Dwyane Adams - Fake Or Real?

[old] cbrock · Post by **[old] cbrock** » January 21st, 2006, 7:57 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Jan 22 2006, 06:04 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulH @ Jan 21 2006, 01:43 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>The specific two names you mention do not originate from the same IP. I also haven't noticed Chad's IP being the same as anyone else's, though I've only done a cursory check.<br /><br />Cheers, Paul </td></tr></table><br /><br />That is a violation of internet privacy.<br /><br />I have already stated that I don't know who Chad is and had not seen him post anywhere prior to this thread.<br /><br />That being said, it is none of your damned business.<br /><br />You should get approval from C2 before divulging personal information. Also, put that you're going to do that in the guidelines and then make it accessible to everyone if that is your wont.<br /><br />There is already a lawsuit against Google for that kind of shenanigans. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />John,<br />Good response.<br /><br />I was very disappointed to read this as well.<br /><br />If Paul had stated that they did originate from the same address then as well as raising the privacy issues above the insinuation would have been that you were the originator of the "Chad Williams" postings.<br /><br />That would have started another 40 pages of responses!<br /><br />Regards,<br />Chris<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />

[old] ehagberg · Post by **[old] ehagberg** » January 21st, 2006, 9:10 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(cbrock @ Jan 21 2006, 06:57 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Jan 22 2006, 06:04 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulH @ Jan 21 2006, 01:43 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>The specific two names you mention do not originate from the same IP. I also haven't noticed Chad's IP being the same as anyone else's, though I've only done a cursory check.<br /><br />Cheers, Paul </td></tr></table><br /><br />That is a violation of internet privacy.<br /><br />I have already stated that I don't know who Chad is and had not seen him post anywhere prior to this thread.<br /><br />That being said, it is none of your damned business.<br /><br />You should get approval from C2 before divulging personal information. Also, put that you're going to do that in the guidelines and then make it accessible to everyone if that is your wont.<br /><br />There is already a lawsuit against Google for that kind of shenanigans. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />John,<br />Good response.<br /><br />I was very disappointed to read this as well.<br /><br />If Paul had stated that they did originate from the same address then as well as raising the privacy issues above the insinuation would have been that you were the originator of the "Chad Williams" postings.<br /><br />That would have started another 40 pages of responses!<br /><br />Regards,<br />Chris <br /> </td></tr></table><br />But there was no personal/private information divulged at all.<br /><br />Paul was merely stating that there was no apparent connection between the two individuals (and anyone else) based on the IP addresses they were connecting from... now if he had mentioned their IP addresses, it might be another story, but he didn't.<br />

[old] Chad Williams · Post by **[old] Chad Williams** » January 22nd, 2006, 7:29 am

Well, before Dwayne posts his 2000m time I thought I better just post the results of my “homework” that Dwayne said I best do a bit more of, so here we go.<br /><br />I will keep it short, as no doubt the longer I make it people will twist it to mean the opposite to what I intended it to come across as.<br /><br />I tried to track down the piece of paper that confirmed Dwayne’s times that would qualify him for the USIRT. After sending emails and hours of web searching it turns out the verification paper would be with Robert Brody who was in charge of the USIRT at that time.<br /><br />Well, that will be easy to confirm then wont it? All I have to do is drop Robert an e-mail and he can confirm if it really exists, or not, this is what we want to know.<br /><br />Imagine my surprise when I find this from Robert Brody<br /><i>"After over 20 years, I now longer work for Concept2. <br />On 06 December I was fired. Essentially told to pack up my things and get out. Locked out of the computer".</i><br /><br />So, I guess we will never know now.<br /><br />I also guess that this is a delicate subject for C2, and they may well be going through Employment tribunals with regards to this case, so this post may get removed by the web master.<br /><br />I have great respect for Robert Brody and wish him well in what ever he goes on to do next.<br /><br /><br />

[old] mpukita · Post by **[old] mpukita** » January 22nd, 2006, 10:03 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Chad Williams @ Jan 22 2006, 07:29 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Well, before Dwayne posts his 2000m time I thought I better just post the results of my “homework” that Dwayne said I best do a bit more of, so here we go.<br /><br />I will keep it short, as no doubt the longer I make it people will twist it to mean the opposite to what I intended it to come across as.<br /><br />I tried to track down the piece of paper that confirmed Dwayne’s times that would qualify him for the USIRT. After sending emails and hours of web searching it turns out the verification paper would be with Robert Brody who was in charge of the USIRT at that time.<br /><br />Well, that will be easy to confirm then wont it? All I have to do is drop Robert an e-mail and he can confirm if it really exists, or not, this is what we want to know.<br /><br />Imagine my surprise when I find this from Robert Brody<br /><i>"After over 20 years, I now longer work for Concept2. <br />On 06 December I was fired. Essentially told to pack up my things and get out. Locked out of the computer".</i><br /><br />So, I guess we will never know now.<br /><br />I also guess that this is a delicate subject for C2, and they may well be going through Employment tribunals with regards to this case, so this post may get removed by the web master.<br /><br />I have great respect for Robert Brody and wish him well in what ever he goes on to do next. <br /> </td></tr></table><br />Chad:<br /><br />OK, so what does this have to do with the original topic? A guy got canned ... happens every day here ... and there from what my mates there tell me. C2 could have had good reason for the termination, or, if it is what we call an "employment at will" state, both the employee and the employer can terminate the employment relationship, without cause, at any time. Unless something illegal has been done, like harassment or discrimination, neither party needs to show any reason for the dismissal. It's a fair, two-way street.<br /><br />So, I'll ask, what does this have to do with the Dwayne matter you raised? This guy is still alive. You are able to communicate with him by e-mail. You could also likely call him. In fact, provide me his contact information, and I'll do it for you. He could still answer the question as to whether he ever saw the paperwork. How about asking him that?<br /><br />Just a thought ...<br /><br />-- Mark

[old] mpukita · Post by **[old] mpukita** » January 22nd, 2006, 10:05 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Chad Williams @ Jan 22 2006, 07:29 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I have <b>great respect </b>for Robert Brody and wish him well in what ever he goes on to do next. <br /> </td></tr></table><br />From one e-mail exchange where you only have one side of the story? You don't have respect for Dwayne, and you know almost just as little about him.

[old] becz · Post by **[old] becz** » January 22nd, 2006, 11:50 am

My God, it finally all makes sense. Open your eyes, people! Can't you see what's in front of your faces?!<br /><br />Robert had to be eliminated. He knew too much. C2 is obviously just a front for a covert military operation devoted to developing superhuman warriors. Come on! The PM3 codes, the "training". Dwayne is obviously one of the subjects of these experiments, as are all of the "USIRDS". Don't you see!!!<br /><br />United<br />States<br />Intelligence,<br />Rowing, and<br />Destabilization<br />Squad<br /><br />How could I not have seen it? Robert was trying to let us know what was going on, but before Chad could reach him, it was too late. Too late!!!<br /><br />And now that we all know, no one is safe.....no one. Watch your back, Chad.<br /><br />I only hope that...

[old] Delilah · Post by **[old] Delilah** » January 22nd, 2006, 11:51 am

Before I get rolling I want to say something about the rankings and the honour system.<br />When I first discovered the erg back in 2000 I was sent with my new machine the previous years ranking book by C2 UK.<br />I now know that the majority of the names are poor hapless souls who just jot their names on the C2 poster at their gym little realising that they will make it into print at year-end. I however, only saw myself rising up the rankings and it was a tremendous source of encouragement and motivation for me. <br />So my vote is overwhelmingly to allow people to rank their times and that nothing should be done to make that more difficult.<br />However, if anybody thinks that the top few performers are not going to come under an increased level of scrutiny then I’m afraid you are misguided.<br /><br />Now do me a temporary favour and just for a moment can I ask you to go with the hypothesis that Dwayne Adams is some sort of highly plausible but totally deranged fraud. Well at BIRC I saw someone limp in for what appeared to be 5 mins of slow agony rather than stop. I can remember commenting (above the long-lasting sympathetic applause from the crowd) that whilst very brave that really he was risking serious damage. If he proves to be a fake we’ll have the Queen put him in the Tower.<br />He has also taken top spot off someone on the Metres Board. He has pushed someone from top spot into second at all distances in over-forties male rankings. If he’s interested in his WR on an erg Petti Karpinen might be feeling he only holds the record under false pretences.<br />IF HE ISN’T THE REAL DEAL THEN THE ROWING WORLD WILL BE BETTER OFF WITHOUT HIM.<br />So let’s say you have decided you don’t believe his performances……..How do you challenge?<br />Now I am prepared to concede that Chad should have been more circumspect in his original phrasing. I am also prepared to agree that he has (on several occasions) posted in haste and probably wished he could retract. I must however, say in his defence that there has been some rather sanctimonious postings on this thread and I can see why, beset as he has been, he would be inclined to lash out.<br />I think that we all invest a certain amount of emotional capital in our Forum buddies. Joined as we are in this most ridiculous of sports – suffering as we do by racing at a distance most exactly designed to produce the maximum agony. So when a fellow forumite’s integrity is attacked it is natural to leap to his defence – particularly where the individual has a public persona that is pleasant and helpful etc. The truth is we don’t know anything about this man – he is just a combination of keystrokes on a page and there are sufficient issues over his performances that now he must deliver.<br />If he vindicates himself all well and good –if he does not then like it or not the forum will owe a debt of thanks to Chad.<br />I don’t believe you can insult a set of keystrokes. If I watched a football match and voiced the opinion that the centre forward was a useless git I would be unwilling to repeat this if I was introduced later that day. This is not just an aversion to hospital food it is also about the nature of insults – it’s hard to truly insult someone you’ve never met.<br />D<br />

[old] Porkchop · Post by **[old] Porkchop** » January 22nd, 2006, 12:51 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Delilah @ Jan 22 2006, 10:51 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Now I am prepared to concede that Chad should have been more circumspect in his original phrasing. I am also prepared to agree that he has (on several occasions) posted in haste and probably wished he could retract. I must however, say in his defence that there has been some rather sanctimonious postings on this thread and I can see why, beset as he has been, he would be inclined to lash out. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Well, as one purveyor of sanctimony, I think that we feel if one is dissatisfied with the system, then one should attack the system. Whether by direct accusation or insinuation, one individual's name was dragged into the matter.<br /><br /><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Delilah @ Jan 22 2006, 10:51 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I don’t believe you can insult a set of keystrokes. If I watched a football match and voiced the opinion that the centre forward was a useless git I would be unwilling to repeat this if I was introduced later that day. This is not just an aversion to hospital food it is also about the nature of insults – it’s hard to truly insult someone you’ve never met.<br />D <br /> </td></tr></table><br />As to whether one can insult someone one has never met, with keystrokes or otherwise, I think it depends very much on the circumstances. If I were to say something terrible about you on this forum, I suspect that you would shrug it off, because, not only do I not know you, I do not even know who you are (nor do any others, unless you have shared that information off-line), and you don't know me either -- we are both anonymous posters on a web forum. If, on the other hand, your full name and address were known to me and others, the same remarks might elicit a very different reaction. In the case of Mr. Adams, his identity is no secret -- he is known publicly to many on this forum.<br /><br />Further, it is not only a question of insult, but also one of possible defamation. One can defame by insinuation and innuendo as well as by outright statements protrayed as fact. If those insinuations, innuendos, or statements can be identified with a particular individual, then it does not matter whether they were published in a book, a newspaper, or an internet chat room. Injury to reputation can be a very serious matter.

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » January 22nd, 2006, 1:12 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(becz @ Jan 22 2006, 07:50 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>My God, it finally all makes sense. Open your eyes, people! Can't you see what's in front of your faces?!<br /><br />Robert had to be eliminated. He knew too much. C2 is obviously just a front for a covert military operation devoted to developing superhuman warriors. Come on! The PM3 codes, the "training". Dwayne is obviously one of the subjects of these experiments, as are all of the "USIRDS". Don't you see!!!<br /><br />United<br />States<br />Intelligence,<br />Rowing, and<br />Destabilization<br />Squad<br /><br />How could I not have seen it? Robert was trying to let us know what was going on, but before Chad could reach him, it was too late. Too late!!!<br /><br />And now that we all know, no one is safe.....no one. Watch your back, Chad.<br /><br />I only hope that... <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Becz,<br /><br />You know too much already......................... <br />

[old] mpukita · Post by **[old] mpukita** » January 22nd, 2006, 1:41 pm

Delilah:<br /><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Delilah @ Jan 22 2006, 11:51 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>However, if anybody thinks that the top few performers are not going to come under an increased level of scrutiny then I’m afraid you are misguided. <br /> </td></tr></table><br />I'm not certain, but I'm fairly sure that nobody here ever said that this wouldn't be the case.<br /><br /><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Delilah @ Jan 22 2006, 11:51 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Now I am prepared to concede that Chad should have been more circumspect in his original phrasing. I am also prepared to agree that he has (on several occasions) posted in haste and probably wished he could retract. I must however, say in his defence that there has been some rather sanctimonious postings on this thread and I can see why, beset as he has been, he would be inclined to lash out.[right] <br /> </td></tr></table><br />This is the point of what you call the "sanctimonious" postings. <br /><br />Chad was questioning the system, so he says, and then built a poll that directly attacked personally a fellow forumite. Once again, I'll repeat, one can try to whitewash this with all kinds of logic, philosophy, rationalization, and gibberish, but it's clear to any reasonable human being that he directly attacked Dwayne, with no factual basis -- using feelings and doubt as his only support. <br /><br /><b>And, he's never had the class to admit this, apologize, and then re-phrase the question to reposition the debate.</b> Thus challenged, Chad has been unwilling to admit he "screwed up". That's OK ... nobody can force him to do so. It just goes to his character.<br /><br />He's in a hole and he keeps digging ... and digging ... and digging. By now, he's probably hit magma.<br /><br />BTW, I'm still waiting for the contact information for Mr. Brody from Chad, so I can check in with him myself, but Chad has not provided that to me ... yet (but I hope he soon will).<br /><br /><b>And, even if Dwayne were proven to be a fake, Chad's behaviour would still not be acceptable ... he had NO FACTS when he made the accusation of cheating.</b> All the other fluff around this issue is just that, fluff ... designed to keep Chad from taking responsibility for being irresponsible.<br /><br />I'll also state, just for the record, that it's amazing how one can call someone else "santimonious" for challenging the statements of others that they feel to be false or misleading or otherwise unacceptable, yet that same person can post a message that has a fairly sanctimonious tone to it. I find the good old sanctimony response is used when someone has exhausted all reason, fact, and logic in a debate, and has nothing left to offer that has any real merit -- just feeling, doubt, innuendo, opinion. As they say, when one runs out of bullets, throw the gun. Lots of guns being thrown here.<br /><br />Many of the people supporting Chad have said they believe in the philosophy of a "dog eat dog" world, and they react as they do because of this. But then they prove themselves to not quite live up to their own philosophy by being critical of others (like me for example) because I challenge that philosophy and way of life. Not challenging me with facts, logical debate, etc., but calling me "sanctimonious", busting my chops for being "an American", and calling me "misguided". If you're going to put yourself out there as dog eat dog, I'd suggest that you'd better be ready to jump into the ring, and you'd better be prepared to take a few "punches" (verbal that is) along the way (unless you can KO me before I get a chance to "punch" ... unlikely as that may be). It's not likely in a "dog eat dog" world that the other dogs will allow you to pee on them without some kind of response that's not to your liking.<br /><br />How's that for "sanctimony"?<br /><br />Cheers -- Mark

[old] mpukita · Post by **[old] mpukita** » January 22nd, 2006, 1:43 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(mpukita @ Jan 22 2006, 10:03 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Chad Williams @ Jan 22 2006, 07:29 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Well, before Dwayne posts his 2000m time I thought I better just post the results of my “homework” that Dwayne said I best do a bit more of, so here we go.<br /><br />I will keep it short, as no doubt the longer I make it people will twist it to mean the opposite to what I intended it to come across as.<br /><br />I tried to track down the piece of paper that confirmed Dwayne’s times that would qualify him for the USIRT. After sending emails and hours of web searching it turns out the verification paper would be with Robert Brody who was in charge of the USIRT at that time.<br /><br />Well, that will be easy to confirm then wont it? All I have to do is drop Robert an e-mail and he can confirm if it really exists, or not, this is what we want to know.<br /><br />Imagine my surprise when I find this from Robert Brody<br /><i>"After over 20 years, I now longer work for Concept2. <br />On 06 December I was fired. Essentially told to pack up my things and get out. Locked out of the computer".</i><br /><br />So, I guess we will never know now.<br /><br />I also guess that this is a delicate subject for C2, and they may well be going through Employment tribunals with regards to this case, so this post may get removed by the web master.<br /><br />I have great respect for Robert Brody and wish him well in what ever he goes on to do next. <br /> </td></tr></table><br />Chad:<br /><br />OK, so what does this have to do with the original topic? A guy got canned ... happens every day here ... and there from what my mates there tell me. C2 could have had good reason for the termination, or, if it is what we call an "employment at will" state, both the employee and the employer can terminate the employment relationship, without cause, at any time. Unless something illegal has been done, like harassment or discrimination, neither party needs to show any reason for the dismissal. It's a fair, two-way street.<br /><br />So, I'll ask, what does this have to do with the Dwayne matter you raised? This guy is still alive. You are able to communicate with him by e-mail. You could also likely call him. In fact, provide me his contact information, and I'll do it for you. He could still answer the question as to whether he ever saw the paperwork. How about asking him that?<br /><br />Just a thought ...<br /><br />-- Mark <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Chad:<br /><br />I see you are online right now ... do me a big favor and please send me Mr. Brody's contact information. I'll contact him immediately.<br /><br />Thanks -- Mark

[old] TomR/the elder · Post by **[old] TomR/the elder** » January 22nd, 2006, 2:04 pm

three quick items:<br /><br />Porkchop:<br /><br />"…he’s also totally gutless, not clever, misleading, a liar. . ."<br />That's from a lad named Pommy Ralph, posting about Ranger. There's lots of rough play on this site. Just the other day, a youngster got slapped for calling Ranger a liar on the UK site. Are we overstating the enormity of the alleged insult here? By the way Ranger, in his inimitable way, happily posts on the US thread with his usual breath-taking self-admiration.<br /><br />Mark:<br /><br />Chad did have facts. He had Dwayne's results and no-shows in public races. He had discrepancies between's Dwayne's times on C2 and the Nonathlon. Those facts led to doubt, which is a rational conclusion, inconclusive though it may be. Perhaps it's not the conclusion you would reach, but it's rational nonetheless. It not a feeling, like the anger many feel about all this. (Perhaps we need an epistemologist to do a tutorial.)<br /><br />Everyone:<br /><br />Yesterday, I decided I needed to do something else, so I went ice fishing. Caught a gi-normous lake trout. Couldn't keep a fish like that, so put it back. Wish I'd had a camera so I could show you all.<br /><br />Tom

[old] Chad Williams · Post by **[old] Chad Williams** » January 22nd, 2006, 2:07 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Chad Williams @ Jan 22 2006, 07:29 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>All I have to do is drop Robert an e-mail and he can confirm if it really exists, or not, this is what we want to know. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />As it says above, all I had to do was to contact Robert Brody, I did not need to as before I could locate his e-mail address, I had found out that he had left C2, as stated above in Italics in my post a few up this page.<br />

[old] mpukita · Post by **[old] mpukita** » January 22nd, 2006, 2:14 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(TomR/the elder @ Jan 22 2006, 02:04 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>three quick items:<br /><br />Porkchop:<br /><br />"…he’s also totally gutless, not clever, misleading, a liar. . ."<br />That's from a lad named Pommy Ralph, posting about Ranger. There's lots of rough play on this site. Just the other day, a youngster got slapped for calling Ranger a liar on the UK site. Are we overstating the enormity of the alleged insult here? By the way Ranger, in his inimitable way, happily posts on the US thread with his usual breath-taking self-admiration.<br /><br />Mark:<br /><br />Chad did have facts. He had Dwayne's results and no-shows in public races. He had discrepancies between's Dwayne's times on C2 and the Nonathlon. Those facts led to doubt, which is a rational conclusion, inconclusive though it may be. Perhaps it's not the conclusion you would reach, but it's rational nonetheless. It not a feeling, like the anger many feel about all this. (Perhaps we need an epistemologist to do a tutorial.)<br /><br />Everyone:<br /><br />Yesterday, I decided I needed to do something else, so I went ice fishing. Caught a gi-normous lake trout. Couldn't keep a fish like that, so put it back. Wish I'd had a camera so I could show you all.<br /><br />Tom <br /> </td></tr></table><br />Tom:<br /><br />We'll never see eye-to-eye and this, and that's OK. Nothing that you listed here is any <b>FACTUAL </b>evidence that the rows Dwayne posted that are of concern to Chad were not legitimate. You're skirting the issue here. These "facts" about other rows, on other dates, in other circumstances caused Chad to doubt ... cool ... but again, that's <b>DOUBT NOT FACT</b>. So, he's unhappy with the system, so he says. Great, he should have posted a poll with a question pointed at that, not Dwayne.<br /><br />I just find it amazing that so few people are willing to call him on it ... that's all.<br /><br />Let me tell you, if I had posted the exact same poll but with the name of Andreas in there, I would have been drawn and quartered by masses of people. Stop, please don't start with all the messages about, "I saw Andreas race!" etc. I get that. Just making a point.<br /><br />This is bigger than a Chad/Dwayne thing, and that's become apparent by the way people have reacted and voted and been willing (or unwilling) to ratify their vote in public. It's easy to see who's reading these formums, and yet not posting one way or another. The silence of some is deafening.<br /><br />I'm still waiting for Mr. Brody's contact information BTW ... and Chad's been on here all day ... what does that tell you?

[old] mpukita · Post by **[old] mpukita** » January 22nd, 2006, 2:16 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Chad Williams @ Jan 22 2006, 02:07 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Chad Williams @ Jan 22 2006, 07:29 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>All I have to do is drop Robert an e-mail and he can confirm if it really exists, or not, this is what we want to know. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />As it says above, all I had to do was to contact Robert Brody, I did not need to as before I could locate his e-mail address, I had found out that he had left C2, as stated above in Italics in my post a few up this page. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />What? Then where in the world did you get the quote you put in italics in your message?

Concept2 Forum

Dwyane Adams - Fake Or Real?

General

General

General

General

General

General

General

General

General

General

General

General

General

General

General