«

Tempting as it is to respond to Preddy's rantings - especially due to
the concern of his nonsensical advice misleading newcomers - can I
suggest that by far the better way to deal with him is to create a rule
in Outlook to simply filter out any messages from him (or one of his
several aliases). If everyone could do that, then the noise level on
this group would decrease dramatically, and hopefully Preddy would get
bored and find somewhere else to troll. I filtered him out some weeks
ago and it's wonderful. Trouble is, I still see everyone's replies to him.

Filter him out, don't reply to him!! You know it makes sense

Paul Howland wrote:

> Tempting as it is to respond to Preddy's rantings - especially due to
> the concern of his nonsensical advice misleading newcomers - can I
> suggest that by far the better way to deal with him is to create a rule
> in Outlook to simply filter out any messages from him (or one of his
> several aliases). If everyone could do that, then the noise level on
> this group would decrease dramatically, and hopefully Preddy would get
> bored and find somewhere else to troll. I filtered him out some weeks
> ago and it's wonderful. Trouble is, I still see everyone's replies to him.
>
> Filter him out, don't reply to him!! You know it makes sense

Paul-

If you set a filter on [GP] you'll filter out all my warnings and those
who reply to them.

Agreed that regulars don't need any more noise around this, but there
have to be some way to lessen it.

--
John McWilliams

John McWilliams wrote:

> Paul-
>
> If you set a filter on [GP] you'll filter out all my warnings and those
> who reply to them.
>
> Agreed that regulars don't need any more noise around this, but there
> have to be some way to lessen it.
>

Although I appreciate your intentions John, I think it would be far
better to simply filter out Preddy and be done with it. Don't feed the
trolls as they say. He thrives on the attention he causes. Deny him
the attention and he'll bugger off with luck.

> Although I appreciate your intentions John, I think it would be far
> better to simply filter out Preddy and be done with it. Don't feed the
> trolls as they say. He thrives on the attention he causes. Deny him
> the attention and he'll bugger off with luck.

Paul, I agree with you. However, the following is a cut and paste from a
recent reply to a post from a newcomer:

"Jeff, you should consider returning the Rebel if you are still able
to. For a bit more money, you can double your resolution, increase
color accuracy, and own the best Pro digital camera in production
today, the Sigma SD10. If you are impressed with the quality of the
Canon, then you aint seen nothin' yet.

Do a little research on the Foveon sensor and how it is the only
sensor capable of recording true colors. Canon cameras are equipped
with inferior CMOS sensors which record pixels as monochrome
initially, and then guess the colors after the shot has been taken.
This leads to inaccurate colors, and unpleasant artifacts.

Give it a thought.

Hope this helps.

-Orville"

GP and other incarnations never miss the chance to mislead others;
especially if they show any signs of being neophytes. Should they be
informed as to what is happening here? What do you think?

Paul Howland <> wrote in message news:<40cbe737$0$127$>...
> Tempting as it is to respond to Preddy's rantings - especially due to
> the concern of his nonsensical advice misleading newcomers - can I
> suggest that by far the better way to deal with him is to create a rule
> in Outlook to simply filter out any messages from him (or one of his
> several aliases). If everyone could do that, then the noise level on
> this group would decrease dramatically, and hopefully Preddy would get
> bored and find somewhere else to troll. I filtered him out some weeks
> ago and it's wonderful. Trouble is, I still see everyone's replies to him.
>
> Filter him out, don't reply to him!! You know it makes sense

Noise.

Paul Howland <> wrote in message news:<40cc3026$0$1752$>...
> John McWilliams wrote:
>
> > Paul-
> >
> > If you set a filter on [GP] you'll filter out all my warnings and those
> > who reply to them.
> >
> > Agreed that regulars don't need any more noise around this, but there
> > have to be some way to lessen it.
> >
>
> Although I appreciate your intentions John, I think it would be far
> better to simply filter out Preddy and be done with it. Don't feed the
> trolls as they say. He thrives on the attention he causes. Deny him
> the attention and he'll bugger off with luck.

All this over silly old me? Why not respond with some facts instead
of this noise? Because Bayer is no good full size, that's why.

On 13 Jun 2004 11:26:08 -0700, (George Preddy)
wrote:

>Paul Howland <> wrote in message news:<40cbe737$0$127$>...
>> Tempting as it is to respond to Preddy's rantings - especially due to
>> the concern of his nonsensical advice misleading newcomers - can I
>> suggest that by far the better way to deal with him is to create a rule
>> in Outlook to simply filter out any messages from him (or one of his
>> several aliases). If everyone could do that, then the noise level on
>> this group would decrease dramatically, and hopefully Preddy would get
>> bored and find somewhere else to troll. I filtered him out some weeks
>> ago and it's wonderful. Trouble is, I still see everyone's replies to him.
>>
>> Filter him out, don't reply to him!! You know it makes sense
>
>Noise.
All you know how to do is make noise gp, lets seethe pics

In message <> ,
(George Preddy) wrote:

>All this over silly old me? Why not respond with some facts instead
>of this noise? Because Bayer is no good full size, that's why.

Here's a fact; this is a crop from 10D original pixels:

http://www.pbase.com/image/28980485/original

The top is the original pixels. The bottom is the same image, reduced
to 50% with "bicubic", and then brought back to size with a 200% upsize,
and sharpened at the same time as the top (after they were stitched
together). If any of what you say about Bayer and interpolation were
true, both halves should look roughly the same. It is pretty obvious
that the top image has unique information for each pixel, and is truly
worthy of 6.29MP for the full frame.

The 10D is a 6.29MP camera. Give it up.

--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><

George Preddy wrote:
>
> Paul Howland <> wrote in message news:<40cc3026$0$1752$>...
> > John McWilliams wrote:
> >
> > > Paul-
> > >
> > > If you set a filter on [GP] you'll filter out all my warnings and those
> > > who reply to them.
> > >
> > > Agreed that regulars don't need any more noise around this, but there
> > > have to be some way to lessen it.
> > >
> >
> > Although I appreciate your intentions John, I think it would be far
> > better to simply filter out Preddy and be done with it. Don't feed the
> > trolls as they say. He thrives on the attention he causes. Deny him
> > the attention and he'll bugger off with luck.
>
> All this over silly old me? Why not respond with some facts instead
> of this noise? Because Bayer is no good full size, that's why.

and yet far better than any picture
you ever took with a sigma camera.