Oh my! Where oh where did all the lying slanderous and libelous DSLR-TROLLS go to?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by LOL!, Sep 11, 2010.

  1. LOL!

    LOL! Guest

    LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    LOL!, Sep 11, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. LOL!

    Tim Conway Guest

    "LOL!" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    >
    >
    > LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!


    He's in a slump. Got nothin' bad to say and is feelin' real perplexed.
    btw, a real photograph isn't necessarily a museum showpiece. Sometimes a
    mere record photo will do. But y'know, a famous world renowned traveler
    like our favorite p&s troll would never stand for such a meager critique.
    Have a good one!
    Tim Conway, Sep 11, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. LOL!

    LOL! Guest

    On Sat, 11 Sep 2010 15:28:30 -0400, "Tim Conway" <>
    wrote:

    >
    >"LOL!" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    >
    >He's in a slump. Got nothin' bad to say and is feelin' real perplexed.
    >btw, a real photograph isn't necessarily a museum showpiece. Sometimes a
    >mere record photo will do. But y'know, a famous world renowned traveler
    >like our favorite p&s troll would never stand for such a meager critique.
    >Have a good one!


    Oh? Were you one of the many that claimed I stole images that were taken
    with DSLRs and posted them as my own? If so, please describe any one of
    them that you said I had stolen. I would love nothing better than to hear
    all about it again. I'll repost the downsized "stolen" version for you
    again just to make sure that it is one of the many that any of you lying
    slanderous and libelous DSLR-TROLLs claimed I had stole.

    LOL!!!!
    LOL!, Sep 11, 2010
    #3
  4. LOL!

    Tim Conway Guest

    "LOL!" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sat, 11 Sep 2010 15:28:30 -0400, "Tim Conway" <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>"LOL!" <> wrote in message
    >>news:...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    >>
    >>He's in a slump. Got nothin' bad to say and is feelin' real perplexed.
    >>btw, a real photograph isn't necessarily a museum showpiece. Sometimes a
    >>mere record photo will do. But y'know, a famous world renowned traveler
    >>like our favorite p&s troll would never stand for such a meager critique.
    >>Have a good one!

    >
    > Oh? Were you one of the many that claimed I stole images that were taken
    > with DSLRs and posted them as my own? If so, please describe any one of
    > them that you said I had stolen. I would love nothing better than to hear
    > all about it again. I'll repost the downsized "stolen" version for you
    > again just to make sure that it is one of the many that any of you lying
    > slanderous and libelous DSLR-TROLLs claimed I had stole.
    >
    > LOL!!!!


    Uh, excuse me, but I never claimed you stole anything. Did you?

    I just take photos as I see fit with the camera I like. No more, no less.
    I sometimes make money at it; sometimes I don't.

    I don't claim to be some extra whatever that knows it all.
    Tim Conway, Sep 12, 2010
    #4
  5. LOL!

    tony cooper Guest

    On Sat, 11 Sep 2010 17:21:30 -0500, LOL! <> wrote:


    >Oh? Were you one of the many that claimed I stole images that were taken
    >with DSLRs and posted them as my own?


    I don't remember any links to any images that I would want to claim to
    be a DSLR-taken image. Mud is mud, whether taken with a DSLR or a
    P&S.

    If you are an image thief, you've got to be the dumbest one I've ever
    come across. Nothing you've linked to and claimed as your own work
    was worth stealing. Or posting. Or keeping.


    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Sep 12, 2010
    #5
  6. LOL!

    LOL! Guest

    On Sat, 11 Sep 2010 19:52:28 -0400, tony cooper
    <> wrote:

    >On Sat, 11 Sep 2010 17:21:30 -0500, LOL! <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Oh? Were you one of the many that claimed I stole images that were taken
    >>with DSLRs and posted them as my own?

    >
    >I don't remember any links to any images that I would want to claim to
    >be a DSLR-taken image. Mud is mud, whether taken with a DSLR or a
    >P&S.
    >
    >If you are an image thief, you've got to be the dumbest one I've ever
    >come across. Nothing you've linked to and claimed as your own work
    >was worth stealing. Or posting. Or keeping.


    Oh good, you just outted yourself as a fucking liar. Either you've never
    seen any of them or you're a liar about the ones you have seen. A liar, in
    either direction that you want to turn on this one.

    Paint yourself into corners much?

    Everyone keeps claiming I stole them because they insist they were all
    taken with DSLRs. Why? Because: 1) either they're so good, or 2) because
    they believe that no compact or superzoom camera could EVER capture an
    image in the situations they've been taken; wrongly assuming everything
    they've ever known or read about DSLRs, compacts, and superzoom cameras.

    You ... ARE A LIAR!

    Signed, sealed, posted, and proved.

    LOL!!!!
    LOL!, Sep 12, 2010
    #6
  7. LOL!

    LOL! Guest

    On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 07:42:47 +1000, "Pete D" <> wrote:

    >
    >
    >"LOL!" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> On Sat, 11 Sep 2010 15:28:30 -0400, "Tim Conway" <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>>"LOL!" <> wrote in message
    >>>news:...
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >>>
    >>>He's in a slump. Got nothin' bad to say and is feelin' real perplexed.
    >>>btw, a real photograph isn't necessarily a museum showpiece. Sometimes a
    >>>mere record photo will do. But y'know, a famous world renowned traveler
    >>>like our favorite p&s troll would never stand for such a meager critique.
    >>>Have a good one!

    >>
    >> Oh? Were you one of the many that claimed I stole images that were taken
    >> with DSLRs and posted them as my own? If so, please describe any one of
    >> them that you said I had stolen. I would love nothing better than to hear
    >> all about it again. I'll repost the downsized "stolen" version for you
    >> again just to make sure that it is one of the many that any of you lying
    >> slanderous and libelous DSLR-TROLLs claimed I had stole.
    >>
    >> LOL!!!!
    >>

    >
    >OMG you are actually going to post a photo, I dare you, go on...........


    GLADLY! Just describe any one of them that you or others claimed I posted
    and stole in the past. It's THAT simple!

    C'mon, you fuckingly useless pretend-photographer trolls. You're all talk
    whenever I post a photo, claiming I stole them, why so quiet now? Because
    you got caught in your fucking slanderous and libelous lies?

    LOL!!!!!!!
    LOL!, Sep 13, 2010
    #7
  8. LOL!

    tony cooper Guest

    On Sun, 12 Sep 2010 15:53:37 -0700, C J Campbell
    <> wrote:

    >On 2010-09-11 15:21:30 -0700, LOL! <> said:
    >
    >> On Sat, 11 Sep 2010 15:28:30 -0400, "Tim Conway" <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> "LOL!" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >>>
    >>> He's in a slump. Got nothin' bad to say and is feelin' real perplexed.
    >>> btw, a real photograph isn't necessarily a museum showpiece. Sometimes a
    >>> mere record photo will do. But y'know, a famous world renowned traveler
    >>> like our favorite p&s troll would never stand for such a meager critique.
    >>> Have a good one!

    >>
    >> Oh? Were you one of the many that claimed I stole images that were taken
    >> with DSLRs and posted them as my own? If so, please describe any one of
    >> them that you said I had stolen. I would love nothing better than to hear
    >> all about it again. I'll repost the downsized "stolen" version for you
    >> again just to make sure that it is one of the many that any of you lying
    >> slanderous and libelous DSLR-TROLLs claimed I had stole.
    >>
    >> LOL!!!!

    >
    >How about the hummingbird photos you claimed were your own -- but they
    >still had the real photographer's copyright notice on the photo?


    I think he posted a link to a photgraph of a moth. I think it was a
    moth. It was a dark, blurry thing that may have had wings. He said
    it was a rare moth. He photographs a lot of rare things that are not
    in any of the guide books. Of course, it may be that the guide books
    just don't use dark, out-of-focus, blurry shots.


    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Sep 13, 2010
    #8
  9. LOL!

    tony cooper Guest

    On Sun, 12 Sep 2010 21:33:33 -0500, LOL! <> wrote:

    >On Sun, 12 Sep 2010 22:03:29 -0400, tony cooper
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >>On Sun, 12 Sep 2010 15:53:37 -0700, C J Campbell
    >><> wrote:
    >>
    >>>On 2010-09-11 15:21:30 -0700, LOL! <> said:
    >>>
    >>>> On Sat, 11 Sep 2010 15:28:30 -0400, "Tim Conway" <>
    >>>> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "LOL!" <> wrote in message
    >>>>> news:...
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >>>>>
    >>>>> He's in a slump. Got nothin' bad to say and is feelin' real perplexed.
    >>>>> btw, a real photograph isn't necessarily a museum showpiece. Sometimes a
    >>>>> mere record photo will do. But y'know, a famous world renowned traveler
    >>>>> like our favorite p&s troll would never stand for such a meager critique.
    >>>>> Have a good one!
    >>>>
    >>>> Oh? Were you one of the many that claimed I stole images that were taken
    >>>> with DSLRs and posted them as my own? If so, please describe any one of
    >>>> them that you said I had stolen. I would love nothing better than to hear
    >>>> all about it again. I'll repost the downsized "stolen" version for you
    >>>> again just to make sure that it is one of the many that any of you lying
    >>>> slanderous and libelous DSLR-TROLLs claimed I had stole.
    >>>>
    >>>> LOL!!!!
    >>>
    >>>How about the hummingbird photos you claimed were your own -- but they
    >>>still had the real photographer's copyright notice on the photo?

    >>
    >>I think he posted a link to a photgraph of a moth. I think it was a
    >>moth. It was a dark, blurry thing that may have had wings. He said
    >>it was a rare moth. He photographs a lot of rare things that are not
    >>in any of the guide books. Of course, it may be that the guide books
    >>just don't use dark, out-of-focus, blurry shots.

    >
    >OH LOOK! The fuckingly useless lying libelous and slanderous DSLR-TROLL
    >proves that's JUST what he is, again!
    >
    >Are you refering to THIS post?


    I dunno. Is that the post where you linked to a dark, blurry thing
    that may have had wings and said it was a photo of a rare moth?


    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Sep 13, 2010
    #9
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. JAS
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    558
    Stan Brown
    Jul 29, 2005
  2. Robert McClenon

    Trolls and Groups

    Robert McClenon, Sep 10, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    289
  3. ecm
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    342
    Matt Ion
    Apr 6, 2005
  4. Robert  Scott
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    318
    jere7my tho?rpe
    Apr 5, 2005
  5. -hh
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    318
    Ofnuts
    Nov 2, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page