mc01svt said:the implication there was that the vendor can do no wrong......
No, the implication was that the vendor has no history of this sort of action so I highly doubt they're deliberately trying to give him something other than he requested. It could be an honest mistake on MSX's part that is completely out of character for them.
And forgive the scepticism, but this wouldn't be the first time someone hopped on an internet forum and made a post like this to have it refuted later by the vendor's side of the story. I'm fairly sure it's happened on this forum even.
Last edited: