quote:
Originally posted by Chrissy
quote:
Originally posted by CookieRevised
true, but it also does not mean it is bad if the owner doesn't want to be known, which is what the issue here is (dixit toddy).
Well, Nathalie stated we don't get to know who owns it because it is a private company, not because the owner want to be private.
It can mean both things.
Nevertheless, whatever it is, not wanting to be known != automatically bad, which is what I'm replying on here.
------------
Discrate
No, you didn't explicitly said anything... that's what we are used from you.
Since Toddy made the connection that being private = bad, that was what I replied upon and what the later posts were about. So if you come here stating, right after my post, you know many private companies where the owner is known then either:
A) it was just a plain statement... making it of no relevance at all to what the current discussion is about (private=bad)... If so, my reply of "So?..." was more then rightfull.
B) you are trolling and trying to stir things up without explicitly stating stuff but implying a hell of a lot so you can easily make a reply like you just did making it look like you do nothing wrong and pushing the ball back.
/ 
