It's absolute weak sauce on his part. Snake eats snake. He was complicit in a lot of the sneaky underhanded ways from way back, as we have seen.Now the blame game starts
Now the blame game starts
I’m a bit split on this. I’ve known Nik online (not met him personally) for many years and I’ve always found him to be one of the good guys. I know you all judge him and say he’s as guilty as Mike and he must have known blah blah blah but it’s very easy to judge someone not really knowing the truth about someone. Or being guilty by association. Has anyone stopped to think that maybe Mike duped Nik and gained his confidence too?
I’m not sticking up for anyone as I’ve purposly stayed out of all the drama and not read every post about it so I may stand corrected. But Nik’s posts look to me like he was suckered by Mike too.
The posts about being his partner and friend etc looked to me like he was.
Nik’s not here anymore to defend himself nor Mike although Mike looks like he deserves this the way he’s treated people. Nik, I’m not so sure.
I think he was a bit blinkered as Mike had a habit of making people feel special when he wanted you or your products. I was approached by Mike and was very humbled by his comments but I chose not to get involved with “shops” as I like to control my own business. The blame stops with me in my business.
As I said maybe I have Nik all wrong but I have only seen him as a contributing member of the hobby who was also duped. Maybe there is solid evidence contrary to this but other than someone sticking up for who they thought was a friend and partner I’ve yet to see any.
This is quite conclusive of him being actively part of the problem. Duped or not, his actions and support of someone recasting/attempting to recast, are his own and his own responsibility.
Fair enough. I’m saddened to see this. I didn’t put Nik down for this kind of behaviour.
His poor reaction when I told him I'm not a fan of his Rubies/DPDLX statue combo was enough to know what kind of person he is.
Fair enough. I’m saddened to see this. I didn’t put Nik down for this kind of behaviour.
Sorry to hear that.
Trying to be as objective as I can through all of this...but from what I've gathered, that screen grab was altered to remove one of the participants. It makes sense because how else would a private convo between Mike and Nick get posted here. That being the case, it doesn't seem like the type of evidence people should use to form their opinions (fruit of the poison tree). It may very well be true, but if someone alters one thing, what's to stop them from changing something else? I'm not taking sides here, because there's plenty of other stuff you could useThis is quite conclusive of him being actively part of the problem. Duped or not, his actions and support of someone recasting/attempting to recast, are his own and his own responsibility.
Trying to be as objective as I can through all of this...but from what I've gathered, that screen grab was altered to remove one of the participants. It makes sense because how else would a private convo between Mike and Nick get posted here. That being the case, it doesn't seem like the type of evidence people should use to form their opinions (fruit of the poison tree). It may very well be true, but if someone alters one thing, what's to stop them from changing something else? I'm not taking sides here, because there's plenty of other stuff you could use
Can I ask what they done to you? Hope you do t mind me asking ?Me neither at the start.
I understand i'm coming across as strident, but I got burned by mike and an associate of his unfortunately.
its not altered it’s part of a group chat that mikeTrying to be as objective as I can through all of this...but from what I've gathered, that screen grab was altered to remove one of the participants. It makes sense because how else would a private convo between Mike and Nick get posted here. That being the case, it doesn't seem like the type of evidence people should use to form their opinions (fruit of the poison tree). It may very well be true, but if someone alters one thing, what's to stop them from changing something else? I'm not taking sides here, because there's plenty of other stuff you could use
It was a group chat wilth a prop maker who has shared here over this matter.I was wondering how a private convo between Mike Herron and Nick managed to be made public with such damning evidence.
Who else was involved?
Altered or not, it feels suspect without the rest of the conversation. Or the third party coming forward with the rest of that convo. If the third party is guilt free, why not be completely open about the whole thing?Can I ask what they done to you? Hope you do t mind me asking ?
its not altered it’s part of a group chat that mike
Liked to use, name of the escapes me at this moment.
If the person in chat doesn’t comment it’s not shown, so no editing involved.
The person who shared it is from replica forge who worked with mike and this who has shared this and more to come that will prove the shady business practices