<html>
<body>
Hi André, <br><br>
I almost responded to David's post but thought better of it but now I
will. A little. <br>
Goodness knows, as Ric stated, much has been written about his
Touchweight Metrology<br>
on the list also, but I never really thought of that as
"promoting" his "product"! I <br>
thought of it a way that had not been available before for a tech to
improve a <br>
problem action. <br><br>
Just as with <i>your</i> "product", if it will enable us to
turn out better, more consistent, <br>
etc. regulating jobs, why not promote it? Especially for those of us who
do a good bit<br>
of so-called high-end regulating work for various artists & teachers,
and it'll make <br>
our job easier/better, I'm all for it. JMHO. <br><br>
Regards, <br>
Avery <br><br>
I'm going to be ordering some from Jurgen this summer, BTW. :-) <br><br>
<br>
At 05:35 AM 5/8/05, you wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">On 8-mei-05, at 9:15, David C=
.
Stanwood wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">To be honest I think that you
both should tone down your posts in respect to promoting your
product. This list should not be used for promoting
products.<br><br>
David Stanwood<br>
</blockquote><br>
Thank you for reminding us Mr Stanwood.<br>
Of course this list is not for promoting products. My emails were
actually more a reaction to the email you sent yesterday in which you
started to tell the list what you thought about the new
punching.<br><br>
André Oorebeek<br><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
pianotech list info:
<a href="https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives" eudora="autourl"=
>
https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives</a></blockquote></body>
</html>