Sharon has asked me to post the following for her:

As I am not a member of this website I am having this posted for me by a friend.
My name is Sharon Dressel and, along with my husband Paul, I’m the owner and operator of Dressel’s Gunstock Blanks Company.
While out-of-town a while back I received some calls from friends and customers informing me that both my business and I were being discussed on this site. I would like to take this opportunity to set the record straight concerning comments that were attributed to me by the moderator and one of the posters.
Before they were mysteriously removed I did have the chance to see the posts from the moderator of this forum in which he claimed to have spoken with me on the phone and in which he also attributed several statements to me concerning the thickness of our stock blanks and our return-exchange policy.
I am 95% sure that I have never spoken to Jeff before, and I am 100% sure that I never made the statements that he claims I did. I have been in the stock blank business for many years and I can assure you that those statements are not something I would have said to anyone at any time. I have checked my sales records and they do not show any sales of wood to this man.
A normal blank for a stock with a cheek piece is 2 1/4 inches thick. A blank that is 1 7/8, 2 or 2 1/8 inches would be considered a thin blank and would work on rifles without a cheek piece or a smaller check piece and some shotguns. Also on our website we list a few extra-thick blanks under rifles and mannlichers. These are 2 1/2 inches and thicker blanks. I will also list blanks that are 2 7/16 thick since it is only 1/16 less than 2 1/2 inches. The woodcutters do not like to cut thicker blanks due to the loss of how many blanks they are able to yield from a tree.
Paul and I will normally have a few thousand blanks on hand at any given time, and of those thousands of blanks perhaps 30 or so would measure less than 2 1/4 inches in thickness. We clearly list the measurements of thin blanks on our website so any buyer would know that up front. I always make it a practice to go over the measurements of each blank with the customer as well as getting from them an idea about what type of gun, caliber or gauge they are stocking.
It is also my practice to end each conversation with a customer buying a blank by telling them to send it back if it isn’t what they need or want. The only requirements we place on a return is that NO WOOD WILL BE ACCEPTED THAT HAS HAD FINISH APPLIED OR THAT HAS BEEN ALTERED IN ANY WAY. Hardly the long list of requirements stated by the moderator of this forum.
We do not put finish on our blanks. It is our professional opinion, based on many years in the business, that even if a blank is dry it can no longer breathe and therefore be able to age with a finish on the blank. Also you never truly know what you are buying with finish on a blank.
Word of mouth is a huge part of our business and we would not have made it this many years in business by selling thin blanks or refusing to allow customers to return wood they were unhappy with.
I will close by saying that I find it very disturbing that the owners of this website would allow one of their moderators to make knowingly false statements about my business and me personally. The title of moderator on a gunsmithing forum implies that the person has some amount of expertise. Unknowing readers, who could be potential customers of ours, could easily take his statements to be the gospel and decide that if the moderator of the gunsmithing forum said this then it must be true.
You are welcome to visit our website at www.dressels.com . We have a lot of information on our website such as the descriptions of the different types of wood and much more.
Thank you all for the opportunity to set the record straight and to hopefully clear my name a bit. I look forward to helping any of you with a stock blank and answering any of your questions.
Sincerely,
Sharon Dressel

Thanks for Posting, Chic.

Well, what I wonder is why Ms. Dressel could not join our little group here and come on herself and say what she had to say.

I would think that anyone who is in the gun business would want to be a member of this forum and come on from time to time to provide information about their products and services, as well as to refute statements.

quote:

Originally posted by 22WRF:
Well, what I wonder is why Ms. Dressel could not join our little group here and come on herself and say what she had to say.

I would think that anyone who is in the gun business would want to be a member of this forum and come on from time to time to provide information about their products and services, as well as to refute statements.

I would have thought the reason for this is quite evident.

quote:

Originally posted by 22WRF:
Well, what I wonder is why Ms. Dressel could not join our little group here and come on herself and say what she had to say.

I would think that anyone who is in the gun business would want to be a member of this forum and come on from time to time to provide information about their products and services, as well as to refute statements.

She has better things to do I reckon.


Chic,

Thanks for posting that. I think that just about settles the issue.

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:

quote:

Originally posted by 22WRF:
Well, what I wonder is why Ms. Dressel could not join our little group here and come on herself and say what she had to say.

I would think that anyone who is in the gun business would want to be a member of this forum and come on from time to time to provide information about their products and services, as well as to refute statements.

I would have thought the reason for this is quite evident.

Why would she want to be a part of this "little club"? It's chock full of "freshmen experts" who most of the time don't have a clue. It's too bad she had to address the bullshit that was spread about her and the business.

So, now to address one of the freshmen experts who I refer to, Yapo, what did you mean by your comment above? Using your own words: "Do you have something to add to this discussion??? Post it!!!"

quote:

I am 95% sure that I have never spoken to Jeff before, and I am 100% sure that I never made the statements that he claims I did.

So, does this mean the moderator is full of BS?

Thanks to Chic and Mrs Dressel for taking the time to set the record straight.

quote:

Originally posted by jimmyd223:

quote:

I am 95% sure that I have never spoken to Jeff before, and I am 100% sure that I never made the statements that he claims I did.

So, does this mean the moderator is full of BS?

Bad Sentances, yes! Oh, you mean that smelly crap? Well, if it stinks like it and looks like it, it must be.

The points in Mrs dressel's staement were the same I made when suggesting the moderator ought to excercise more caution is his posts. Since, for some reason, the mere title of moderator elevates a person in some readers' eyes.

His friend that was being misquoted especially on the return aspect of the blank ought to have stepped up and cleared the air too. I thought Texans were honor bound to defend a woman's honor. Apparently not anymore.

Why would she want to be a part of this little club?

Becasue some of her customers are here.

Texas women are perfectly able to defend themselves. Apparently, so is Sharon Dressel.

I would like to say that I have bought one nice stock blank so far (200 dollar level), for the 416 Taylor LN I'm doing for my stepfather. After talking to people I have met here and at shows I called Dressels. I had a couple I liked from their website.

I spoke directly with Sharon, told her what I was using it for, she pulled the blanks, gave me her opinion on both. When I told her I was going to attempt it myself and it was my first stock she directed me to a bunch of pics to look at for reference. The blank arrived and is great, perfect layout for a heavy kicker.

She was very nice and I look forward to buying another one from them.


Red

Obviously, I've missed the better part of this pissing match, but my $.02 worth is that I would hope ALL of the experts of our sport (guns/gunsmithing/shooting/hunting) would be welcome here.

I don't agree with everything that Jack Belk did or said, really don't like the vapo-action teases of Matt Williams, and have never had an interaction with the Dressels. BUT, I sincerely hope they all will continue (or come back) to participate here because I LEARN FROM THEM. And I am certain that I could learn about wood from the Dressels...

To quote a famous, law-abiding American citizen: "Can't we all just get along?"...

MKane160

22WRF and Vapodog.

Sharon and her husband run 3 businesses in Yakima and between that and a young daughter they just do not have time. Knowing them, I do not think they are the type who want to spend their spare time on a computer chat/bulletin board. Sharon will talk your leg off on the phone, ia a gifted stockmaker in her own right and is a delightful person to boot. She serves her customers very well.

The comment about the reason being evident is just another in a long list of worthless posts by VD.

I am sure Ms. Dressel is a delightful woman and a wonderful mother. And I have heard of her and her husband's reputation for very fine stockwork. Nevertheless, If Ms. Dressel had time to talk to you about the issue (and apparently a considerable bit of time to talk to Rick about it) then she could have used the same amount of time when the thread was going on to come on here herself and say what she had to say about it.

Running a business is partially about spending time with your customers. There are a lot of folks here on AR that are Dressel customers.

quote:

Originally posted by 22WRF:
I am sure Ms. Dressel is a delightful woman and a wonderful mother. And I have heard of her and her husband's reputation for very fine stockwork. Nevertheless, If Ms. Dressel had time to talk to you about the issue (and apparently a considerable bit of time to talk to Rick about it) then she could have used the same amount of time when the thread was going on to come on here herself and say what she had to say about it.

Running a business is partially about spending time with your customers. There are a lot of folks here on AR that are Dressel customers.

Well sir, you should get used to the fact that what you want to happen and what does happen can be two entirely different things. The fact is, she isn't going to post here so get used to it.

What more would you have her say anyway? It is apparent that plenty of members here when confronted with fact will still refuse to be swayed. It would likely be a waste of her valuable time.

She does spend time with her customers and does it by phone or in other manners by her choice. If you also read the post she was away when the thread was still active and managed to see it before it was deleted. I know that she saw it just before it was deleted.

Running a business is about serving the needs of the customers and they do that. It is not about spending time with them. It may be if the situation dictates but this one surely does not. If you need to be hand held in the wood business they will also do that for you. Your original comment about them needing to adress the issues here personally are without merit and as already said you need to get over it.

I am sure I have purchased more wood from them than anyone on this board and my total may just be more than all of you combined and I am not paranoid about them not being a member of this site or commenting on the stock topics. Both of the Dressels could add to the knowledge here but they choose not to. You can get that same information from them in person just by picking up the phone.

I wouldn't have her say anymore than what she has already said. What she said is fine. Customstox is correct. Its strictly her choice if she wants to spend time here. Its my choice to opine that she should have come on here and said it directly herself at the time the thread was going on.

As for her time being valuable, her time to her is no more valuable than anyone elses time to them. If her business is retail (the wood business) which it basically is, then her "time" running that business is about taking care of customers. Part of taking care of customers is Public Relations. WE have had lots of folks come on here every once in awhile to tell us about their gun business. Some still do post. They "find" time for public relations, which is the mark of a good businessperson.

I would call this more like damage control or BS repellent than public relations. She does take care of her customers. Why she would come here to engage in discourse with some one who is NOT her customer is beyond me. Besides, if you really want to here her so badly, why not drop a dime in the phone & call her.

I think the mark of a good business person is having a successful business. If that entails "public relations" so be it. But a happy satisfied customer base who feels they are well taken care of and are provided a superior product at a fair price generaly requires little or no public relations at least in the context you are suggesting.

Poleax

Lest you forget, the entire thread was about an unhappy customer. And, as I have stated, it would have taken no more of her "valuable" time then than it did now.

quote:

Originally posted by Customstox:
22WRF and Vapodog.

Sharon and her husband run 3 businesses in Yakima and between that and a young daughter they just do not have time. Knowing them, I do not think they are the type who want to spend their spare time on a computer chat/bulletin board. Sharon will talk your leg off on the phone, ia a gifted stockmaker in her own right and is a delightful person to boot. She serves her customers very well.

The comment about the reason being evident is just another in a long list of worthless posts by VD.

welcome to the club of assholes Chic.....Somehow I knew you'd fit right in here nicely.

If my posting is over your head,...well that's OK....as you've just proven yourself a very little man!!!!!

22WRF,
It was not about an unhappy customer. It was about BS by our so called moderator regarding a non incident. Try some reading comprehension.

VD, your UnFan club is growing in leaps and bounds due to your "talent" for posting on EVERYTHING where you know NOTHING.

quote:

Originally posted by Customstox:
22WRF,
It was not about an unhappy customer. It was about BS by our so called moderator regarding a non incident. Try some reading comprehension.

VD, your UnFan club is growing in leaps and bounds due to your "talent" for posting on EVERYTHING where you know NOTHING.

And you, of course know it all??

Listen asshole.....you can't find a single post of mine that is untrue!!

VD, no I don't know everything and I don't post when I am in that position. It NEVER slows you down.

22wrf,

I'm sorry but the original post was not about an unhappy customer, it was about mistatements by one individual about Sharon's product and misrepresentaions of what a real customer said. That customer was indeed satisfied but someone else attributed statements to him that he denied ever making. So, rather than hound Sharon, perhaps you should call upon those individuals to step up on offer up proof or recant.

quote:

Originally posted by Customstox:
VD, no I don't know everything and I don't post when I am in that position. It NEVER slows you down.

wow...that is a post of a lot of substance...what an asshole....

VD, I certainly do not want to take away your title for posts with a lack of substance. You stand unchallenged in that area. I will refrain from the name calling, but I do remember a respected orator saying the use of it is just a reflection of one who had little to say and it at least gave them somethng to fall back on.

The stage is now yours. I see no value in continuing this exchange with you. So throw out a few more "assholes" and see if you learn anything in retrospect.

Kind of reminds me of the time my ex wife tried to poke my eyes out. Good thing she was so short.

One thing I am not going to do is respond to name calling or put downs by doing the same. If I did I would be putting myself on that same level.

The facts. Jeffe was the unhappy customer. He was on here posting about it by first person testimony. Another poster (Rick) didn't like what Jeffe had to say. He then called Ms. Dressel. Ms. Dressel apprently chose to speak here on AR through Rick. Hearsay is I believe what they call it. Rick believed in what he was arguing (I admire him for sticking up for his friend) but went a little bit too far with the language. Wish he would come back as he has lots of good knowledge to share.

Nevertheless, Ms. Dressel now offers more hearsay and I am told I have poor reading comprehension.

Again, that is fine. Everybody is entitled to their own opinions. Mine is that I pay more attention to first hand testimony over that of hearsay and I still believe that it would have been better if Ms. Dressel would have offered her own side of the story when the thread was active.

With regard to "proof", I am told that one of the hardest things to do is to prove something didn't happen. its almost impossible they say.

quote:

Originally posted by 22WRF:
One thing I am not going to do is respond to name calling or put downs by doing the same. If I did I would be putting myself on that same level.

The facts. Jeffe was the unhappy customer. He was on here posting about it by first person testimony. Another poster (Rick) didn't like what Jeffe had to say. He then called Ms. Dressel. Ms. Dressel apprently chose to speak here on AR through Rick. Hearsay is I believe what they call it. Rick believed in what he was arguing (I admire him for sticking up for his friend) but went a little bit too far with the language. Wish he would come back as he has lots of good knowledge to share.

Nevertheless, Ms. Dressel now offers more hearsay and I am told I have poor reading comprehension.

Again, that is fine. Everybody is entitled to their own opinions. Mine is that I pay more attention to first hand testimony over that of hearsay and I still believe that it would have been better if Ms. Dressel would have offered her own side of the story when the thread was active.

With regard to "proof", I am told that one of the hardest things to do is to prove something didn't happen. its almost impossible they say.

I applaud you for not resorting to name calling as so many here do.

I too wish Rick could come back but that I believe is in the hands of DRG. Besides I'm sure Jeff is all too happy not to have Rick here. I do find it funny that VD has chosen to resort to colorful language on four consecutive posts yet I'm sure he won't be asked to leave.

As to Sharon offering up her side. Consider this, she was on vacation when the initial exchange took place. I'm sure she may have liked to have responded but the post was miraculously gone by the time she got back. Again, you are more than welcome to call her for her own firsthand account.

Jeffe was only a potential customer. He did not buy a blank. His friend was a customer, and jeffe posted much hearsay about HIS FREIND'S alledged experience with Sharon.

Rick's problem had been building, Poleax. He never took after me but he did get more and more antagonistic in general. The exchange that got him banned was just the proverbial straw.

VD and Stox (sounds like a TV show, huh?) are just having a nice one-on-one for us all to enjoy. Glad it's not my turn in the box, LOL.

22WRF,
Jeffe WAS NOT the unhappy customer. The customer in question was a friend of Jeffe's and Jeffe supposedly called Sharon to ask about the supposed problems with the blank. I was also discussing the matter with Jeffe on the thread. I was also corresponding with Jeffe during the post via pms and he told me to contact the customer and get it straight from the horses mouth. Those pms just as mysteriously got deleted from the forum but not before I saved them to my hard drive. I did contact the customer ( he wishes to remain anonymous) and he emailed to me and had already emaild to Jeffe that the thickness was not an issue. In fact it was the depth of the pattern in the butt that caused the problem. Also she had never told him that she would not take the blank back and the customer had never told Jeffe that. I asked Jeffe to apologize and not water it down with BS. What he posted was anything but an apology and included that he was "mistaken" but that the Dressels would take th blank but only if a long list of conditions were met. That was far from the truth as was his initial posts.

So you need to get your stories straight.

The customer had written his name on the blank and decided that he would not send it back in that condition. Sharon has said that she would have taken it with his name on it.

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:

quote:

Originally posted by 22WRF:
Well, what I wonder is why Ms. Dressel could not join our little group here and come on herself and say what she had to say.

I would think that anyone who is in the gun business would want to be a member of this forum and come on from time to time to provide information about their products and services, as well as to refute statements.

I would have thought the reason for this is quite evident.

Vapo,
Out of curiosity, just what did you mean by this if I might ask?

Mr. Worthing

I stand corrected in that I believed it was Jeffe who had been the customer. Thank you.

22WRF,
You are welcome. This will probably help you understand why Rick and I were upset by what Jeffe posted, and futher by his unwillingness to make it right. The whole debacle was a black eye for this web site when you consider it was fostered by the moderator. The post was started by Dempsey and his only request was the minimum thickness of a stock blank. He stated some observations about Dressels blanks and prefaced his statements with his minimal experience with their blanks.

Best I can tell, Sharron was trying to clear things that came up in a previous post that got real nasty. It appears she cares about her business and her customers, she has sold a lot of stock blanks, so they must be doing something right. Can’t blame anybody for being busy and I sure couldn’t judge someone for not being inclined to participate on a website, some people just don’t do it. Many businesses are run without being a member of this site.

Seems like many times when stock making, blanks and etc, are bought up it turns into a pissing match.

Anyone of us that cared about what we do for a living or our business if put in question would at least try to put some clarity to it, think that’s all she was trying to do.

As far as her return policy, I think in a previous post if I remember correctly it came up about a blank that was skinny she refused to be returned, which was not the case at all. The blank may have been mine. The blank was not to skinny, it lacked dept at the butt for the pattern I wanted to use. She offered to take the blank back, but I chose to keep it and use for something else, end of story.

We want to talk about guns and gunsmithing, Dressel’s just want to sell blanks. I really don’t see what the big deal is.

Gent's, I feel that we have come a long way in clearing up that previous debacle. I for one appreciate those that have stepped in and helped to clarify the mistatements and misunderstandings emminating from that long since removed thread. Thanks also to those that have tried to be open to the truth.

Allow me to begin with apologizing, again to Sharon, for misremembering why the stock blank didn't go back.


I had chosen to not reply, line by line, on Sharon's email. I salute her for making the effort. Since some posters can't seem to be satisfied from having an internet trial by assertion, I will answer

quote:

Originally posted by Customstox:
Sharon has asked me to post the following for her:

As I am not a member of this website I am having this posted for me by a friend.
My name is Sharon Dressel and, along with my husband Paul, I’m the owner and operator of Dressel’s Gunstock Blanks Company.
While out-of-town a while back I received some calls from friends and customers informing me that both my business and I were being discussed on this site. I would like to take this opportunity to set the record straight concerning comments that were attributed to me by the moderator and one of the posters.
Before they were mysteriously removed

There is no mystery to anyone following along. Dempsey asked the administrator to remove the thread, after an explosion of the "f" word

quote:

I did have the chance to see the posts from the moderator of this forum in which he claimed to have spoken with me on the phone and in which he also attributed several statements to me concerning the thickness of our stock blanks and our return-exchange policy.

I am 95% sure that I have never spoken to Jeff before, and I am 100% sure that I never made the statements that he claims I did.

We spoke, but, then again, I expect a company as busy as Dressels would not recall every phone conversation, especially on a no sale.

quote:

I have been in the stock blank business for many years and I can assure you that those statements are not something I would have said to anyone at any time. I have checked my sales records and they do not show any sales of wood to this man.

Correct, I have not bought a blank from Dressels, nor will I. I can also assure you that I would be (and was) surprised by these statements

quote:

A normal blank for a stock with a cheek piece is 2 1/4 inches thick. A blank that is 1 7/8, 2 or 2 1/8 inches would be considered a thin blank and would work on rifles without a cheek piece or a smaller check piece and some shotguns.

I totally agree, and have stated such. Chic,Poleax(rick) are you going to "attack" Sharon for stating that a NORMAL blank for a stock with a cheekpiece is 2.25? Are you going to insult her skill level for making this position? You certainly did me, for say EXACTLY the same thing. You repeatedly insulted my skill level for wanting a 2.125 blank, but Sharon states that a 2.25 is a NORMAL sized blank, and that 2 1/8 should be a thin cheek piece, no cheekpiece, or a shotgun stock

quote:

Also on our website we list a few extra-thick blanks under rifles and mannlichers. These are 2 1/2 inches and thicker blanks. I will also list blanks that are 2 7/16 thick since it is only 1/16 less than 2 1/2 inches.

Let's be clear then, 2 7/16 is listed as an extra thick blank as listed on the Dressels website

quote:

The woodcutters do not like to cut thicker blanks due to the loss of how many blanks they are able to yield from a tree.

Which I stated as well, as to why blanks aren't all over 2.25. Again, the same trio decided to attack me on this point, inferring some sort of negative statement about this. Are you going to assault and insult Sharon now, gentlemen?

quote:

Paul and I will normally have a few thousand blanks on hand at any given time, and of those thousands of blanks perhaps 30 or so would measure less than 2 1/4 inches in thickness. We clearly list the measurements of thin blanks on our website so any buyer would know that up front.

So, not to put too fine a point on it, we can assume any stock on the website without being specifically annotated, is at least 2.25" thick? This would be a great statement on the opening page. I find it statistically odd that at least 14 of those 30 are listed on the dressels site. This is rather confusing, as they also list blanks over 2.25, but not all blanks have measurements. I think it is fair to say that they are in process of listing all stocks with dimensions. 2 3/8 is obviously over 2 1/4.

quote:

I always make it a practice to go over the measurements of each blank with the customer as well as getting from them an idea about what type of gun, caliber or gauge they are stocking.

No Offense, but making it a practice does not a business policy make.

quote:

It is also my practice to end each conversation with a customer buying a blank by telling them to send it back if it isn’t what they need or want. The only requirements we place on a return is that NO WOOD WILL BE ACCEPTED THAT HAS HAD FINISH APPLIED OR THAT HAS BEEN ALTERED IN ANY WAY. Hardly the long list of requirements stated by the moderator of this forum.

Yes, hardly a long list.
Though your website actually encourages people to put alcohol or water on the stock, which, frankly, is an alteration of how it was shipped. I take the word ANY very seriously. ANY, from dictionary.com means
One, some, every, or all without specification:
Or
To any degree or extent; at all

So, unless “any†becomes “some†I fail to see where encouraging a change doesn’t violate your policy

Writing one's name on a stock violates this return policy, which is kind of funny, as a pen is nothing but alcohol and a pigment (in it’s most basic form). I find this to be a trivial change, on the same scale as putting water or alcohol on wood. That this prevents a stock coming back is one of the reasons I disagree and will not be buying blanks from dressels.

Since I do not agree with their return policy and will not get into a contest with them, should the stock have hidden flaws or be rejected by a stockmaker, I will not be doing business with them

quote:

We do not put finish on our blanks. It is our professional opinion, based on many years in the business, that even if a blank is dry it can no longer breathe and therefore be able to age with a finish on the blank.
Also you never truly know what you are buying with finish on a blank.
Word of mouth is a huge part of our business and we would not have made it this many years in business by selling thin blanks or refusing to allow customers to return wood they were unhappy with.

You have lost me as a customer by word of mouth from a friend who, IMO, was not treated well. That's my opinion

quote:

I will close by saying that I find it very disturbing that the owners of this website would allow one of their moderators to make knowingly false statements about my business and me personally.

Never made a single statement about you personally. In fact, your personality was never mentioned. I did make a post "unknowingly" on your return policy, that I misremembered the reason the stock would not go back. I then apologized. Thanks for agreeing with that decision.

quote:

The title of moderator on a gunsmithing forum implies that the person has some amount of expertise.

Yes, it does. Thanks for recognizing that. It also means, as well, a person who can post their opinion, keep topics on topic, and ask posters not to flagrantly use vulgarity, or make "jokes" about beating women or sexual abuse of Children. Some posters cry "censorship" when these loose guidelines are crossed and the posters are asked to not do so. I can't imagine anyone supporting spousal abuse or child molestation, much less on a gunsmithing forum

quote:

Unknowing readers, who could be potential customers of ours,

as well as unknowing readers could be assaulted by a vile stream of curse words from a thread on a stock thickness thread.

quote:

could easily take his statements to be the gospel and decide that if the moderator of the gunsmithing forum said this then it must be true.

As well as potential customers of hundreds of other business, some which are viciously attacked by other posters. Sharon, would you suggest that all of these types of threads are removed, especially when made from people from "sources" of authority. You can start with Chic and his relentless attacks on Williams Firearms.

quote:

You are welcome to visit our website at www.dressels.com . We have a lot of information on our website such as the descriptions of the different types of wood and much more.
Thank you all for the opportunity to set the record straight and to hopefully clear my name a bit.

Your name was never impinged, but I do applauded you for the effort

quote:

I look forward to helping any of you with a stock blank and answering any of your questions.
Sincerely,
Sharon Dressel

Here's my "inflammatory" post that started this issue.. which, frankly, other than Sharon stating they don't think 2 1/4 is a thick blank, she has 100% affirmed

quote:

i hear dressels' says 2.25 is a thick blank...

yeah, well, I do disagree.. if you want a cheekpiece, another 1/8 is about enough, and another .250 is better still..

besides, .0625 too much aint bad...

but undersized is a disaster

i won't touch 2.125 for anything with a cheecepiece, in a turnbolt centerfire ... and that would have to be a TINY stock

jeffe

The facts that Sharon Dressel also feels that a 2.25 is a normal blank for a normal stock with cheekpiece might elude some, and cause Chic to attack me, again, about my skill and experience, though Sharon affirms that a 2.25 is a normal thickness for such a stock

And again, I apologize to Sharon, again, for misremembering why the stock blank didn't go back.

jeffe

tiggertate, to set the record straight, Rick was not banned. He was given the option of apologizing for what he said or leaving and he chose the latter. I might add that Dempsey, who used the same language (and first, I might add) was not put in that position.

Billy, thank you for coming in and posting on this and yes it was your blank. The big deal was the comments that were made about the whole transaction with out any truth to them. I do think it is time to put this to bed and you have helped in that matter, albeit a bit untimely.

As you said the Dressels are in the stock blank business and as I stated, neither Sharon or Paul have the time or the inclination to become members and spend their time in here. That does not make them poor business people, they just choose to put their efforts in other areas. They do well in this business because of their product, their ethics and their reputation and I am sure that will continue the same whether they are here or not. They are always my "go to" people for stock blanks.

Jeffe,
Okay this thread is not dead. My god, is this your apology?????? Typical sidewinder crap. Your integrity is sorely lacking.

I "attacked" because you lied about the whole scenario about the stock blank. "Misremembered????? Nice term for BS.

It is interesting that you have access to the thread and post what you feel paints you in the best light and it is gone for everyone else. Your line by line account is lacking any merit, but your "apology is so sincere" - yeah spare me. BTW, she said she would take the stock back and was encouraged by Bill Soversn to do it, he chose not to. Your statement about writing the name on it was not considered in that light by Sharon. Just more of your damn lies. Now you think you are showing yourself in a better light and it is anything but the truth but then the truth seems to be a foreign concept to you.

Posted 24 July 2006 05:53
"tiggertate, to set the record straight, Rick was not banned. He was given the option of apologizing for what he said or leaving and he chose the latter. I might add that Dempsey, who used the same language (and first, I might add) was not put in that position."

For old farts a lot of us still seem to have quite a bit of testosterone running in our arteries and veins. Sometimes its wise to stick the tail between the legs and wait for another day to make a stand. Rick, I didn't always agree with everything you had to say, (and you definitely had a lot to say) but there is no doubt you had and have a lot of good knowledge to share, and most importantly of all you love guns, which is why we are all here in the first place. So put the tail where it belongs and come on back here and argue with us somemore (but just don't get too excited and use the F word too much).

It appears to me that we have now gotten everything straightened out on this deal. Most of the factual misunderstanding has been taken care of, everybody thats going to has apologized as far as they are going to, and hunting season is coming.

Lets put her to bed and go on to better stuff.