Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > OT Rita - Digital Soft Paw on Flickr Re: THE CURE FOR RITA!

Reply
Thread Tools

OT Rita - Digital Soft Paw on Flickr Re: THE CURE FOR RITA!

 
 
Mark Thomas
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-21-2008
John McWilliams wrote:
> Rita Berkowitz wrote:
>> You posted a photo? And you have to ask why SI was a complete and
>> total failure?

>
> I can see how proud you are, "Rita", for your part in the demise of the
> SI. Way to go; you are indeed the Champ.


It's illuminating that Rita focuses on denigrating the forum s/he posts
to and attacking anything/anyone that might provide criticism of her images.

S/he would naturally take particular delight in the SI's (temporary -
I'll bet it comes back) demise. It is a forum where for the most part,
images are supplied and critiqued on merit rather than personality. You
could sense the seething jealousy when people she disliked got high
praise for their work. It is also notable that s/he is incapable of
actually critiquing - rather like her inability to *take* a critique!
And of course she would never actually post an image to such a forum -
one on which she cannot control the responses she gets, or simply use
the "I meant to post a bad one" excuse...

It's also interesting to note that initially she posted images without
claiming they were food for 'idiots'.. But then sometime after she
started to get heavily criticised, the "I'm doing this to tease you"
excuse came out.

It's a shame. But some people like to destroy rather than improve, and
are incapable of taking criticism.

(O:
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Mark Thomas
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-21-2008
Rita Berkowitz wrote:
> Funny thing is you're so
> ****ed because you can't get a rise from me


This post. Flickr. That's 2-0 'rises', loser.

Given that I now ignore 98% of your crap, wtf would i care about what
you have posted on pbase? And why do you need to hide your identity -
subconciously ashamed of your behavior?


BTW, it is refreshing to see that even Tony C has dropped you now, so
that leaves ... hmm ... a supporter base of what, exactly?

Guess there's always D-Mac? (or 2squid, as he is today..)
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
tony cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-21-2008
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:28:12 +1000, Mark Thomas
<markt@_don't_spam_marktphoto.com> wrote:

>Rita Berkowitz wrote:
>> Funny thing is you're so
>> ****ed because you can't get a rise from me

>
>This post. Flickr. That's 2-0 'rises', loser.
>
>Given that I now ignore 98% of your crap, wtf would i care about what
>you have posted on pbase? And why do you need to hide your identity -
>subconciously ashamed of your behavior?
>
>
>BTW, it is refreshing to see that even Tony C has dropped you now, so
>that leaves ... hmm ... a supporter base of what, exactly?
>


Damn it, that isn't right. I've read and commented on Rita's posts in
this newsgroup and another newsgroup for years. I am neither her
supporter nor her detractor. My comments have gone both ways many
times. Your comment above only reflects my *last* post about her.

On the plus side...Rita takes a lot of pictures and is very involved
in photography. That's hard to be critical of in a photography
newsgroup. Rita enjoys herself immensely in her newsgroup
participation. I do like the idea that her critics can't wear her
down and that she continues to do what she likes to do. I don't have
to enjoy how she goes about it to see this. Rita takes the occasional
good shot, and that's a plus for any photographer. She's not afraid
to get out there. Most (but not all) of her detractors seem to be
afraid to post their own results.*

On the minus side...The Nikon/Canon comparisons are silly. The
personal insults are childish. She should have the sense not to post
links to some of her...err, ummm...less polished works. She doesn't
seem to be able to make a simple statement; she feels she has to go
over the top in all areas. She shoots mostly in her back yard...her
dog, a squirrel, a bird...so her subject matter is too limited. Her
Subject line teasers wear a bit thin, but it's no big deal.

I find the "Rita" and "he" insinuations to be churlish and puerile.
As far as I'm concerned, she's Rita and a she. If she isn't either or
both, it doesn't make any difference to me.

Even when Rita annoys me, she doesn't annoy me as much as Bret does.
Bret is an accomplished photographer who turns out some of the best
work seen via this group. Then he spoils it by playing in the mud
with his comments. With his skills, he would come across better with
a little dignity.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*I guess if I'm going to criticize others for not linking to their
efforts, I should link to something recent of mine.
http://www.pbase.com/tony_cooper/image/100367564








--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mark Thomas
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-21-2008
OT, just more ramblings...

tony cooper wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:28:12 +1000, Mark Thomas
>> BTW, it is refreshing to see that even Tony C has dropped you now, so
>> that leaves ... hmm ... a supporter base of what, exactly?
>>

>
> Damn it, that isn't right. I've read and commented on Rita's posts in
> this newsgroup and another newsgroup for years. I am neither her
> supporter nor her detractor. My comments have gone both ways many
> times. Your comment above only reflects my *last* post about her.

Ok, but there's no need to get het up, 'damn it'! (O:

My observation (and others have commented similarly), was that you
seemed to quite fervently support Rita some time back, and that your
attitude seemed to have changed recently. Your previous support did
stand out somewhat, but perhaps that was just my interpretation and if I
have misjudged the situation, I apologise unreservedly*.

And I am genuinely trying to see if Rita has any genuine support here -
does anyone support her approach?

The problem comes about, Tony, when Rita makes personal attacks on
people - you may not have seen many, as she also expires those posts to
try to avoid responsibility. Those attacks, strangely, always come
after a shot of hers is criticised. I trust you are also aware of her
frequent comments along the lines that most usenet users are idiots, and
that her images are just to tease and are deliberately chosen as her worst.

I've watched what happens to people who point out her exposure errors
and composition flaws, or challenge her silly comments about equipment
or technique. It isn't pleasant, even though the criticism usually
starts out pleasantly and in a genuine attempt to help her improve.

> On the plus side...Rita takes a lot of pictures and is very involved
> in photography.

Then why all her silly posts?

> That's hard to be critical of in a photography
> newsgroup.

It is, when she descends into Nikon absurdity, posts ludicrous images of
dog's backsides and turds, and uses cowardly personal attacks and lies.

> Rita enjoys herself immensely in her newsgroup
> participation.

And so do I. But the usenet groups could be a much better place to live
in, and have been in the past.

> I do like the idea that her critics can't wear her
> down and that she continues to do what she likes to do.

That's fine.

> I don't have
> to enjoy how she goes about it to see this.
> Rita takes the occasional
> good shot, and that's a plus for any photographer.

Actually, if you browse her "Digital Soft Paw" flickr collection you
will find quite a few *very* good shots amongst the bad (there you go,
Rita, a free plug and sort-of-compliment), but very few of the good ones
find their way here. Why do you think that is?

> Most (but not all) of her detractors seem to be
> afraid to post their own results.*

Actually, I think you will find most of the detractors post work here or
in the SI, or if not, are contributors in other ways. You'll find a lot
of my work posted if you look around, but I don't do the bragging stuff
and I normally post in aus.photo (one of the groups Rita keeps adding to
her follow-ups.. lucky us!)

I'm here to learn and to share some of my knowledge, little as it may
be. If you look at my contributions elsewhere, you will see there are
only two people who seem to have a problem with me - Rita and Douglas
MacDonald. I'm pretty happy with that!

> On the minus side...The Nikon/Canon comparisons are silly.

Agreed.

> The
> personal insults are childish.

Even more agreed, but I would add *that* is the stuff that drives the
decent folk away. Would you be a supporter of Rita if she made
allegations of illegality (not just insults) about *you* that were
demonstrably untrue? For the most part, I let sleeping dogs lie, but
every now and then I think it is worth trying to keep people honest.

> She should have the sense not to post
> links to some of her...err, ummm...less polished works.

Agreed.

> She doesn't
> seem to be able to make a simple statement; she feels she has to go
> over the top in all areas. She shoots mostly in her back yard...her
> dog, a squirrel, a bird...so her subject matter is too limited. Her
> Subject line teasers wear a bit thin, but it's no big deal.

When those posts are pretty much all that is posted, and a new person
wanders into the group, you don't see a problem? When she cross posts
topics inappropriately, you don't see a problem? If usenet is all about
playing games and driving genuine enquiries and new visitors away, then
all that is fine and dandy, I guess.

But I would like to think otherwise. Perhaps that just makes me
troll-bait. But I've survived worse than Rita and Doug, and life will
go on.

> I find the "Rita" and "he" insinuations to be churlish and puerile.

Maybe you need to do a little historical checking to understand why.
And you don't think calling posters "churlish and puerile" might be seen
as a bit insulting, especially if there was a reason for that 'insinuation'?

> As far as I'm concerned, she's Rita and a she. If she isn't either or
> both, it doesn't make any difference to me.

So why would it *matter* if Rita is addressed as 's/he' - why do you
assume that is an insult, rather than simply acknowledging that the
gender is unknown?

> Even when Rita annoys me, she doesn't annoy me as much as Bret does.

Perhaps you need to ask yourself why, given all the comments above.

> Bret is an accomplished photographer who turns out some of the best
> work seen via this group.
> Then he spoils it by playing in the mud
> with his comments. With his skills, he would come across better with
> a little dignity.

So Rita, who you seem to imply is not as good a photographer and uses
similar tactics, is better? OK, your call!

> http://www.pbase.com/tony_cooper/image/100367564

Nice, but it isn't really about what images you can post - I don't
believe you have to prove your skills or knowledge that way.

Anyway, I think we agree to mainly agree, with just a few differences.

That's fine with me. (O:

mt


* (See how it is done, Rita? So how about that apology for *your*
accusation about me? Or maybe just repeat it for Tony's benefit, in
which case I will again ask you to *prove* it.)
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mark Thomas
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-21-2008
Rita Berkowitz wrote:
> What a hypocrite. You couldn't go a week without writing endless
> dissertations about D-Mac and trying to instigate him.


...your endless dissertation snipped, hypocrite..

I was speaking to Tony.

But dance on, Rita.
 
Reply With Quote
 
tony cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-21-2008
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 18:20:09 +1000, Mark Thomas
<markt@_don't_spam_marktphoto.com> wrote:

>OT, just more ramblings...
>
>tony cooper wrote:
>> On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:28:12 +1000, Mark Thomas
>>> BTW, it is refreshing to see that even Tony C has dropped you now, so
>>> that leaves ... hmm ... a supporter base of what, exactly?
>>>

>>
>> Damn it, that isn't right. I've read and commented on Rita's posts in
>> this newsgroup and another newsgroup for years. I am neither her
>> supporter nor her detractor. My comments have gone both ways many
>> times. Your comment above only reflects my *last* post about her.

>Ok, but there's no need to get het up, 'damn it'! (O:
>
>My observation (and others have commented similarly), was that you
>seemed to quite fervently support Rita some time back, and that your
>attitude seemed to have changed recently.


Your perception was wrong. I'm hardly fervent in either support or
condemnation of Rita. My attitude has not changed in general, but I
may be supportive in one post and condemning in another. It depends
entirely on what I'm commenting on.

> Your previous support did stand out somewhat,


Anything said favorable about Rita tends to stand out simply because
it goes against the tide.

>And I am genuinely trying to see if Rita has any genuine support here -
>does anyone support her approach?


It doesn't make sense to me to care.

>The problem comes about, Tony, when Rita makes personal attacks on
>people


Oh, c'mon. She is one of many in that department. While personal
attacks should not be considered acceptable, you can hardly single her
out as the source of them here.

>- you may not have seen many, as she also expires those posts to
>try to avoid responsibility.


As I said, I've seen Rita's posts in this newsgroup and another one
for several years. I'm as familiar with them as you are. I just
don't comment on them as much.

>I've watched what happens to people who point out her exposure errors
>and composition flaws, or challenge her silly comments about equipment
>or technique. It isn't pleasant, even though the criticism usually
>starts out pleasantly and in a genuine attempt to help her improve.


To put it delicately, bullshit. While I may have missed some, the
"critiques" I've seen of her work have not been helpful in any way.
Just pure vitriol. And, I don't believe for a second that she'd be
interested in a helpful critique if one was offered.

>> She doesn't
>> seem to be able to make a simple statement; she feels she has to go
>> over the top in all areas. She shoots mostly in her back yard...her
>> dog, a squirrel, a bird...so her subject matter is too limited. Her
>> Subject line teasers wear a bit thin, but it's no big deal.


>When those posts are pretty much all that is posted, and a new person
>wanders into the group, you don't see a problem?


Yes, I see a problem. However the problem that I see is that her
posts and all the inane follow-ups are the problem, and not just her
posts.

>> I find the "Rita" and "he" insinuations to be churlish and puerile.

>Maybe you need to do a little historical checking to understand why.
>And you don't think calling posters "churlish and puerile" might be seen
>as a bit insulting, especially if there was a reason for that 'insinuation'?
>
>> As far as I'm concerned, she's Rita and a she. If she isn't either or
>> both, it doesn't make any difference to me.


>So why would it *matter* if Rita is addressed as 's/he' - why do you
>assume that is an insult, rather than simply acknowledging that the
>gender is unknown?


I have no more proof that you are a "he" than I do that she is a
"she", but I see no reason to question the sex of either of you. You
are as unknown to me in that respect as she is. If I referred to you
as "Mark" and "s/he", you would be insulted.


>> Even when Rita annoys me, she doesn't annoy me as much as Bret does.


>Perhaps you need to ask yourself why, given all the comments above.


Bret could rest on his laurels as a photographer, but chooses to be a
good photographer who engages in petty battles. Rita is not a good
enough photographer to be known just for her photographs. Bret gives
up the high ground that he could command, and that's a waste in my
estimation. I hate to see that kind of waste.

>> Bret is an accomplished photographer who turns out some of the best
>> work seen via this group.
>> Then he spoils it by playing in the mud
>> with his comments. With his skills, he would come across better with
>> a little dignity.


>So Rita, who you seem to imply is not as good a photographer


Imply? No, I aver and avow it. Technically, Rita may be able to
match Bret with the occasional shot. Bret has a better sense of what
will make a good photograph. Good photography doesn't start with
pressing the button. It starts with knowing where to point the
camera.

>and uses
>similar tactics, is better? OK, your call!


Less annoying is not "better". It's a matter of degree. A mosquito
bite is less bothersome than a wasp sting, but a mosquito bite is not
"better".


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
 
Reply With Quote
 
Annika1980
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-21-2008
On Jul 21, 8:16*am, "Rita Berkowitz" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> What would these allegations of illegality be, Mark? *If you are referring
> to Bret's public admission that he uses a "fixed" copy of CS3 and a "keygen"
> followed weeks later by a post that "he was just joking" you got me red
> handed. *And yes, I'm still holding his toes to the fire for that one.
> Google is your friend.


Once again I'll ask you for a cite. Where did I say that?
Once again you'll avoid the question so you can keep repeating your
lie.

 
Reply With Quote
 
tony cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-21-2008
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 18:20:09 +1000, Mark Thomas
<markt@_don't_spam_marktphoto.com> wrote:

>> http://www.pbase.com/tony_cooper/image/100367564

>Nice, but it isn't really about what images you can post



Actually, the circumstances were more interesting than the shot. I
was out to get a good photo of an armadillo. They are difficult to
photograph if you want anything more than the top or back of one.
They're skittish and move surprisingly fast. Getting a "face" shot is
quite a trick.

I was prone on the ground trying for an eye-level shot in a field
behind an industrial park, and heard this loud rattling sound behind
me. I turned and saw that peacock doing some sort of mating dance.
The rattling was the sound of the quills clacking together.

We tend to get jumpy in Florida when we hear a rattling in the weeds.
Pygmy rattlers are not uncommon around here.

This second shot is not intended to be a "good" photograph, but it is
a view of a peacock that is seldom seen in print. Who knew how
complicated the design structure is from that angle?

http://www.pbase.com/tony_cooper/image/100506903

I did get an armadillo shot on my way home. It's not what I was
looking for though:

http://www.pbase.com/tony_cooper/image/100507145

That's the way we normally see armadillos in Florida.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
 
Reply With Quote
 
Annika1980
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-21-2008
On Jul 21, 9:55*am, savvo <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> Just saying you've proved something and repeated links to the same
> (also evidence-free) website that backs up your belief doesn't prove
> anything.
>
> Since you decided to shut up when I asked for clarification, I presumed
> you couldn't put up. Did I miss it?


That is Rita's M.O.

Say something stupid.
Get challenged on it.
Laugh it off and run away.

 
Reply With Quote
 
2SQUID
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-21-2008
Rita Berkowitz wrote:

>
> Only way you'll ever convince anyone worth convincing you are without guilt
> is to go two solid months without mentioning D-Mac or respond to him or any
> of his sockpuppets directly. Try not to use socks to skirt the challenge.
> This should be easy for someone that claims to be "taking the moral high
> ground" in all of this. Are you up to the challenge, Mark?
>
> Oh, and show us what kind of man you are by archiving this post in its
> entirety instead of creatively snipping it. You're so predictable and so
> easy to make dance, my little puppet.
>
>
>
> Rita


Don't fall for this criminal's tricks Rita. He will try to come across
as being a nice fellow and while you have your back turned, not just
stick a big knife in it but twist it too.

The amazing part of all his stunts is he believes he alone is capable of
clearing Usenet of all the honest people he "discovers" are on to him.
I'm not sure what your feedback rating is but mine is over 115 and 100%.

As you know, you don't get this sort of response from your clients if
you aren't totally honest. Mark would have all his followers (both of
them) believe he is the only honest person on Usenet. LOL.

His little escapade with Australia's company watchdog gets me rolling in
the isles - "I'll get my mates at ASIC to investigate you".

No one there has any knowledge of Charles Stevens or Mark Thomas. Maybe
his mates are all dancing to the same tune as him? Just people that
don't exist.

Let's not forget this gem: "Lies, all lies. You don't have a shop front"
http://www.douglasjames.com.au/evidence/shopfront.htm I wonder where he
keeps his guide dog?

And then there was this (recent) display of Markie gross stupidity:
"The EPA doesn't issue photography permits"
Hullo, hullo, wot's this then?
http://www.douglasjames.com.au/evidence/permit.htm ...Hmm he's dyslexic too!

And to cap off this condensed version of the little dancer's stupidity,
is the incredible gem of wisdom about the Queensland State PRESIDENT of
the AIPP (Photbyron)'s wedding photography: "Amateurish".

Yeah... Way to go Markie old boy, definitely the way to go! Keep it up
and you could become Usenet's most stupid idiot... If you aren't already
there!

Hey by the way... Thanks for the Google lift Mark... Number 5 in the
results for "Certified professional Photographers" today. You did an
excellent job of that one Mark. A single page site ranking 6 after it's
first month of existence. It's a good thing I found your strings. I'd
hate to have you on a commission only basis! ROTFL.

The thing is Rita, Those of us who make a living doing what he failed
at, know a thing or two about business and how to run one. Old Markie
and his gang of supporters (both of them)have demonstrated many, many
times they are just trolls in the hope of making themselves out to be
useful when in fact they are demonstrating with every post to be the
most useless of the useless.

Me and Big Squid
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
CC photos (flickr) -- CC foto's (flickr) sobriquet Digital Photography 1 12-28-2009 02:52 AM
flickr url -> flickr account sobriquet Digital Photography 5 12-17-2009 06:22 PM
Re: So Rita (Digital Soft Paw) is a liar - was Ok, you all win -I give up. Cal I Fornicate Digital Photography 76 07-24-2008 10:30 PM
Re: THE CURE FOR RITA! Annika1980 Digital Photography 6 07-23-2008 02:20 PM
Re: THE CURE FOR RITA! SneakyP Digital Photography 6 07-21-2008 11:13 PM



Advertisments