I'd say, google the name.
>Peter could you shed some light on this,please? Why was there anything suspicious about the original LL message? What are some of us missing that Dimitry and presumably you picked up on? Why should Naomi have been suspicious right from the start?
>
>No coyness, innuendo or hints, please. What is so obvious to some that the rest of us are missing?
>
>>>Michel, if I understand your post correctly then it seems that some element *still* is trying to sabotage the peaceful running of VFP forums. How tiresome. All we can do is keep giving newcomers the benefit of the doubt while watching for unlikely behaviors such as public posts that logically would be private.
>>>
>>>FWIW there is a company with similar name at the address specified in that membership. If there is any benefit, perhaps a call to that company would confirm whether the member exists and was posting legitimately?
>>
>>Being here currently because of a technical question (#1388460), my attention was drawn to these Lynda Loveland threads. Are you boys and girls ALL actors in this soap or new series of Monty Python's Flying Circus? Perhaps you have planned this all out in PM's? Or are you all sincerely disconcerned about what Dmitry said? IMO, he was the ONLY person who said the right thing.
>>
>>The first one who reacted was Naomi. She should have been suspicious right from the start, don't you all think?!!
Groet,
Peter de Valença
Constructive frustration is the breeding ground of genius.
If there’s no willingness to moderate for the sake of good debate, then I have no willingness to debate at all.
Let's develop superb standards that will end the holy wars.
"There are three types of people: Alphas and Betas", said the beta decisively.
If you find this message rude or offensive or stupid, please take a step away from the keyboard and try to think calmly about an eventual a possible alternative explanation of my message.
