GigOne:
You thought that my post was a cheap shot? Im a little confused, I guess. For days now, people have been accusing TAD of poor business practices, whether those practices were indifference to the loss a customer sustained, lack of knowledge as to how to conduct their affairs, lack of knowledge as to how the USPS works, lack of care in following up on a difficult situation or, in the case of one post, collusion with another forum. (I guess the idea is that USN lures them into ordering from TAD, then TAD cheats them, then USN bans them, right?) And yet, when I post information that I believe has a direct bearing on the entire situation, and voice MY opinion as to the significance of that information, its a cheap shot??
You don't find it the least bit suspicious that the same person, ordering two different knives, a year apart, had BOTH of them go missing in transit? You don't find it at all suspicious that the buyer's FIRST posts to public forums were accusatory, beleaguered and pleading, rather than conciliatory and straightforward? You don't find it the least bit suspicious that PS felt it necessary, in both posts, to not-too-subtly tug at everyone's heartstrings by pointing out that he's a soldier serving his country far from home, rather than simply stating the facts of the deal? You don't find it the least bit suspicious that he found it necessary to point out, in his second post, that he'd been off studying for college exams (another not-too-subtle heartstring tug, IMO), to explain his absence? (Of course, when TAD didnt answer his e-mails promptly, because of their holiday closure he won't buy the line that the New Years Eve holidays were the reason for not answering emails.) You dont find it suspicious that his posts are full of innuendo that TAD has done something shameful, that hes saddened that he has to bring this whole thing to the forums (more verbiage designed to slant emotions his way, in lieu of facts)? You dont find it suspicious that his original post says TAD told him AFTER the package went missing, that they couldnt help, when they say they told him that twice, BEFORE completing the deal? You dont find it suspicious that he found it necessary to bring the USN ban into play, and accuse TAD and the USN Administrators of some sort of collusion?
I suppose a case could be made that I'm overly suspicious; perhaps I am. Nature of the beast, I suppose. I have spent the majority of my adult professional life sifting for the truth in things people tell me, and I have found that HOW they say things is often as telling, if not more so, than WHAT they are saying. My life-experiences kept making me look askance at PSs posts; they have from the very beginning, and yes, much of it is based on hunch, not fact. However, I never voiced those feelings until I realized this morning that he was the same person I had dealt with last year. All those niggling little questions I had about HOW he was conducting himself over this affair, combined with THAT fact, was what led me to this mornings post.
If I have offended you or other members of this forum, if you feel that I took unfair advantage of a victimized customer who was poorly treated, if you believe I have been overly vehement in anything I said, then I am sorry you feel that way. However, I stand by what I have written, facts, opinions and all.
In the future, if you get the urge. . .shoot it to me in an e-mail. 
Jezzz. . .I guess not ? 
What a shock.
