the spirit which they are presented, but I control my agenda, and none other.</p><p> </p><p>One of the "time sensitive" issues alluded to in my post to Grit is what both Bryan, and I, have already made oblique reference to. To avoid the circus atmosphere surrounding reporting of field "data", which has appeared at this site very recently, I have contracted with Bryan to model, and test, the ZA338/6.0-Cu. This will be made publicly available in concert with general release of the bullet. I believe this to be the best option for the sake of the product, and the consumer. </p><p> </p><p>In the interim, you will be forced to take my comments with whatever degree of credibility you choose to assign to them. </p><p> </p><p>I accept your apology, and agree that my communication style can be overly curt, even offensive. Rest assured that is not my objective. Regarding offense given to specific individuals, I am hampered in having no preconceived idea of what assertions should be given undue quarter, I do not know the reputation of individuals here. Sometimes that is technically beneficial, but it is rarely a public relations advantage. </p><p> </p><p>I am going to have lunch, and then continue.</p><p> </p><p>Once again, I look forward to having meaningful exchange with you.</p><p> </p><p>Best,</p><p>Noel</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="noel carlson, post: 289629, member: 16138"] Michael, I do not offend easily, and neither do I have much patience for foolishness. I accept your comments in the spirit which they are presented, but I control my agenda, and none other. One of the "time sensitive" issues alluded to in my post to Grit is what both Bryan, and I, have already made oblique reference to. To avoid the circus atmosphere surrounding reporting of field "data", which has appeared at this site very recently, I have contracted with Bryan to model, and test, the ZA338/6.0-Cu. This will be made publicly available in concert with general release of the bullet. I believe this to be the best option for the sake of the product, and the consumer. In the interim, you will be forced to take my comments with whatever degree of credibility you choose to assign to them. I accept your apology, and agree that my communication style can be overly curt, even offensive. Rest assured that is not my objective. Regarding offense given to specific individuals, I am hampered in having no preconceived idea of what assertions should be given undue quarter, I do not know the reputation of individuals here. Sometimes that is technically beneficial, but it is rarely a public relations advantage. I am going to have lunch, and then continue. Once again, I look forward to having meaningful exchange with you. Best, Noel [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
The Solid Bullet Debate
Top