What he did here is post only a few of our email exchanges and changed the wording on some.
That is a very serious charge. As a business person you must save email files, after a charge like that you need to post your version of what you say are the emails that were allegedly tampered with. Failure to do so will reflect on you as a person who says things that are not true.
I anticipate your answer will be that you are a busy person; if that is the case you should not have made such charges because until you corroborate them, they could be characterized as lies designed to take the heat off of you.
Bill,
I think that this post gets to the character of who he is. he promises things and string you along and all of sudden he stop communicating. If after all these conversations, if he was a good person, he should have at least let me know that he has decided not to sell to me.
Ty
Fairly frequently on the BOI there are customers who post and say that they had been talking to a seller, had told the seller that they wanted the critter, and who are outraged when they go to buy the critter and it is sold.
Frequently readers will say that absent a specific agreement or a money deposit, sellers are not obligated to hold critters for those expressing interest.
Here, there was no offer, Mitch expressly wrote that he could not offer critters unless he actually had them. I am thinking that unless you have a close personal relationship with a seller, they are not obligated to get back to you simply because there was a conversation and you expressed interest in buying some of their critters.
I do not see where there were promises made, the parties were involved in preliminary negotiations, trading needs and prices. Had the buyer wanted to buy future critters there could have been a deposit made but nowhere is that evident.
Had the shoe been on the other foot and Mitch here claiming there was a sale and Ty had not paid up, I am thinking Ty would say the same thing: no actual binding agreement had been reached by the parties.