«

On Aug 8, 3:16*pm, tony cooper <tony_cooper...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 20:41:51 +0100, Grimly Curmudgeon
>
>
>
> <grimly4REM...@REMOVEgmail.com> wrote:
> >We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
> >drugs began to take hold. I remember RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> saying
> >something like:
>
> >>I picked up a prime lens today, an older used one. *I noticed the lens
> >>had a light blue coating, which was odd as this prime's coatings are
> >>usually brown-purple. *At home, I gave the lens a swipe with a lens
> >>tissue, and it looked like part of the coating "rubbed off." *Turns
> >>out, the lens was covered in a layer of tobacco smoke residue. *The
> >>whole lens was coated with it. *When I cleaned the entire front
> >>element surface, sure enough, the correct coating colour was revealed.
> >>It took an hour to clean the thing. Luckily, the inside and the back
> >>of the lens were ok, likely because it was inside the camera body.
> >>I'm glad I didn't have to see the camera. *But I've seen this before
> >>on optics. *How can anyone do this to a camera?
>
> >Vandal!
> >You've destroyed many years of patina, puffed out by tens of thousands
> >of cigarettes and the cost of many thousands of dollars.
> >That nicotine coating was responsible for the prize-winning portraiture
> >that lens could make.
>
> Exactly. *The original owner was renowned for his portraiture using a
> nicotine density filter.

NICE!

TFTL.

--
YOP...

On Aug 8, 4:55*pm, ray <r...@zianet.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 20:56:34 -0700, RichA wrote:
> > I picked up a prime lens today, an older used one. *I noticed the lens
> > had a light blue coating, which was odd as this prime's coatings are
> > usually brown-purple. *At home, I gave the lens a swipe with a lens
> > tissue, and it looked like part of the coating "rubbed off." *Turns out,
> > the lens was covered in a layer of tobacco smoke residue. *The whole
> > lens was coated with it. *When I cleaned the entire front element
> > surface, sure enough, the correct coating colour was revealed. It took
> > an hour to clean the thing. Luckily, the inside and the back of the lens
> > were ok, likely because it was inside the camera body. I'm glad I didn't
> > have to see the camera. *But I've seen this before on optics. *How can
> > anyone do this to a camera?
>
> IMHO - the ones who should be "taken out and shot" are those who ask:
> "should all <fill in the blank> be taken out and shot". What a person
> does with his own personal property and/or his own body is his business -
> not yours.

It is if I'm buy it and am not warned beforehand. How do you think it
would sell on Ebay:
"One prime lens in good condition, except it's covered with YEARS of
tobacco smoke residue."

On Aug 8, 7:46*pm, George Kerby <ghost_top...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/8/10 5:45 PM, in article
> ddb37c4d-889f-4739-a697-1bf8f2505...@p7g2000yqa.googlegroups.com, "RichA"
>
>
>
> <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Aug 8, 4:55*pm, ray <r...@zianet.com> wrote:
> >> On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 20:56:34 -0700, RichA wrote:
> >>> I picked up a prime lens today, an older used one. *I noticed the lens
> >>> had a light blue coating, which was odd as this prime's coatings are
> >>> usually brown-purple. *At home, I gave the lens a swipe with a lens
> >>> tissue, and it looked like part of the coating "rubbed off." *Turns out,
> >>> the lens was covered in a layer of tobacco smoke residue. *The whole
> >>> lens was coated with it. *When I cleaned the entire front element
> >>> surface, sure enough, the correct coating colour was revealed. It took
> >>> an hour to clean the thing. Luckily, the inside and the back of the lens
> >>> were ok, likely because it was inside the camera body. I'm glad I didn't
> >>> have to see the camera. *But I've seen this before on optics. *How can
> >>> anyone do this to a camera?
>
> >> IMHO - the ones who should be "taken out and shot" are those who ask:
> >> "should all <fill in the blank> be taken out and shot". What a person
> >> does with his own personal property and/or his own body is his business -
> >> not yours.
>
> > It is if I'm buy it and am not warned beforehand. *How do you think it
> > would sell on Ebay:
> > "One prime lens in good condition, except it's covered with YEARS of
> > tobacco smoke residue."
>
> Who you foolin' Bitch?!? You don't *buy* anything!!!

You shouldn't address people like that. Not everyone is one of your
male prostitute friends.

On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 15:45:52 -0700, RichA wrote:



Caveat Emptor.

On Mon, 9 Aug 2010 22:41:15 +1000, "N" <> wrote:

>
><> wrote in message
>news:.. .
>> On Sat, 7 Aug 2010 20:56:34 -0700 (PDT), RichA <>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>I picked up a prime lens today, an older used one. I noticed the lens
>>>had a light blue coating, which was odd as this prime's coatings are
>>>usually brown-purple. At home, I gave the lens a swipe with a lens
>>>tissue, and it looked like part of the coating "rubbed off." Turns
>>>out, the lens was covered in a layer of tobacco smoke residue. The
>>>whole lens was coated with it. When I cleaned the entire front
>>>element surface, sure enough, the correct coating colour was revealed.
>>>It took an hour to clean the thing. Luckily, the inside and the back
>>>of the lens were ok, likely because it was inside the camera body.
>>>I'm glad I didn't have to see the camera. But I've seen this before
>>>on optics. How can anyone do this to a camera?
>>
>> How you ask?
>>
>> Because it's THEIR camera.
>>
>> They bought and paid for it and how they use and treat it is their
>> choice just as how you use and treat your camera is your choice.
>>
>> Do you have a problem with free choice?
>
>If you sell your house, you are required to clean it when vacating.

In what Nazi dictatorship country is that a requirement?

On Mon, 9 Aug 2010 22:44:57 +1000, "N" <> wrote:

>
>"Outing Trolls is FUN!" <> wrote in message
>news:.. .
>> On Mon, 9 Aug 2010 22:41:15 +1000, "N" <> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>If you sell your house, you are required to clean it when vacating.
>>
>> In what Nazi dictatorship country is that a requirement?
>>
>
>Have you ever sold a house?

Yes. And I could even burn them to the ground first and sell the charred
remains and land if I want.

Like I asked, "In what Nazi dictatorship country is that a requirement?"

On Aug 8, 11:07*pm, ray <r...@zianet.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 15:45:52 -0700, RichA wrote:
>
> Caveat Emptor.

You can't if you aren't told.

On Aug 9, 7:17*am, gamer_...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Aug 2010 20:56:34 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >I picked up a prime lens today, an older used one. *I noticed the lens
> >had a light blue coating, which was odd as this prime's coatings are
> >usually brown-purple. *At home, I gave the lens a swipe with a lens
> >tissue, and it looked like part of the coating "rubbed off." *Turns
> >out, the lens was covered in a layer of tobacco smoke residue. *The
> >whole lens was coated with it. *When I cleaned the entire front
> >element surface, sure enough, the correct coating colour was revealed.
> >It took an hour to clean the thing. Luckily, the inside and the back
> >of the lens were ok, likely because it was inside the camera body.
> >I'm glad I didn't have to see the camera. *But I've seen this before
> >on optics. *How can anyone do this to a camera?
>
> How you ask?
>
> Because it's THEIR camera.
>
> They bought and paid for it and how they use and treat it is their
> choice just as how you use and treat your camera is your choice.
>
> Do you have a problem with free choice?

They have the right to, they just don't have the sense not to.

On Aug 9, 8:47*am, Outing Trolls is FUN! <o...@trollouters.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Aug 2010 22:44:57 +1000, "N" <N...@onyx.com> wrote:
>
> >"Outing Trolls is FUN!" <o...@trollouters.org> wrote in message
> >news:.. .
> >> On Mon, 9 Aug 2010 22:41:15 +1000, "N" <N...@onyx.com> wrote:
>
> >>>If you sell your house, you are required to clean it when vacating.
>
> >> In what Nazi dictatorship country is that a requirement?
>
> >Have you ever sold a house?
>
> Yes. And I could even burn them to the ground first and sell the charred
> remains and land if I want.
>
> Like I asked, "In what Nazi dictatorship country is that a requirement?"

Even if it isn't a requirement to clean it, you are required to inform
the buyer if something is going to intefere with the enjoyment or use
of the property, like the presence of black mold. At least you are in
Canada, I don't know about the U.S.

On Mon, 9 Aug 2010 06:38:16 -0700 (PDT), Rich <>
wrote:

>On Aug 8, 11:07*pm, ray <r...@zianet.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 15:45:52 -0700, RichA wrote:
>>
>> Caveat Emptor.
>
>You can't if you aren't told.

The whole concept of "caveat emptor" is that you should not expect to
be told. That's why you should beware.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida