I'm not going to go into people's lives and personal sheet, but there are some problems here. First,
@TorroXL is my lifting partner - meaning I see him and talk to him pretty much daily. One thing I can guarantee is that he has enough gear to get him through multiple blasts and doesn't need any from an unknown lab.
Also, some of us were not very happy with a private lab becoming semi-public, and just a quick read through the stanford thread shows that the lab has existed for many years. Torro had nothing to do with said thread and cannot make any claim about "getting them in the door" [sic].
Finally, I am an editor. I read various written works all day and have for years. Each person has a unique vernacular, writing style, and presentation. Now, these things may not be apparent to someone who doesn't get paid to notice them, but they are quite apparent to someone whose livlihood depends on such observances. My point is that I've seen torro's emails multiple times and am very familiar with his writing (one of which is using a specifc emoji - as a signature of sorts), and this email does not contain many of his writing signatures. In addition, of course, to the timing issue that has been brought up above.
Finally, why were two emails shown with only one containing identifying marks?
@North44 said that these were just two emails of a few that were sent. If the source is offering free gear on a specific forum, wouldn't it make sense to include your handle/avi-name when requesting gear, to ensure that the source knows who will be required to review the gear and to ensure that the requester is indeed part of a forum the source is on?
Just my two cents.
