Sorry, if my emails to Bob are long winded, but I�m not a native english speaker.
So I did my best to express what I mean. To Bob and to you.
But please don�t loose the red line on this case:
Bob described this dagger as a KILLER and �The blade is nice and I think you will be very pleased with this dagger!� USD 2999.
The dagger had mayor problems and I think, that that would be reason enough to send it back, for everyone of you (otherwise someone can pay the price Bob is looking for and Bob can refund it to me because he still has my money, would be the best solution I think):
Blade repaired,
gap between crossguard and blade
Bob didn�t talk about this, instead of this he discribed it as a KILLER!
Then after returning Bob suspected me, that I�ve opend the dagger and he could never sold it as unopend
Bob to Ralf: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 15:22:38 -0800 (PST)
Lastly, on the dagger, these scars may sound very small however, the dagger was taken apart and some people would not buy it with these problems.
To proofe this he sent me two of his own (!!!) pictures, not mine:
One viewing the crossguard from top and one viewing the nut from the side (the one everybody can see on this threat).
Regarding the picture showing the scratches from the side Bob admits on WAF:
�This picture is trying to show the slight damage also caused by a collector tool. I did miss the mark at top caused by probably the vet and I agree, that one was there before I sent the dagger but not the slghtly rounded efect the tool has on the multi sided place where the rench goes.
Bob�
And here on GDC he admits:
�I just saw your pictures; I see the marks you are referring to. It looks like they were there and I never made reference to these marks before. The marks that were not there before are the ones on the upper cross guard that I sent you pictures of which you requested. �
So please explain me, why you send me a picture to proof that I made scratches on the nut by using a tool and now you admit that this scratches had been there before and you miss this mark?
Also you are talking to me, that you could not sell it as unopend now, but you now admit, that it has been opend and altered by the vet itself!
It was my fault not to ask for a picture from the top, ok, but as everybody can clearly see the scratches of the nut on top and near the crossguards had been there before.
The man who did this is also responsible for the scratches on the crossguards.
Bob, you are suspecting me to made this scratches.
In Germany, the man who looks to take advantage of his suspect has to proof it, not the man who get suspected. So please show me the pictures of the crossguard in unscratched condition before you sent it to me.
Please remember, that�s what I asked you since weeks!!!
You never did it, also on this forum.
As everybod can see on the pictures you used for your offer on your website, the scratches on the nut had been there.
Shure I didn�t realize them there, because it looked to me like a reflection as the gap on the blade looked like mirroring blade. The repair was well hidden.
Shure my eyes are getting more professional now.
But you now admit and the picture shows that the scratches on the nut had been there before.
