In His Own Words
#131
My looter comment? Jay own posts. If he was lying about being a looter, I withdraw my statement.
#132
VIP Member
VIP Member
Thread Starter
That's an interesting statement coming from a man who once carried a TV out of his neighbor's abandoned mobile home during a hurricane. But you took it back, so it's cool. Like covering a bad check, I suppose. You aren't a looter, just a guy who looted once and chickened out.
The truth is that you hate who you hate, and then find a reason.
You lied about me TWICE this week. Oh yeah, that was a "mistake."
The truth is that you hate who you hate, and then find a reason.
You lied about me TWICE this week. Oh yeah, that was a "mistake."
And talk about hate... you have brought this subject up numerous times over the last 6 years, regardless of whether it has any relevance to the subject at hand.
I did not lie repeatedly about the tv and I took it back within hours. Of my own free will. (for those of you interested in context about this, search for the Charley Came To My House thread)
Let's keep the focus of this thread where it belongs.
Shooting the messenger is a fool's errand.
#133
Ok. You are an admitted thief. Not a liar.
Oh wait, except that you lied about me twice this week on this forum in an attempt to villainize me and lump me into the stew. Ok, so you are not an admitted liar. Just and admitted thief.
For me to remind you that you are both a liar and a thief after your comment is more than appropriate.
Let the reader decide what is weak.
Oh wait, except that you lied about me twice this week on this forum in an attempt to villainize me and lump me into the stew. Ok, so you are not an admitted liar. Just and admitted thief.
For me to remind you that you are both a liar and a thief after your comment is more than appropriate.
Let the reader decide what is weak.
#134
So, if I go down to the gas station, and rip them off... and take the money back within hours I am cool.
Maybe then it's an "unfelony."
Glad you are the moral compass for everyone else.
Maybe then it's an "unfelony."
Glad you are the moral compass for everyone else.
#135
What is it about the world these days that makes people think that they can stick their noses into other people's business and that's ok? That they can phuck with another guy's livelihood with impunity? That they can allege anything and prove nothing?
That's what's weak Jay. The fact that a once great forum has become a Jerry Springer substitute. And you are one of the ringleaders of the circus.
That's what's weak Jay. The fact that a once great forum has become a Jerry Springer substitute. And you are one of the ringleaders of the circus.
Last edited by SpeedGirl; 04-22-2010 at 08:56 AM. Reason: typo..... Group asked to be left out of this......
#137
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Mooresville, NC
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#138
Registered
That's one way to look at it, but here's another version of events as seen through the eyes of the board members...
Suppose you are on the board of directors of SOS and have impeccable reputations and you become convinced that the person who has administrative control of your very public web site is a pathological liar who would stoop so low as to delay sending member-donated funds to a childrens charity for nearly 2 months, who only hands over a check after 2 months of pleading by board members when he can no longer avoid it during the meeting in KW (despite claims that "it's in the mail"), who then manages to bounce the check that he finally did provide, who when first confronted about it bouncing tried to play it off as bank fraud and then mail fraud citing a postal investigation because "they already cashed it," who then changed the tune about it already being made good, and who finally replaces it only after it's brought into public light while being confronted by the remaining board members to do so... Well those board members might think it reasonable to just buy this person out rather than further risk him tarnishing the reputation of the web site and themselves through any continued association.
Further consider from the board members perspective that this nasty charity check bouncing business exploded after they had already confronted this person about him dramatically inflating his offshore boating credentials on this very web site and on SOS, those claimed credentials being one of the main reason they went into business with him in the first place, and in response he offers nothing to alleviate their fears that he is in fact a pathological lier who totally fabricated his claims of owing and operating such boats as a 50' Sea Ray, 42' Apache, 41 Sea Ray, 3 41" Apache's, Top guns, ect... and they begin to wonder if their partner in SeriouslyOffShore has any Offshore Performance boat credentials at all! Well from the board's perspective the buyout offer may have been seen as the only viable option to quickly disassociate themselves from this person who they saw as a pathological liar, and their motive was simply to remove him from the scene before he perpertrated yet more lies upon the offshore community (i.e. US). When Chris didnt' accept the offer the board walked away from the web site because continuing to work with a person they saw a pathological liar was just not an option. They also felt obligated to warn others about Chris.
If these events did unfold as the board says, then the board's actions seem quite reasonable IMO, wouldn't you agree? I guess it comes down to whom do you believe. The word of the four board of directors or Chris Sunkin, a guy who bounced a check to a children's charity and offers little or no rebuttle to repeated claims that he outright lied to yourself and fellow members on this very web site about owning and operating numerous highly visable iconic Offshore Performance boats. Highly visable except when Chris Sunkin owns and operates them I guess (We are still waiting and welcome a explaination of how that can be Chris).
It is my understanding that Chris has the administrative keys to Seriouslyoffshore and the ability to bill advertisers to generate revenue to keep the site up and running. I am not telling anyone that they should not patronize
his web site, although in good conscience I cannot do so myself considering his, IMO, complete lack of integrity. But if other people feel ok about endorsing Chris Sunkin's by visiting his site then so be it. We all see things from a different perspective so enjoy your visits there. I am sure that Chris will have more tales of his vast experiences with Offshore boats to keep you well entertained.
Suppose you are on the board of directors of SOS and have impeccable reputations and you become convinced that the person who has administrative control of your very public web site is a pathological liar who would stoop so low as to delay sending member-donated funds to a childrens charity for nearly 2 months, who only hands over a check after 2 months of pleading by board members when he can no longer avoid it during the meeting in KW (despite claims that "it's in the mail"), who then manages to bounce the check that he finally did provide, who when first confronted about it bouncing tried to play it off as bank fraud and then mail fraud citing a postal investigation because "they already cashed it," who then changed the tune about it already being made good, and who finally replaces it only after it's brought into public light while being confronted by the remaining board members to do so... Well those board members might think it reasonable to just buy this person out rather than further risk him tarnishing the reputation of the web site and themselves through any continued association.
Further consider from the board members perspective that this nasty charity check bouncing business exploded after they had already confronted this person about him dramatically inflating his offshore boating credentials on this very web site and on SOS, those claimed credentials being one of the main reason they went into business with him in the first place, and in response he offers nothing to alleviate their fears that he is in fact a pathological lier who totally fabricated his claims of owing and operating such boats as a 50' Sea Ray, 42' Apache, 41 Sea Ray, 3 41" Apache's, Top guns, ect... and they begin to wonder if their partner in SeriouslyOffShore has any Offshore Performance boat credentials at all! Well from the board's perspective the buyout offer may have been seen as the only viable option to quickly disassociate themselves from this person who they saw as a pathological liar, and their motive was simply to remove him from the scene before he perpertrated yet more lies upon the offshore community (i.e. US). When Chris didnt' accept the offer the board walked away from the web site because continuing to work with a person they saw a pathological liar was just not an option. They also felt obligated to warn others about Chris.
If these events did unfold as the board says, then the board's actions seem quite reasonable IMO, wouldn't you agree? I guess it comes down to whom do you believe. The word of the four board of directors or Chris Sunkin, a guy who bounced a check to a children's charity and offers little or no rebuttle to repeated claims that he outright lied to yourself and fellow members on this very web site about owning and operating numerous highly visable iconic Offshore Performance boats. Highly visable except when Chris Sunkin owns and operates them I guess (We are still waiting and welcome a explaination of how that can be Chris).
It is my understanding that Chris has the administrative keys to Seriouslyoffshore and the ability to bill advertisers to generate revenue to keep the site up and running. I am not telling anyone that they should not patronize
his web site, although in good conscience I cannot do so myself considering his, IMO, complete lack of integrity. But if other people feel ok about endorsing Chris Sunkin's by visiting his site then so be it. We all see things from a different perspective so enjoy your visits there. I am sure that Chris will have more tales of his vast experiences with Offshore boats to keep you well entertained.
anyone else who "doesnt really give a chit one way or the other" feel the same???
#139
And that's the editorialized, sensationalized version. The one that assumes that four members of a loose group of friends (those of us who sit on actual boards know that a loose grouping of interesting folks is not really a board of directors. Chris is sole owner) who have gone silent speak for the other dozen. The one that assumes that if Chris doesn't refute an unfounded allegation it is automatically true. Sour grapes, old agenda. Axes to grind. Wait....
Perhaps Marginmn is the missing victim?
The actual version is a freaking yawner.
Dam, I need another shower.
Perhaps Marginmn is the missing victim?
The actual version is a freaking yawner.
Dam, I need another shower.