Respectfully, I considered your statement to the effect of the set being 90% machined as being a "misnomer", and given the literal meaning of the word I think I have very fair grounds for my reaction. I considered those few words very carefully, and I tried hard to make no hasty assumptions. My interpretation of those words and what seemed to be the context of their use, was that you were not happy with the quality of the machining job, because they took you so long to fit - and therefore that my work was responsible for that. Those words made me feel as though you thought the set had been mis-represented, which I do take personally. Hence my use of the term "rough" machining as by labelling it a misnomer, you clearly didn't think the job a clean one.

I have no problems with you stating your viewpoint, or posting it. My other comments were made to state my viewpoint, and to attempt to qualify it. Perhaps you could qualify your opinion about the inletting/machining "misnomer" - as it is the sole basis for my original post?

I had and have no wish to make a direct, or subversive, attempt at denigration of the quality of your own work - but rather make statements based on my own experiences. I would not ever have the desire to spoil someones enjoyment of this work. However in reflection I can see how you may have taken my comments personally, especially considering "assumptions and sensibilities". My use of the term "decent stocker" was admittedly not the best choice of words, and would have been much better written as "professional stocker" or "accomplished stocker" to best put my words into perspective and avoid unintentional offense. Other than that I think the statement is a fair point, made in a democratic forum.

My only intention was to state my objection about the "misnomer", which remains, as does my explanation of it. Perhaps my willingness to state things from my perspective could be regarded as a positive rather than a negative? There are two sides to a coin.