<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1"> <title></title> </head> <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff"> Did Pianotunaguy first refer to himself (even possibly herself -- "guys" is becoming generic) as PTG, or did someone else on the list notice the possibility and post it?  Without question, there could be a serious problem here, even possibly a legal one, if this person *ever* refers to himself as PTG.  No one else should refer to him/her that way, either.<br> <br> Regards,<br> Clyde Hollinger, RPT<br> <br> Tony Caught wrote:<br> <blockquote type="cite" cite="mid001701c44ba1$cc0a6e30$0100000a@cautefbz9jdfvc"> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; "> <meta content="MSHTML 6.00.2737.800" name="GENERATOR"> <style></style> <div> <div>Sarah and list,</div> <div> </div> <div>Personally I have a little more respect for the PTG and what it stands for. The use of PTG as a non de plume appears as an insult to those that also respect what it stands for so to <a title="Pianotunaguy@aol.com" href="mailto:Pianotunaguy@aol.com">Pianotunaguy@aol.com</a> why not use a different name just out of respect for your peers.</div> </div> </blockquote> </body> </html>