by nowandagain » Sun Mar 18, 2007 10:33 pm
Hi TheMailman
I don't think you'll be receiving a

from Andy, he's already replied three times after your post anyway.
His tone probably isn't so harsh in two of his other posts. It seems like he's trying to state an opinion rather than argue about authenticity. For example:
Andy316 wrote:While I see your point, the inscription has been done with a completely different pen, which suggests the inscription is secretarial. The actual autograph may not be though.
Although his opinion was unwarranted by the original poster, it's nothing to get annoyed over. It's probably not at the stage to lock the thread yet, but if it gets any more out of hand I will.
nowandagain [rockon]
Hi TheMailman :D
I don't think you'll be receiving a {down} from Andy, he's already replied three times after your post anyway.
His tone probably isn't so harsh in two of his other posts. It seems like he's trying to state an opinion rather than argue about authenticity. For example:
[quote="Andy316"]While I see your point, the inscription has been done with a completely different pen, which suggests the inscription is secretarial. The actual autograph may not be though.[/quote]
Although his opinion was unwarranted by the original poster, it's nothing to get annoyed over. It's probably not at the stage to lock the thread yet, but if it gets any more out of hand I will.
nowandagain [rockon]