Re: The Lime sock on General Zod

On Tue, 25 Feb 2025 18:40:04 +0000, W.Dockery wrote:

HarryLime wrote:

Will Dockery wrote:

HarryLime wrote:

Will Dockery wrote:

HarryLime wrote:

Will Dockery wrote:

>

Jim Senetto sent $50 to Zod, NOT me.
I was sent the money to give to Zod, which I did.
>
Senetto mailed it to me and I handed it to Zod, who spent the money as
he pleased, as was his right.
Again , I was sent the money to give to Zod, which I did.
>
Glad to clear the confusion up about that matter, which happened almost
a decade ago.
>
The story isn't really that complicated, Pendragon, and I told it
exactly as it happened.
>
I gave Zod the $50 immediately.
Senetto sent the money to my address.
Going out to eat was Zod's idea, and so we went to the steakhouse.
>
That's been well known from day one.

>

<Lies and misrepresentations snipped, to be corrected later.>

>
The truth is Jim Senetto sent Zod $50 which Zod spent as he pleased,
which was his right after the $$$ was given to him.

>

The $50 was later given back to Jim Senetto, in fact he was repaied over
$100 sent to where Jim Senetto instructed me to send the money.

>

The money was sent where Jim Senetto instructed me to send it.
>
TWICE.

>
Which amounts to over $100 for the original $50.
>
Jim Senetto was reimbursed double, and according to Jim Senetto's
instructions.
>

Do you understand the difference between the money "was given back to
Jim Senetto" and the money "was sent where Jim Senetto instructed me to
send it?"
>
--

>
I understand that that's what Jim Senetto wanted done and so that's what
I did.
>
I would have much rather sent the money straight back to him and be done
with the matter.
>
And so it goes.

What you would have preferred to have done is not the point, Donkey.
The point is that you're claiming to have "given back" the money to Jim,
which is *not* what happened.
You keep prattling on about "setting the record straight" and
"correcting lies and misrepresentations," yet you insist on creating
your own lies and misrepresentations through your gross misuse of the
English language.
When you say that you gave Jim back the money, you are *literally*
saying that you placed the money in his hand, pocket, or bank account.
Jim never saw, touched, or in any way had access to, that money again,
so he never *got it back.*
Words matter.
We've been over this countless times before, but it seems that you've
forgotten.
What happened was that you *settled your debt* with Jim, per his
instructions, and to his satisfaction.
You did not, however, return the money to him.
When you insist that you *gave Jim the money,* you are creating a false
record of what actually happened.  Stop it.
If you want to set the record straight, say that your debt was settled
to Jim's satisfaction.  Or say that you eventually gave a total of $100
to others at Jim's instruction.  But don't say that you gave Jim back
the money, because that never happened.
--