Barrister and Mann

Jaxx I see your reference but I can guarantee you that’s a very false accusation and quite a low blow.

You have proof that it's false? Sounds very plausible to me.

Jaxx I see your reference but I can guarantee you that’s a very false accusation and quite a low blow.

You have proof that it's false? Sounds very plausible to me.

I truly hate to post on a Barrister and Mann thread, and muck it up but really? Did you sign up today just to post this comment? Can we just get back to discussing Barrister and Mann now, and not other artisans?

Jaxx I see your reference but I can guarantee you that’s a very false accusation and quite a low blow.

You have proof that it's false? Sounds very plausible to me.

I truly hate to post on a Barrister and Mann thread, and muck it up but really? Did you sign up today just to post this comment? Can we just get back to discussing Barrister and Mann now, and not other artisans?

Hey I like Barrister as well. One of my Favorite scents of all time is Diamond. I posted because I truly believe that Scott is devious and underhanded. I was just responding to a comment I found to be interesting, coming from it's source. I support BM 100%. Happy to resume regularly scheduled thread programming.

Jaxx I see your reference but I can guarantee you that’s a very false accusation and quite a low blow.

You have proof that it's false? Sounds very plausible to me.

Do you have proof that’s it’s true?  Sounds very conspiratorial to me.

Jaxx I see your reference but I can guarantee you that’s a very false accusation and quite a low blow.

You have proof that it's false? Sounds very plausible to me.

Do you have proof that’s it’s true?  Sounds very conspiratorial to me.

No, but the shoe sure fits. Also, Joey seemed pretty definitive in his exclamation that it is false, likely also without proof. How can he defend something he cannot be certain is true?

You have proof that it's false? Sounds very plausible to me.

Do you have proof that’s it’s true?  Sounds very conspiratorial to me.

No, but the shoe sure fits. Also, Joey seemed pretty definitive in his exclamation that it is false, likely also without proof. How can he defend something he cannot be certain is true?

Going to back up Joey here. The interactions i've had with Scott, he is most certainly not devious and underhanded. 

Back to the topic of the thread? So, how are the scents on Lyssa and Clusterfig? I haven't smelled them yet. I did smell Fougere Angelique, and think it's fantastic.

You have proof that it's false? Sounds very plausible to me.

Do you have proof that’s it’s true?  Sounds very conspiratorial to me.

No, but the shoe sure fits. Also, Joey seemed pretty definitive in his exclamation that it is false, likely also without proof. How can he defend something he cannot be certain is true?

Again, what proof do you have?  You accuse Joey of lying, yet offer zero proof yourself.

Do you have proof that’s it’s true?  Sounds very conspiratorial to me.

No, but the shoe sure fits. Also, Joey seemed pretty definitive in his exclamation that it is false, likely also without proof. How can he defend something he cannot be certain is true?

Going to back up Joey here. The interactions i've had with Scott, he is most certainly not devious and underhanded. 

Back to the topic of the thread? So, how are the scents on Lyssa and Clusterfig? I haven't smelled them yet. I did smell Fougere Angelique, and think it's fantastic.

Do you have proof that’s it’s true?  Sounds very conspiratorial to me.

No, but the shoe sure fits. Also, Joey seemed pretty definitive in his exclamation that it is false, likely also without proof. How can he defend something he cannot be certain is true?

Again, what proof do you have?  You accuse Joey of lying, yet offer zero proof yourself.

I have a very strong hunch, which is likely the same amount of proof Joey can offer that he is an innocent party.

No, but the shoe sure fits. Also, Joey seemed pretty definitive in his exclamation that it is false, likely also without proof. How can he defend something he cannot be certain is true?

Going to back up Joey here. The interactions i've had with Scott, he is most certainly not devious and underhanded. 

Back to the topic of the thread? So, how are the scents on Lyssa and Clusterfig? I haven't smelled them yet. I did smell Fougere Angelique, and think it's fantastic.

No, but the shoe sure fits. Also, Joey seemed pretty definitive in his exclamation that it is false, likely also without proof. How can he defend something he cannot be certain is true?

Again, what proof do you have?  You accuse Joey of lying, yet offer zero proof yourself.

I have a very strong hunch, which is likely the same amount of proof Joey can offer that he is an innocent party.

And I fail to understand how it can be so out of the realm of possibility anyway. Artisans try to screw each other often. Just look at that APR guy from Australia. he's attacked multiple artisans (and customers) in public. It is a sad state of affairs that what was once a relatively benign hobby has become so muddied.

You have proof that it's false? Sounds very plausible to me.

I truly hate to post on a Barrister and Mann thread, and muck it up but really? Did you sign up today just to post this comment? Can we just get back to discussing Barrister and Mann now, and not other artisans?

I posted because I truly believe that Scott is devious and underhanded.

Oh hi bazza, didn't see you there.

You have got to be effing kidding me with this comment. What evidence do you have of this? Oh that's right, none. I can guarantee you that these multiple releases (BaM, Dec, M&M, Noble Otter) within a weeks time are purely coincidence. Nothing underhanded about it.