...bored to the point of disinterest, in fact.
In a week of questions about whether or not Alexander Knight funneled donations intended for a non-for-profit "eco-drone" into his own private for-profit business, Knight has promised answers, but produced none.
I'm starting to think there's a reason for that. But earlier today, Knight came up with this:
That was never in dispute.
What is in dispute is whether he purchased it for his so-called "eco-drone" project, or if he purchased it for his @SkeyeFoto drone. This picture doesn't answer that question. I'm really starting to think that he won't, and I think under these circumstances a refusal to answer is, in itself, an answer of sorts.
Your mileage may differ.
But here's the remarkable thing about it: even if Knight did purchase these components with funds donated to what he promised was strictly a not-for-profit project, and then used to build a drone for his for-profit business, I'm not the person to whom he owes redress.
That would be his donors.
And suppose that his existing donors are okay with him doing such a thing? Well, fine. But at the very least Knight ought to edit his GoFundMe page in order to indicate that the drone is for dual purpose. So that at least future donors may not be misled.
It could be that simple.
That's what's so remarkable about this to me: there are so many easy ways out of this for Alexander Knight. But they involve answering questions to account for how he's conducting himself, and correcting whatever misconduct may be afoot.
Instead, Knight is trying to preen about his alleged victimhood.
And so, I'm bored. Bored to the point of disinterest. Unless Knight decides he'd like to actually answer the relevant questions, I'm pretty much done with it.