sumyunggai
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2016
- Messages
- 337
I didn't assume that, I was told that.
Had my available information been only 'wife had sent 25 million instead of 2.5 million', then I would have ascribed the dishonesty directly to the mother-in-law, in the absence of further evidence.
Clearly there is a difference between 'accidentally sent 10* more money, keeps quiet' and 'accidentally sent 10* more money, lies about it'.
There was nothing wrong with my observation; I have 15 years of data points about local dishonesty, you have none. I have personal experience even of members of the local post office stealing things
Had my available information been only 'wife had sent 25 million instead of 2.5 million', then I would have ascribed the dishonesty directly to the mother-in-law, in the absence of further evidence.
Clearly there is a difference between 'accidentally sent 10* more money, keeps quiet' and 'accidentally sent 10* more money, lies about it'.
There was nothing wrong with my observation; I have 15 years of data points about local dishonesty, you have none. I have personal experience even of members of the local post office stealing things
