I think you (and some others) have completely missed the point of this thread. It matters not the least how someone has acted in the past--what matters is what they do in the present, in response to a problem. It's easy to be the good guy when everything is going right; it takes extra effort to do it when things are going wrong. I don't have the problem printer, but I have been a salesman. Anyone who has any degree of success in sales knows, or should know, that regardless of whether a customer's position is justified or not if you intend to build a reputation you have to take care of the customer, and his problem, and, especially, get him to shut up, using whatever means it takes. Bad news travels much faster, and lasts longer, WHETHER JUSTIFIED OR NOT, than good news, and it _must_ be dealt with, as quickly as possible, regardless of how valid it is. Epson is not doing this, and they are quickly picking up the reputation (whether justified or not) of stonewalling and failing to support their users. When I was doing sales the very hardest thing for me to do was to return a call from a dissatisfied customer, but I did it _everytime_, knowing that the situation would not go away, and if I didn't deal with it immediately it would only get worse in the future, and, wonder of wonders, I'd still have to deal with it. It wouldn't take much energy for Epson to build a form e-mail response: "Thank you for the information; we've heard from other users, as well, about this and are trying to figure out what's going on and will let you know when we know." This isn't much, and I bet the lawyers could come up with something that worked for them, too. If they did just that much, I bet that there'd be a lot less noise on this group, and people would have developed a different attitude about the situation, and about Epson's response. People howl loudest when they're being ignored, and having a angry, howling crowd of users is not a function position to put one's business in. I don't think the real idiots at Epson are in development, designing faulty products--I think at this point it's being shown that they're in the public relations department, failing to respond appropriately to complaints, whether they're justified or not. --Michael Darnton ORIGINAL MESSAGE:: Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 18:49:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Greer <mgreer942@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Ozone and the orange shift--more disgusting every day . . . . . It disgusts me when people try to eleviate themselves from all personal responsibility by trying to make somebody else pay for their lack of wise decision making. It also disgusts me when people want to torch a company without realizing that that company has almost single handedly freed photographers from depending on labs. . . . . . - Please do not include an entire message in your response. Delete the excess. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.