Anyway, I’m going to ask him about where our client’s information goes. If you want more specifics, suggest an exact series of questions.
Jim, suggest a line of questioning then. I can even insert a screen shot of any document you want to reference.
If you have a strong point to make, ask a series of questions that gets to it directly. Nathan is left with three choices:
- Answer the questions directly.
- Avoid answering them and have me drag him back on point during the interview until he simply refuses to answer.
- Walk off the set.
My members and their inspection businesses benefit from any of those three.
Okay.
That’s great Nick! Nathan has been an asset whenever I need help. He answers his phone and has never lead me in the wrong direction. Can’t wait to hear more on the NachiTV!
There you go, Nick. 
Yep. I think that comment is helpful for other members to read when they are trying to assess a vendor and his/her products/services.
I’m giving members an opportunity with this thread. If they don’t avail themselves of it, I’ll do the interview as best as I can on my own, play the the NACHI.TV theme song and call it a wrap.
And if you post a sensible question on this thread and Nathan and I avoid it during the interview… that says something about me, doesn’t it?
I might consider it if you will agree to this condition …
That they will be posted here on this thread (just as you requested) on the day of the taping. You can tell me when the taping will be (date and time) either here or by email.
Other than that, I may as well be writing his scripted responses as well as the questions.
Let me know if you agree and I will consider doing that.
I’m fine with it. Nathan has to agree to it as your condition changes the terms of his appearance on the show.
Nathan?
Jim, in a legal proceeding counsel gets months after the discovery period to review opposing counsel’s evidence, so if I were Nathan, I would not agree to the condition.
It is only something that an honest vendor with nothing to hide might do. I agree with you. Let’s see if he wants to pretend to be one for the purposes of your show.
Jim, if your evidence and contentions only have a hope of making your point when sprung upon a person, what does that say about them? This is why surprise witnesses aren’t permitted in the courts.
If you have a contention supported by evidence, it’s validity is increased by permitting scrutiny. Any idiot can lob a last-minute grenade and run. It’s done on the message board every day. I’m not interested in creating a video replay of the message board threads.
Apparently, Nathan isn’t “fine with it”.
He’s on another thread right now at this moment … back to claiming that he is compliant with the Client Fidelity Pledge. His fourth position in the same half of a day. I guess his idea of his own pledge didn’t gain any takers. LOL.
In any event … his agreed “terms” of doing your show appear to be quite beneficial to him. I’m sure he will be happy with his commercial.
My question regarding ethics violations and denials is quite valid.
No last minute grenade tactic needed.
Your analogy is flawed, Nick.
I’m not a “surprise witness”. He would know in advance that I will be asking the question.
In your courtroom analogy, are you saying that a court requires both counsel to announce, in advance, what questions they will ask?
That’s okay, though. I understand. Go ahead and do your commercial.
I totally agree. Just another pre-rehearsed info commercial, with no true value, other then promoting Nate and his services.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
LOL.
I have to go and collect on a few bets. Thanks, kid.