Lousy supplier websites?

[Colin B.]

Hey all. Rant time...

Is there some secret code of ethics which demands that all fencing
suppliers have a poor web page?

I've been ordering from Physical Chess. GREAT service, good prices, and
a better than average selection. Online ordering is fairly good too, except
that their catalog database is broken in seventeen different directions.
Pictures? About half of them are broken. Duplication? The same item sometimes
appears on the same page three times! (yes, complete with the same part
number). The sad thing is that they don't seem to be worse than any other
fencing supplier--they all seem rather broken. (and don't even get me started
on sizing charts!)

I can understand if it were a short-term thing, but I don't see anything
getting fixed. Why is this such a difficult thing to manage?

OK, I'll stop now.
Colin

[Harold Buck]

In article <41af7fdf@news.nucleus.com>,
"Colin B." <cbigam@somewhereelse.nucleus.com> wrote:

>
> Is there some secret code of ethics which demands that all fencing
> suppliers have a poor web page?

They're just following the model set forth by the USFA :-)

>
> I've been ordering from Physical Chess. GREAT service, good prices, and
> a better than average selection. Online ordering is fairly good too, except


I'm very happy that someone is getting good service from them.

--Harold Buck


"I used to rock and roll all night,
and party every day.
Then it was every other day. . . ."
-Homer J. Simpson

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Santelli's Web site is fairly easy to navigate these days.

[Colin B.]

Rufus T. Firefly <remise@aol.com> wrote:
> Santelli's Web site is fairly easy to navigate these days.

Yeah, but the selection isn't quite as good as it might be. :-)

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Yeah, but the selection isn't quite as good as it might be. :-)
=====
Touche. But on a sad note, I have been buying, and generally pleased with,
their gear since I was 14 years old, and I feel sorry for poor Giorgio, for
whatever led his company to this state, or rather non-state.

[Colin B.]

Parties solemnly
declare in the names of their respective peoples that they condemn
recourse to war for the solution of international controversies, and
renounce it as an instrument of national policy in their relations with
one another." This prohibition countermanded the so-called Von
Clausewitz Doctrine to the effect that war was a continuation of
diplomacy by other means. At the time it was generally believed that the
Von Clausewitz Doctrine had been responsible for the precipitation of
the First World War by Imperial Germany and its imperialist allies.
Today the Von Clausewitz Doctrine is now the operational rationale
behind the Bush Jr. administration's foreign policy. Can World War III
be far behind? Article II of the Kellogg-Briand Peace Pact mandated the
exclusively peaceful resolution of all international disputes: "The High
Contracting Parties agree that the settlement or solution of all
disputes or conflicts of whatever nature or of whatever origin they may
be, which may arise among them, shall never be sought except by pacific
means." Iraq, the United States, and the United Kingdom are all
contracting parties to the Kellogg-Briand Peace Pact. Not that it
mattered to the Bush Jr. administration, which now openly preaches and
promotes the Violent Resolution of International Disputes Just like Nazi
Germany, Fascist Italy, and Imperial Japan had done during the 1930s.
The Von Clausewitz Doctrine. Nevertheless, these two fundamental
requirements of the inter-war international legal order set forth in the
Kellogg-Briand Peace Pact would later be incorporated into Article 2,
paragraph 4, and article 2,

[Rufus T. Firefly]

replies
on cue: "I didn't quite understand what Bobby was saying. But I
remember him telling me that he was powerful enough to have
people taken care of it they got in his way." Another entry is
about the Bay of Pigs. Slatzer says that Marilyn told him that
Jack let Bobby handle "the whole thing" because JFK's back was
sore that day etc. etc. etc. The whole book is a continuation and
refinement of the Capell hoax.

But Slatzer got away with it. Today he still appears on talk
shows and videos (e.g. Marilyn, the Last Word ) as Marilyn's
former spouse. In 1991, he actually sold his story to the ever
gullible ABC. They made a film of his tall tale: Marilyn and Me.

Slatzer's book set a precedent in this field. Later, volumes by
the likes of Milo Speriglio (whom Slatzer hired as an
investigator), Anthony Scaduto, and James Haspiel, took their
lead from Slatzer. They all follow the above outlined formula:
the Kennedys were a rotten crowd (Collier and Horowitz); they
were involved in political assassinations (John Davis); and both
were having affairs with Monroe (Slatzer).

Tony, How Could You