RE: [photo-3d] P3D camera 'insurance'?

["Dan Shelley" <dshelley@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Talbot [mailto:list_post@xxxxxxxxx]
>
> The outpouring of support for Grant's situation is
> impressive.  I feel compelled to note, however, that
> within the space of three days, this group learned of
> not one but three cases of 'misappropriated' stereo
> cameras.  (Don Lopp's stolen car and Rolleidoscop were
> mentioned Monday; Grant's mistakenly donated RBT story
> was told on Tuesday; and last night John Rupkalvis
> mentioned his stolen Verascope.)  Mary Ann and Wolfgang
> Sell had equipment stolen by a hotel valet while doing
> a site inspection for the NSA Mesa convention.  Other
> stories have been mentioned from time to time on the
> list, and I'm sure there are more cases out there.  Are
> these crime victims less deserving of our support than
> Grant is?

Paul,

The main difference (from my perspective) is that with Grant's story, we
have a specific person we can "target". With the other stolen equipment
scenarios, there was no person to attempt to work with to "fix" the
situation.

It's not that we feel any less bad about the other losses, it's just that
there seems to be something we CAN do in this situation. Hopefully the
offers of "ransom"/"reward" money will be enough to convince the guy who
currently has the camera to return it.

In my mind there is a difference here - can you see it, or am I missing
something else?

Dan Shelley


 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/