Re: Dpreview post many have waited for

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by nospam, Nov 25, 2009.

  1. nospam

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Rich
    <> wrote:

    > The thread might be gone by the time you try to read it, but silence
    > speaks volumes. They guy is right about some of the more prolific
    > posters, especially the chip-on-the-shoulder, always defensive because of
    > the tiny 4/3rds sensor types.


    the fact that you are reposting that garbage here suggests that it is
    *you* who signed up as 'hercules' and posted it in just about every
    forum.
    nospam, Nov 25, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. nospam

    RichA Guest

    On Nov 25, 12:33 am, nospam <> wrote:
    > In article <>, Rich
    >
    > <> wrote:
    > > The thread might be gone by the time you try to read it, but silence
    > > speaks volumes.  They guy is right about some of the more prolific
    > > posters, especially the chip-on-the-shoulder, always defensive because of
    > > the tiny 4/3rds sensor types.

    >
    > the fact that you are reposting that garbage here suggests that it is
    > *you* who signed up as 'hercules' and posted it in just about every
    > forum.


    Hardly. I just applaud the guy for attacking the thin-skinned, fanboy
    children in those forums.
    RichA, Nov 25, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. nospam

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 15:48:20 -0800 (PST), RichA <> wrote:
    : On Nov 25, 12:33 am, nospam <> wrote:
    : > In article <>, Rich
    : >
    : > <> wrote:
    : > > The thread might be gone by the time you try to read it, but silence
    : > > speaks volumes.  They guy is right about some of the more prolific
    : > > posters, especially the chip-on-the-shoulder, always defensive because
    : > > of the tiny 4/3rds sensor types.
    : >
    : > the fact that you are reposting that garbage here suggests that it is
    : > *you* who signed up as 'hercules' and posted it in just about every
    : > forum.
    :
    : Hardly. I just applaud the guy for attacking the thin-skinned, fanboy
    : children in those forums.

    By what convoluted logic does that puerile rant qualify as an "attack"? It
    lacks any substantive examples of the incompetence and fraud it seems to
    allege. At best it's a diatribe; at worst it's gibberish.

    Bob
    Robert Coe, Nov 26, 2009
    #3
  4. nospam

    RichA Guest

    Robert Coe wrote:
    > On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 15:48:20 -0800 (PST), RichA <> wrote:
    > : On Nov 25, 12:33�am, nospam <> wrote:
    > : > In article <>, Rich
    > : >
    > : > <> wrote:
    > : > > The thread might be gone by the time you try to read it, but silence
    > : > > speaks volumes. �They guy is right about some of the more prolific
    > : > > posters, especially the chip-on-the-shoulder, always defensive because
    > : > > of the tiny 4/3rds sensor types.
    > : >
    > : > the fact that you are reposting that garbage here suggests that it is
    > : > *you* who signed up as 'hercules' and posted it in just about every
    > : > forum.
    > :
    > : Hardly. I just applaud the guy for attacking the thin-skinned, fanboy
    > : children in those forums.
    >
    > By what convoluted logic does that puerile rant qualify as an "attack"? It
    > lacks any substantive examples of the incompetence and fraud it seems to
    > allege. At best it's a diatribe; at worst it's gibberish.
    >
    > Bob


    The idea was to broad-brush certain members of forums without naming
    them all and starting 100 brush fires in the process. Fact is, the
    guy makes good points and it all boils down to one cause: That too
    many hotheads are TOO emotionally involved with their particular
    equipment. They need to be reminded that a camera is a tool or a toy
    and NOT a lover.
    RichA, Nov 26, 2009
    #4
  5. nospam

    Oliver Guest

    On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 22:01:29 -0800 (PST), RichA <>
    wrote this:

    >The idea was to broad-brush certain members of forums without naming
    >them all and starting 100 brush fires in the process. Fact is, the
    >guy makes good points and it all boils down to one cause: That too
    >many hotheads are TOO emotionally involved with their particular
    >equipment. They need to be reminded that a camera is a tool or a toy
    >and NOT a lover.


    I see! Did you post it as has already been suggested?

    Too emotionally involved with their equiptment! Are they made of plastic?

    Oli.
    Oliver, Nov 26, 2009
    #5
  6. nospam

    Bruce Guest

    On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 22:01:29 -0800 (PST), RichA <>
    wrote:
    >The idea was to broad-brush certain members of forums without naming
    >them all and starting 100 brush fires in the process. Fact is, the
    >guy makes good points and it all boils down to one cause: That too
    >many hotheads are TOO emotionally involved with their particular
    >equipment. They need to be reminded that a camera is a tool or a toy
    >and NOT a lover.



    Yes, it is almost as bad as an irrational hatred of "plastic".
    Bruce, Nov 26, 2009
    #6
  7. nospam

    Ray Fischer Guest

    RichA <> wrote:
    >Robert Coe wrote:
    >> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 15:48:20 -0800 (PST), RichA <> wrote:
    >> : On Nov 25, 12:33�am, nospam <> wrote:
    >> : > In article <>, Rich
    >> : >
    >> : > <> wrote:
    >> : > > The thread might be gone by the time you try to read it, but silence
    >> : > > speaks volumes. �They guy is right about some of the more prolific
    >> : > > posters, especially the chip-on-the-shoulder, always defensive because
    >> : > > of the tiny 4/3rds sensor types.
    >> : >
    >> : > the fact that you are reposting that garbage here suggests that it is
    >> : > *you* who signed up as 'hercules' and posted it in just about every
    >> : > forum.
    >> :
    >> : Hardly. I just applaud the guy for attacking the thin-skinned, fanboy
    >> : children in those forums.
    >>
    >> By what convoluted logic does that puerile rant qualify as an "attack"? It
    >> lacks any substantive examples of the incompetence and fraud it seems to
    >> allege. At best it's a diatribe; at worst it's gibberish.
    >>

    >The idea was to broad-brush certain members of forums without naming
    >them all and starting 100 brush fires in the process.


    So you're a troll.

    > Fact is, the
    >guy makes good points


    That you agree with them doesn't make them good. In fact, history
    would indicate the exact opposite.

    --
    Ray Fischer
    Ray Fischer, Nov 26, 2009
    #7
  8. nospam

    Mike Guest

    On Nov 26, 6:01 am, RichA <> wrote:
    > Robert Coe wrote:
    > > On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 15:48:20 -0800 (PST), RichA <> wrote:
    > > : On Nov 25, 12:33 am, nospam <> wrote:
    > > : > In article <>, Rich
    > > : >
    > > : > <> wrote:
    > > : > > The thread might be gone by the time you try to read it, but silence
    > > : > > speaks volumes. They guy is right about some of the more prolific
    > > : > > posters, especially the chip-on-the-shoulder, always defensive because
    > > : > > of the tiny 4/3rds sensor types.
    > > : >
    > > : > the fact that you are reposting that garbage here suggests that it is
    > > : > *you* who signed up as 'hercules' and posted it in just about every
    > > : > forum.
    > > :
    > > : Hardly.  I just applaud the guy for attacking the thin-skinned, fanboy
    > > : children in those forums.

    >
    > > By what convoluted logic does that puerile rant qualify as an "attack"? It
    > > lacks any substantive examples of the incompetence and fraud it seems to
    > > allege. At best it's a diatribe; at worst it's gibberish.

    >
    > > Bob

    >
    > The idea was to broad-brush certain members of forums without naming
    > them all and starting 100 brush fires in the process.  Fact is, the
    > guy makes good points and it all boils down to one cause:  That too
    > many hotheads are TOO emotionally involved with their particular
    > equipment.  They need to be reminded that a camera is a tool or a toy
    > and NOT a lover.


    Ha ha ha ha ha. You utter hypocrite.
    Canon this.
    Plastic that.

    Physician heal thyself
    Mike, Nov 26, 2009
    #8
  9. nospam

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 22:01:29 -0800 (PST), RichA <> wrote:
    :
    :
    : Robert Coe wrote:
    : > On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 15:48:20 -0800 (PST), RichA <> wrote:
    : > : On Nov 25, 12:33?am, nospam <> wrote:
    : > : > In article <>, Rich
    : > : >
    : > : > <> wrote:
    : > : > > The thread might be gone by the time you try to read it, but silence
    : > : > > speaks volumes. ?They guy is right about some of the more prolific
    : > : > > posters, especially the chip-on-the-shoulder, always defensive because
    : > : > > of the tiny 4/3rds sensor types.
    : > : >
    : > : > the fact that you are reposting that garbage here suggests that it is
    : > : > *you* who signed up as 'hercules' and posted it in just about every
    : > : > forum.
    : > :
    : > : Hardly. I just applaud the guy for attacking the thin-skinned, fanboy
    : > : children in those forums.
    : >
    : > By what convoluted logic does that puerile rant qualify as an "attack"? It
    : > lacks any substantive examples of the incompetence and fraud it seems to
    : > allege. At best it's a diatribe; at worst it's gibberish.
    : >
    : > Bob
    :
    : The idea was to broad-brush certain members of forums without naming
    : them all and starting 100 brush fires in the process. Fact is, the
    : guy makes good points

    Actually, I don't see that he makes *any* points. All he does is accuse DP
    Review's reviewers of dishonesty and incompetence without citing even one
    concrete example.

    : and it all boils down to one cause: That too many hotheads are TOO
    : emotionally involved with their particular equipment. They need to be
    : reminded that a camera is a tool or a toy and NOT a lover.

    Even if DP Review's forums *are* crawling with fanboys, why should you or I
    care? We don't have to read their stuff. People go to DP Review to get
    unbiased information about the equipment they test. If they're not providing
    that, and you can prove it, that's one thing. But how does the rant you quoted
    contribute to anybody's understanding of anything? Accusing a list of people
    most of us never heard of, of being fanboys certainly doesn't do it.

    Bob
    Robert Coe, Nov 26, 2009
    #9
  10. nospam

    RichA Guest

    On Nov 26, 6:59 am, Mike <> wrote:
    > On Nov 26, 6:01 am, RichA <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > > Robert Coe wrote:
    > > > On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 15:48:20 -0800 (PST), RichA <> wrote:
    > > > : On Nov 25, 12:33 am, nospam <> wrote:
    > > > : > In article <>, Rich
    > > > : >
    > > > : > <> wrote:
    > > > : > > The thread might be gone by the time you try to read it, but silence
    > > > : > > speaks volumes. They guy is right about some of the more prolific
    > > > : > > posters, especially the chip-on-the-shoulder, always defensive because
    > > > : > > of the tiny 4/3rds sensor types.
    > > > : >
    > > > : > the fact that you are reposting that garbage here suggests that it is
    > > > : > *you* who signed up as 'hercules' and posted it in just about every
    > > > : > forum.
    > > > :
    > > > : Hardly.  I just applaud the guy for attacking the thin-skinned, fanboy
    > > > : children in those forums.

    >
    > > > By what convoluted logic does that puerile rant qualify as an "attack"? It
    > > > lacks any substantive examples of the incompetence and fraud it seems to
    > > > allege. At best it's a diatribe; at worst it's gibberish.

    >
    > > > Bob

    >
    > > The idea was to broad-brush certain members of forums without naming
    > > them all and starting 100 brush fires in the process.  Fact is, the
    > > guy makes good points and it all boils down to one cause:  That too
    > > many hotheads are TOO emotionally involved with their particular
    > > equipment.  They need to be reminded that a camera is a tool or a toy
    > > and NOT a lover.

    >
    > Ha ha ha ha ha. You utter hypocrite.
    > Canon this.
    > Plastic that.
    >
    > Physician heal thyself


    Difference is, I'm not defending the indefensible, making up
    attributes for products to minimize faults. In other words, unlike
    them, I have no blind faith in any system and I recognize flaws in
    those systems for what they are: flaws.
    RichA, Nov 27, 2009
    #10
  11. nospam

    Ray Fischer Guest

    RichA <> wrote:
    >On Nov 26, 6:59 am, Mike <> wrote:
    >> On Nov 26, 6:01 am, RichA <> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> > Robert Coe wrote:
    >> > > On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 15:48:20 -0800 (PST), RichA <> wrote:
    >> > > : On Nov 25, 12:33 am, nospam <> wrote:
    >> > > : > In article <>, Rich
    >> > > : >
    >> > > : > <> wrote:
    >> > > : > > The thread might be gone by the time you try to read it, but silence
    >> > > : > > speaks volumes. They guy is right about some of the more prolific
    >> > > : > > posters, especially the chip-on-the-shoulder, always defensive because
    >> > > : > > of the tiny 4/3rds sensor types.
    >> > > : >
    >> > > : > the fact that you are reposting that garbage here suggests that it is
    >> > > : > *you* who signed up as 'hercules' and posted it in just about every
    >> > > : > forum.
    >> > > :
    >> > > : Hardly.  I just applaud the guy for attacking the thin-skinned, fanboy
    >> > > : children in those forums.

    >>
    >> > > By what convoluted logic does that puerile rant qualify as an "attack"? It
    >> > > lacks any substantive examples of the incompetence and fraud it seems to
    >> > > allege. At best it's a diatribe; at worst it's gibberish.

    >>
    >> > > Bob

    >>
    >> > The idea was to broad-brush certain members of forums without naming
    >> > them all and starting 100 brush fires in the process.  Fact is, the
    >> > guy makes good points and it all boils down to one cause:  That too
    >> > many hotheads are TOO emotionally involved with their particular
    >> > equipment.  They need to be reminded that a camera is a tool or a toy
    >> > and NOT a lover.

    >>
    >> Ha ha ha ha ha. You utter hypocrite.
    >> Canon this.
    >> Plastic that.
    >>
    >> Physician heal thyself

    >
    >Difference is, I'm not defending the indefensible, making up
    >attributes for products to minimize faults.


    LOL!

    Yes, you are. It's all you do.

    > In other words, unlike
    >them, I have no blind faith in any system


    Except the one you use.

    --
    Ray Fischer
    Ray Fischer, Nov 27, 2009
    #11
  12. Ray Fischer wrote:
    > RichA <> wrote:


    >
    > Yes, you are. It's all you do.
    >
    >> In other words, unlike
    >> them, I have no blind faith in any system

    >
    > Except the one you use.
    >


    Don't feed the trolls, hypocrite.
    John McWilliams, Nov 27, 2009
    #12
  13. nospam

    John Turco Guest

    RichA wrote:
    >
    > On Nov 26, 6:59 am, Mike <> wrote:


    <edited for brevity>

    > > > The idea was to broad-brush certain members of forums without naming
    > > > them all and starting 100 brush fires in the process. Fact is, the
    > > > guy makes good points and it all boils down to one cause: That too
    > > > many hotheads are TOO emotionally involved with their particular
    > > > equipment. They need to be reminded that a camera is a tool or a toy
    > > > and NOT a lover.

    > >
    > > Ha ha ha ha ha. You utter hypocrite.
    > > Canon this.
    > > Plastic that.
    > >
    > > Physician heal thyself

    >
    > Difference is, I'm not defending the indefensible, making up
    > attributes for products to minimize faults. In other words, unlike
    > them, I have no blind faith in any system and I recognize flaws in
    > those systems for what they are: flaws.



    So, Cap'n Canuck (a.k.a., "RichA"), please tell me: Are you capable of
    recognizing your own serious flaws as a newsgroup troll?

    --
    Cordially,
    John Turco <>

    Paintings Pain and Pun <http://laughatthepain.blogspot.com>
    John Turco, Dec 30, 2009
    #13
    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. Dean S. Lautermilch

    Sensor Cleaning While I Waited

    Dean S. Lautermilch, Jun 28, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    276
  2. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    870
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
  3. waited too long

    , Nov 20, 2003, in forum: A+ Certification
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    313
    Sean Cleary
    Nov 20, 2003
  4. ASAAR
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    268
  5. RichA

    As we've waited with baited breath..Sigma SD15

    RichA, Jun 12, 2010, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    285
    RichA
    Jun 12, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page