Unique Spoon Ring *Please Help!*

"Marilee J. Layman" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 08:39:02 GMT, m
wrote:

I do not understand the brough-ha-ha about spoon rings.
Most of them are tacky and crude and can be found at garage sales and junk
shops ---- so was this just an opportunity for some of us to sound off ?????

I am an attorney

nothing like having a government protected monopoly(unlike jewelers)

who bills more an hour as an
attorney than he does as a jeweler, and though I am not required to , I
continue to do pro bono work, because sometimes, people just need a
favor...just need some help...can't afford, can't do, WHATever.

more likely, you feel guilty because you often do not give good value.


You all need to stop thinking that the world begins and ends with ourselves,
and sometimes, stop being legends in our own minds.

I refer you to the first 4 words at the top. Why did you think what you
do for a living was pertinent? I think WE know the answer to that.

Carl
1 Lucky Texan

lgreene wrote:


Your suggestions will not be taken. My missive is not a mistake, but
evidently being on this group is.

You are not on this group! You have never participated, you have never posted
here, before this post. I on the other hand have been participating and getting
my hands dirty in this news group since at least April 7, 1996. But I don't
think that getting your hands dirty is something you would know about.

You have the gall to email me your bile, and hide behind a fake email address,
so I cannot even return the mail to you. And you have the unmitigated audacity
to lecture me on how I should run my business.

You are a slimy worm. And a common street hustling coward. Actually a street
hustler has more style than you have. Some lawyer you are. Most lawyers I
know, at least have some rudimentary manners.

Since Peter won't allow me to get into a real flame war, which in this case I
would really enjoy, I will leave it at this. This is an instance where I wished
this newsgroup were not moderated, you sheister.

Abrasha
http://www.abrasha.com

PS.

Peter,

Please post this, because he won't allow me to address him directly in private
email, by hiding behind a fake email address! And he has attacked me personally
in this forum, without any provocation.

hey joey,

i guess it takes one person with an attitude to direct every one's attention
away from the initial request. however i can't blame the guy for it must have
been a real rough christmas season for him. you should ask him for an estimate
of the total cost anyway. if the price is right ,i may have him fed-ex me some
chinese delight from my favorite store in china town.

here is my suggestion: post that picture here and let us see what kind of a
spoon it was. there are similar street artists here in venice beach (in los
angeles) who may have what you are looking for. if you are not in a big rush, i
may be able to do something for you by valentines day. that may be a good time
to surprise her with it.

good luck to both of us,
ken.

Marilee J. Layman wrote:

On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 08:39:02 GMT, m
wrote:

J. Fehrenbach wrote:
...... was actually made from the "bowl" portion of the
spoon to make a really wide full-digit ring.

Interesting. Along the same vane, did anyone see the
ring Angelina Jolie wore in "Hackers"?
The thing spanned a joint, and had a hinge so that she
could still bend her finger. Kind of like one-finger armor.
Cyberpunk aesthetic of the '90s as interpreted by moviemakers.
The movie so severely insulted hackers that the movie's site was
actually cracked-into and defaced.

These are more goth than cyberpunk. They're widely available on the
web -- here, for instance (no relationship to the seller, just the
first thing that came up on Google):

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tem=2880518682

Actually the ring in this page is quite different, all filligree and
frou-frou, and it doesn't cover the bottom of the finger. The one in
she wore was actually like a tiny piece of armor, with an armor joint at
the knuckle, complete coverage around the finger, and no filligree.
Couldn't get a very good image, but...
http://www.mbstevens.com/A/ring.jpg
....should give the idea.
--
cheers, m

On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 21:39:43 -0800, in rec.crafts.jewelry
(Nobel jewelry) wrote:


here is my suggestion: post that picture here and let us see what kind of a
spoon it was.

Kindly remember that I cannot process posts with actual attached graphics. to
post the picture, you have to (yourself) post it somewhere on the web, and then
include in your newsgroup post, the URL to that web based image. Most, if not
all, ISPs include in an access account, a certain amount of web storage space,
normally intended for a home page, or the like. That includes enough space to
easily post such an image. If that isn't possible, there are web sites out
there that specialize in hosting images for things like ebay auctions and other
uses. Some charge a fee, others might not.

Peter Rowe
moderator
rec.crafts.jewelry

How does someone get called a slimy worm in a "moderated" news group???
Its OK to have friends, but its not OK to play favorites.
I dont think you would let me call someone a worm, even a lawyer

Les

[Peter's reply]

Every time I allow this sort of thing to start, as I did with the initial post
from "lgreene", it ends up escalating, and I end up feeling like I've stepped in
something nasty that I didn't see coming in time.

In this case, Mr. Greene (?) does use a munged reply address, and Abrasha
specifically asked, in his post, for an exception so that he could answer an
email he says he got from the fellow in private, which was, he says, more
vitriolic than what Mr. greene sent to the group. Probably against my better
judgement, I allowed it on the thought that letting Abrasha reply seemed somehow
fair.

But you're completely right that Abrasha's post does directly attack Mr. green
at a level that's not normally allowed in this group.

I DO try not to play favorites. Whether you believe it or not. I only very
rarely have to actually reject a post on these grounds, and really don't like
the option of approving a post only after editing out objectionable parts.
That's not my job, nor proper. Sometimes the right call is hard to find, and in
this case, I'm still not sure what the right point to have put a stop to this
would have been, if it even is here yet. Abrasha clearly knows, and states that
he knows, that flame wars aren't allowed, and has limited his reply compared to
what he might have done, and for me, the fact that he states in his post that
he's trying to stay within what he feels should be the limits does count for
brownie points here. I would have muchly preferred if he'd taken the moral high
ground and refrained from insults. It would have made my job easier.

On the other hand, when you think of it, the underlying issues ARE interesting.
What do we need to charge for, when should we do favors for free, and that stuff
are issues we all deal with. If we do lots and lots of favors and give away our
time for too little, as some of us may do, we'll feel good all the way into
bankrupcy court. If we're really hard lined about it, we'll end up feeling, and
looking to others, like Mr. Scrooge himself.

I would like to point out a couple side thoughts on this thread, apart from my
role as moderator, that make it, for me, worthy of discussion. One is the
comparison (my fault, I'm afraid) between pro bono work by lawyers vs freebies
by jewelers. The work that many lawyers do on a pro bono basis is work that
people often desperately need done, and deserve to have done. Legal matters of
importance, that they simply cannot afford to pay for at normal rates. Add to
this that the normal going rate for legal work is considerably higher than what
an average bench jeweler makes. I suspect that most lawyers take home a lot
more per year than most jewelers, and may have more room in their budgets, if
not in their schedules, for a bit of pro bono work for people who really need
the help. In the case of jewelery, it may be important too, to remember that
jewelery is a luxury. While lots of people want it and like it, it's not vital
to anyone's life (except jewelers). When we're giving away a free favor, we're
doing something nice, but not something essential to the recipient in most
cases. Plus, I've often noted that people value their jewelery, or jewelry
work, according to what they pay for it, not what they should have paid. When
you give them a freebie, they thank you but in their minds, the value of what
you just did is then assumed to be trivial. If it's a good thing that people
should value their jewelery at it's real value, freebies may not always be doing
them a favor. So the issues of what should be free, whether gaining good karma
with customers has real value, and the like, is worthy of discussion. Common
sense says "take care of your customers and they'll take care of you.". But
what about freebies for people you've never seen, in another city, who have neve
before been customers and are not likely to be so again? Should one's first
interaction with such a customer be a freebie? Hmm.

Then again, remember that J. Fehrenbach's first post clearly stated he was quite
willing to pay someone to make this, and presumably, to locate one if needed.
He didn't imply either poverty, or the need for a financial favor. And Abrashas
reply simply stated "mutually agreeable fee". That might have been negotiated
to a free cup of coffee the next time Mr. Fehrenbach was in town, or it might
have been a couple hundred dollars. If it was to be mutually agreed, then
presumably Mr. Fehrenbach was going to be satisfied and happy with the
arrangement. Remember, again, that while this sort of request is a nice thing
he wanted to do and was eager to do, nobody's life or welfare rested on it's
success. If his girlfriend got a replacement ring for a total cost of five
bucks, then perhaps she'd only put five bucks worth of care into making sure the
next one didn't also get flushed down a toilet. Who knows. We don't. We
really don't know, from either posting, what might have happened, or what might
still happen in this deal. We know only that a request was made, and that
Abrasha offered to help solve it, as a member of the jewelry profession. I
really really really don't think this deserved to escalate into this big fight,
beginning with Mr. Greene's civil, but disapproving post.

Well, I'm getting long winded. Or actually, just getting my fingers to wake up
(grin).

Please folks. Lets try to keep it civil. You can disagree, discuss, debate,
the issues all you like. No more name calling, OK? Do it as a freebie favor to
me, so I don't have to deal with other posters wondering whether I'm playing
favorites.

And a final thought. If you choose to take such conversations to private email,
as I encourage you to do if you're choosing to go in directions not appropriate
to this group, then for heavens sake have the common sense to include your
proper return address. Not to do so makes even a well written and thought out
email little more than SPAM, and justifies more than a little frustration and
anger on the part of the recipient.

Peter Rowe

I didn't intend this to become an argument. Sorry guys! Just wanted to make
my girl smile.
I would have been perfectly fine with working out some sort of monetary
agreement for Abrasha's time and effort. I understood from the beginning
that he'd be taking time out from his schedule to find this spoon ring maker
and I was totally happy that he would be willing to go through this for me.

Anyway, I actually have been contacted recently by a couple jewelry makers
who believe they can successfully duplicate the design for a decent price,
so I don't believe you need to go to the effort of finding the guy now,
Abrasha. I really do appreciate your volunteering to find him for me
though.
Thanks!
Joe

"Abrasha" wrote in message
news
lgreene wrote:


Your suggestions will not be taken. My missive is not a mistake, but
evidently being on this group is.

You are not on this group! You have never participated, you have never
posted
here, before this post. I on the other hand have been participating and
getting
my hands dirty in this news group since at least April 7, 1996. But I
don't
think that getting your hands dirty is something you would know about.

You have the gall to email me your bile, and hide behind a fake email
address,
so I cannot even return the mail to you. And you have the unmitigated
audacity
to lecture me on how I should run my business.

You are a slimy worm. And a common street hustling coward. Actually a
street
hustler has more style than you have. Some lawyer you are. Most lawyers
I
know, at least have some rudimentary manners.

Since Peter won't allow me to get into a real flame war, which in this
case I
would really enjoy, I will leave it at this. This is an instance where I
wished
this newsgroup were not moderated, you sheister.

Abrasha
http://www.abrasha.com

PS.

Peter,

Please post this, because he won't allow me to address him directly in
private
email, by hiding behind a fake email address! And he has attacked me
personally
in this forum, without any provocation.

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 05:38:57 GMT, Marion Margoshes
wrote:


"Marilee J. Layman" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 08:39:02 GMT, m
wrote:

I do not understand the brough-ha-ha about spoon rings.
Most of them are tacky and crude and can be found at garage sales and junk
shops ---- so was this just an opportunity for some of us to sound off ?????

I didn't say anything in this message. If you cut the text, cut the
attributions. (And we were no longer talking about spoon rings.)

--
Marilee J. Layman

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 05:39:13 GMT, m
wrote:

Marilee J. Layman wrote:

On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 08:39:02 GMT, m
wrote:

J. Fehrenbach wrote:
...... was actually made from the "bowl" portion of the
spoon to make a really wide full-digit ring.

Interesting. Along the same vane, did anyone see the
ring Angelina Jolie wore in "Hackers"?
The thing spanned a joint, and had a hinge so that she
could still bend her finger. Kind of like one-finger armor.
Cyberpunk aesthetic of the '90s as interpreted by moviemakers.
The movie so severely insulted hackers that the movie's site was
actually cracked-into and defaced.

These are more goth than cyberpunk. They're widely available on the
web -- here, for instance (no relationship to the seller, just the
first thing that came up on Google):

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tem=2880518682

Actually the ring in this page is quite different, all filligree and
frou-frou, and it doesn't cover the bottom of the finger. The one in
she wore was actually like a tiny piece of armor, with an armor joint at
the knuckle, complete coverage around the finger, and no filligree.
Couldn't get a very good image, but...
http://www.mbstevens.com/A/ring.jpg
...should give the idea.

That's the same kind of ring, just a different style. The TV show
Witchblade had similar hand-armor.

--
Marilee J. Layman