Listers,
Allow me to clarify myself. In the previous post I ended by saying "But
just tell us that TAC, either as an organization or as individuals, cannot
comment other than to say that a car has, or has not been TACed." What I
should have said was: "Just say 'Here is the list of authenticated Tigers.
We have no further comment'." Authenticated was what I meant by "TACed",
but of course many people will think that means just inspected, not
necessarily certified.Telling us directly or indirectly who has presented
their cars for inspection just starts the guessing game going. Obviously,
this kind of thing is what a private authentication process would help
avoid. And equally important is the need for the TAC Committee members, and
Mr Reisentz in particular, to know when to keep quiet. (Like in this
instance for example!!) You can't have it both ways; if you don't want to
put TAC in the position of prosecuting the frauds, then you TAC guys will
just have to sit on the sidelines and quietly watch when the game gets rough.
Paul, I suggest your re-read the Tiger Authentication Committee policy
manual (you do have one don't you?) and either a) agree to abide by it in
the future or, b) amend it so that in the future it will be clear to you
and the other members that you need to refrain from ever making any
comments beyond simply publicizing the list of authenticated Tigers. That's
certainly plenty of power for you people to have. Learn to use it wisely.
Bob
Robert L. Palmer
Dept. of AMES, Univ. of Calif., San Diego
rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu
rpalmer@cts.com
|