«

Bruce wrote:
>
> > dj_nme <> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 29/03/2011 7:01 AM, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
> >>> dj_nme<> wrote:
> >>>> On 27/03/2011 11:20 PM, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> History teaches us a lot. Like posters with obvious fake
> >>>> names having usually little of worth to say hereabouts.
> >>>
> >>> You mean Like PerterN?
> >>
> >> More like "dj_nme", which doesn't even look like the contraction
> >> of a real name. Isn't even pronounceable. Feels like a mouth
> >> full of sharp edged stones.
> >>
> >> Tellingly, you cannot even write other peoples' names correctly.
> >
> > At least I can stay on topic and write about the x100.
> > You and "Peter N" have to go on a personal witch-hunt because you
> > can't come up with a decently reasoned response.
>
> Put them both in your kill file. Their contributions here are
> intended only to annoy and are otherwise completely pointless.


Here's "Bruce" the kettle, calling other posters pots!

--
Cordially,
John Turco <>

Marie's Musings <http://fairiesandtails.blogspot.com>

On 31/03/2011 1:27 PM, John Turco wrote:
> dj_nme wrote:
>
> <heavily edited for brevity>
>
>> The X100 will probably have the same sort of sudden price-drop as the S5.
>> The next few months will be telling.
>
>
> Yeah, but, but, but, but...the Fuji X100 is soooo pretty!

It does look pretty.

It must be so nice looking that Peter N & Wolfgang Weisselberg seem
totally enamoured with it, presumably (having no evidence to prove
otherwise) without ever seeing one "in the flesh" so to speak and
defending it "to the death" from accusations that it will drop in price
in the months after it's released.

Luminous Landscapes is reviewing and posting their reactions to it over
the a period of time.
They seem to agree that it's a pretty looking camera, but might have
some issues with the controls.
Read the site yourself if you want more details.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/

On 31/03/2011 1:33 PM, John Turco wrote:
> Bruce wrote:
>>
>>> dj_nme<> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 29/03/2011 7:01 AM, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
>>>>> dj_nme<> wrote:
>>>>>> On 27/03/2011 11:20 PM, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> History teaches us a lot. Like posters with obvious fake
>>>>>> names having usually little of worth to say hereabouts.
>>>>>
>>>>> You mean Like PerterN?
>>>>
>>>> More like "dj_nme", which doesn't even look like the contraction
>>>> of a real name. Isn't even pronounceable. Feels like a mouth
>>>> full of sharp edged stones.
>>>>
>>>> Tellingly, you cannot even write other peoples' names correctly.
>>>
>>> At least I can stay on topic and write about the x100.
>>> You and "Peter N" have to go on a personal witch-hunt because you
>>> can't come up with a decently reasoned response.
>>
>> Put them both in your kill file. Their contributions here are
>> intended only to annoy and are otherwise completely pointless.
>
>
> Here's "Bruce" the kettle, calling other posters pots!

Considering their difficulties with staying on topic, ad hominiem
attacks and tortured logic, Bruce's advice (in this case) may not be too
bad.

dj_nme wrote:
>
> >? On 31/03/2011 1:27 PM, John Turco wrote:
> > dj_nme wrote:
> >
> > <heavily edited for brevity>
> >
> >> The X100 will probably have the same sort of sudden price-drop as
> >> the S5. The next few months will be telling.
> >
> >
> > Yeah, but, but, but, but...the Fuji X100 is soooo pretty!
>
> It does look pretty.
>
> It must be so nice looking that Peter N & Wolfgang Weisselberg seem
> totally enamoured with it, presumably (having no evidence to prove
> otherwise) without ever seeing one "in the flesh" so to speak and
> defending it "to the death" from accusations that it will drop in
> price in the months after it's released.
>
> Luminous Landscapes is reviewing and posting their reactions to it
> over the a period of time. They seem to agree that it's a pretty
> looking camera, but might have some issues with the controls. Read
> the site yourself if you want more details.
> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/


I noticed this entry title, on Luminous Landscape's "What's New"
page <http://www.luminous-landscape.com/whatsnew>:

"28 March, 2010 - Testing the Fuji X100"

That seems somewhat old, for such a recently-introduced camera?

--
Cordially,
John Turco <>

Marie's Musings <http://fairiesandtails.blogspot.com>

Bruce wrote:
>
> > dj_nme <> wrote:
> >> On 31/03/2011 1:33 PM, John Turco wrote:
> >>> Bruce wrote:
> >>>> dj_nme<> wrote:
> >>>> At least I can stay on topic and write about the x100.
> >>>> You and "Peter N" have to go on a personal witch-hunt because
> >>>> you can't come up with a decently reasoned response.
> >>>
> >>> Put them both in your kill file. Their contributions here are
> >>> intended only to annoy and are otherwise completely pointless.
> >>
> >>
> >> Here's "Bruce" the kettle, calling other posters pots!
> >
> > Considering their difficulties with staying on topic, ad hominiem
> > attacks and tortured logic, Bruce's advice (in this case) may not
> > be too bad.
>
> Let me add to that advice. You should add Turco to your kill file
> too. He never has anything intelligent to contribute. He cannot
> even correctly quote a well known saying.


Oh, "Bruce" -- pay attention! I didn't "quote" >any< saying ("well
known" or otherwise).

--
Cordially,
John Turco <>

Marie's Musings <http://fairiesandtails.blogspot.com>

On 28/04/2011 10:44 PM, John Turco wrote:
> dj_nme wrote:
>>
>>> ? On 31/03/2011 1:27 PM, John Turco wrote:
>>> dj_nme wrote:
>>>
>>> <heavily edited for brevity>
>>>
>>>> The X100 will probably have the same sort of sudden price-drop as
>>>> the S5. The next few months will be telling.
>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, but, but, but, but...the Fuji X100 is soooo pretty!
>>
>> It does look pretty.
>>
>> It must be so nice looking that Peter N& Wolfgang Weisselberg seem
>> totally enamoured with it, presumably (having no evidence to prove
>> otherwise) without ever seeing one "in the flesh" so to speak and
>> defending it "to the death" from accusations that it will drop in
>> price in the months after it's released.
>>
>> Luminous Landscapes is reviewing and posting their reactions to it
>> over the a period of time. They seem to agree that it's a pretty
>> looking camera, but might have some issues with the controls. Read
>> the site yourself if you want more details.
>> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/
>
>
> I noticed this entry title, on Luminous Landscape's "What's New"
> page<http://www.luminous-landscape.com/whatsnew>:
>
> "28 March, 2010 - Testing the Fuji X100"
>
> That seems somewhat old, for such a recently-introduced camera?
>

Maybe the X100 that LL received was a pre-release review sample?
Considering the following the site seem to get, this isn't an
unreasonable assumption.

On Fri, 29 Apr 2011 22:16:31 +1000, dj_nme wrote:

> On 28/04/2011 10:44 PM, John Turco wrote:
>> dj_nme wrote:
[snip]
>>
>> I noticed this entry title, on Luminous Landscape's "What's New"
>> page<http://www.luminous-landscape.com/whatsnew>:
>>
>> "28 March, 2010 - Testing the Fuji X100"
>>
>> That seems somewhat old, for such a recently-introduced camera?
>>
>>
> Maybe the X100 that LL received was a pre-release review sample?
> Considering the following the site seem to get, this isn't an
> unreasonable assumption.

Given the surrounding articles dated 1 April, 2011 and 26 March, 2011,
don't you suppose that it's more likely that the author just wrote the
date incorrectly?

Cheers,

--
Andrew

On 30/04/2011 8:12 AM, Andrew Reilly wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Apr 2011 22:16:31 +1000, dj_nme wrote:
>
>> On 28/04/2011 10:44 PM, John Turco wrote:
>>> dj_nme wrote:
> [snip]
>>>
>>> I noticed this entry title, on Luminous Landscape's "What's New"
>>> page<http://www.luminous-landscape.com/whatsnew>:
>>>
>>> "28 March, 2010 - Testing the Fuji X100"
>>>
>>> That seems somewhat old, for such a recently-introduced camera?
>>>
>>>
>> Maybe the X100 that LL received was a pre-release review sample?
>> Considering the following the site seem to get, this isn't an
>> unreasonable assumption.
>
> Given the surrounding articles dated 1 April, 2011 and 26 March, 2011,
> don't you suppose that it's more likely that the author just wrote the
> date incorrectly?
>
> Cheers,

Ok, maybe I should have looked at the year and not just the month/day
part of the date.
An review of a wood/nonfunctional mock-up Fuji X100 made in 2010 would
be rather unlikely, I really doubt that Fuji would have let that thing
out of the design lab or even acknowledge that it existed.
It would even less likely than LL reviewing Chuxter's EVIL project page
<http://www.1derful.info/Words/EvilCameraProject.htm> design mock-up as
though it were a real camera.