My take on the D600 lubricant/dust issue

TOF guy wrote:

Here are a few facts which you can actually check:

• You probably do not read my posts on the subject of Nikon QC (why should you ?). But if you did you'd know that I've been very vocal critizing Nikon for its recent issues for months, starting with the D800.
• I've continued to be critical - no more no less - after being named a moderator. Of course the views I post "as a regular forum member" as are my own only and do no represent dprview in an way. The point is: clearly dpreview has not put any pressure on me to change my views, and clearly dpreview has never checked my position on the Nikon QC issues (or if they did they didn't care) before entrusting me with the responsability of moderating two Nikon forums.

The first thing dpreview would have done if it wanted to prevent criticism of manufacturers would have been to pick its moderators among those who are not critical of these companies. I'm the living proof that this is not the case.

Threads are rarely closed. We edit or delete the offending posts but try to avoid closing threads as much as possible. When we do close a thread it is because either it is already out of control, and there are too many posts to edit or delete, or because the way the subject or initial text is worded is bound to generate many hostile answers and very little in the sense of a constructive discussion. Even so I leave a note as moderator clarifying that the subject may be reposted, just worded without flaming.

Members who see their posts or threads deleted because of their hostile content have only themselves to blame. Threads are not closed because of their content, but because of the manner they are posted. Are you saying that there is a lack of threads reporting the D600 dust issue on this forum ?

No $ involved, sorry (me the first )

-- Thierry - clarification on his role as moderator