Taras22,
The gentlemen "doth protest too much, methinks" -- from Hamlet by William Shakespeare.
1. The fact that you have gone to the trouble to write this very lengthy post shows that my statements have hit a real nerve. If they had not hit a sensitive nerve they would certainly not have merited the lengthy rebuttal that you have posted today. IMO.
2. You state you will not "engage ... in a point-by-point rebuttal ... for the sake of brevity ...". Whereupon you follow with one of the longest posts I have ever read on any Audiogon forum.
3. The fact that you have not gone to the trouble to compose a point-by-point rebuttal of the points that I have made tells me there are points I have made that you cannot rebut. Otherwise you would have done so. You have chosen to side step the points I have made.
4. The worker you refer to in the indium study died from inhaling indium. You have just made my point. Indium vapor, like mercury vapor, is highly toxic. Indium composes over 20% of Galinstan. I note you have not replied to a single point that I made in my earlier post regarding mercury and the marketing of toxic products. The fact that many toxic products are found in unregulated markets does not make them non-toxic.
5. You state: "I had, mistakenly it seems, thought that I had produced a fairly good argument to buttress our contention that TEO Audio products are safe."
You are correct that you mistakenly thought you produced a good argument. You did not produce a "good argument", IMO. I find your language very revealing. You avoid answering my points directly -- in favor of trying to produce "a fairly good argument" to "buttress [your] contention". Your contention remains just that -- merely a contention. IMO.
I am only interested in examining the facts. I am not engaging in polemics here. You contend your products are safe. In fact, they may not be safe over the long haul since they contain toxic elements that could possibly leak into the environment. And you have not proved otherwise. This is the crux of the matter and the focus of my observations.
6. You state: "But looking at the Sabai posts ... I realized that we were still not out of the woods." You are still not out of the woods, IMO. In your frantic search to get out of this quagmire you have sunk deeper into it. Regarding the content of my posts, your statements do not respond to my observations in a convincing manner. IMO.
7. I find the tone of some of your comments that try to personalize things most revealing.
You state "So, I guess the irony is that Sabai has more to fear from the computer that he typed his rants on than he ever would have from our products."
With all due respect, if you look at the tone of my posts there are very sober and focus strictly on the facts -- point by point. In no way can they be described as "rants". IMO.
8. You state: "The bad news is that Sabai has shown himself to be either well intentioned, but incompetent or someone with a rather toxic agenda. In this regard his recent postings have proved to be way less than flattering to both himself and the members of this forum, who at the very least deserve some semblance of honesty in postings."
Your reference to my competency and honesty are unfortunate. I do not know how any discerning reader can call into question the honest of my posts -- or my competency. The fact is you have no idea of my identity other than my ID here as Sabai. I believe that respect on both sides of the fence on Audiogon is the best way for everyone to proceed. Other than dealers, you do not know who you are talking to on these forums and you should therefore always default to the "respect mode" as a matter of course.
9. Your reference to flattery is an obvious attempt to draw attention away from the issues at hand with a non-issue. IMO your comments about honesty, competency and flattery do not reflect favorably on your professionalism. I believe your commercial agenda is driving your responses here. I believe this is the most obvious agenda on this thread.
