I wasn't attacking you... I was disagreeing with what you had to say and pointing out the discrepancies. If that's what you call a personal attack, then I'm guilty.
I asked one question that was also on someone's mind so it's not just me. That was not a personal attack. Maybe if the other guy had asked it then it wouldn't have been.
Sure, you can email me as easily as I can email you, you know.
Oh no, I'm not falling for THAT again. You asked me once before to provide a link to prove what I was saying was true and when I did, you ridiculed me for doing it.
It may not have been Phil's review but you DID point out part of a review that was unflattering to the 2100 and waved it like a flag.
What is an attack to you... disagreeing? You do that to others all the time.
not necessary romantics one!--Daniella http://www.pbase.com/zylenC7OO discussion group: http://www.homepet.com/cgi-bin/c700/UltraBoard.cgi
--Daniella http://www.pbase.com/zylenC7OO discussion group: http://www.homepet.com/cgi-bin/c700/UltraBoard.cgi
You get upset when people speak unflatteringly about your "object". In fact, some things people have said really "pissed" you off and you said so. And when you no longer have an answer, you resort to name-calling while, at the same time, playing the victim and claiming your were personally attacked. That's a pity game you're playing. Show me where I attacked you.well, good thing i am not his boss and he is not mine...chances are
there would be some sparks
You're totally right about those litte stupid cameras, they are
just objects and don,t care about anything. I guess we both have
quite a temper, but i just don't like when people are bashing on me
when i am talking about an object.
If they don't agree with me all they have to do is prove me
wrong...not saying i am hiding this or liying on that....that makes
me angry and then i say things i do not mean.
--Daniella http://www.pbase.com/zylenC7OO discussion group: http://www.homepet.com/cgi-bin/c700/UltraBoard.cgi
--Daniella http://www.pbase.com/zylenC7OO discussion group: http://www.homepet.com/cgi-bin/c700/UltraBoard.cgi
--Daniella http://www.pbase.com/zylenC7OO discussion group: http://www.homepet.com/cgi-bin/c700/UltraBoard.cgi
--Daniella http://www.pbase.com/zylenC7OO discussion group: http://www.homepet.com/cgi-bin/c700/UltraBoard.cgiYou get upset when people speak unflatteringly about your "object".well, good thing i am not his boss and he is not mine...chances are
there would be some sparks
You're totally right about those litte stupid cameras, they are
just objects and don,t care about anything. I guess we both have
quite a temper, but i just don't like when people are bashing on me
when i am talking about an object.
If they don't agree with me all they have to do is prove me
wrong...not saying i am hiding this or liying on that....that makes
me angry and then i say things i do not mean.
In fact, some things people have said really "pissed" you off and
you said so. And when you no longer have an answer, you resort to
name-calling while, at the same time, playing the victim and
claiming your were personally attacked. That's a pity game you're
playing. Show me where I attacked you.
want more? here is some pick of the day....i got more if this is not enough:
Yes, you were talking about a camera or more precisely "comparing" cameras again. You thought I was talking about the 2100's LCD so you decided to "compare" it to the C700's LCD. Since you referred to a review you often discount as being inaccurate, I wondered why you would do this and asked you so. Instead of answering as you did later, you blew up. If I hadn't asked, Dwight1973 would probably have done it. The point is that you can't discuss cameras without the lopsided comparisons. You don't see me always pointing out advantages of the 2100 over the C700 without being asked. You do that very often.
What proof could I have brought into your latest "comparison"? Should I dig up a review or someone's opinion that the LCD on the 2100 was better? What good would that do? You'd only discount it as you discount any other negative remarks about the C700. I didn't say you were lying, hiding, or misleading people. I asked you a question... period. You can read whatever you want into that.
That's grand. Are you trying to say that's the way ALL C700's perform? Phil's C700 didn't perform as well as yours, obviously, and he reported what he saw and provided evidence. You discounted it. It seems to me you're calling Phil a liar. I've seen others report excessive CA, hot pixels, and noise too. Do you "discount" them as well?
But you HAVE done that to me. Don't you remember?
As I remember that, someone was asking or commenting about my problem with you. I answered. As for your spelling, that's incorrect. I wasn't criticizing your SPELLING... I was questioning WHY your spelling and grammar was sometimes PERFECT, and I mean PERFECT, and other times it was hardly decipherable. I found that odd. I never criticize people's spelling as I'm not a perfect speller either.
Again, you're misrepresented the facts. I wanted to know why your writing styles changed so drastically. I understand that your native language isn't English but sometimes you type with the grammar, punctuation, and accuracy of a teacher. It's almost as if there were two entirely people using the same name.
Actually, you were doing something I thought we'd agreed would stop... "comparing" your C700 against the 2100. If they're just "objects", why do you get this chip on your shoulder and do this so much? Others can't get away with talking about your favorite "object" without having to deal with you. Practically from the first time you posted on this forum, you've been "defending" the C700. Obviously, it's not just an "object" to you.
--Daniella http://www.pbase.com/zylenC7OO discussion group: http://www.homepet.com/cgi-bin/c700/UltraBoard.cgi
Wrong, I didn't stop posting messages to you and you KNOW it. You even made the statement that I kept on responding to you.
So what if i did? i was still talking about a camera, all you had to do was explain what you can see very clearly in sunlight with your LCD on the c2100 and that you were talking about the c3040, no need to resort to personal attack.
no simply tell me your opinion on the C2100 LCD instead of doing those personal attack. geee i think that is easy to understand the difference here.
what was the question again? sorry because i thought you saying:
no i am simply comparing my observations with other observation and then i comment on them according to my observation. I do know that some people had problem with hot pixels and after a firmware upgrade that fixed it. I also never called Phill a liar! where is that coming from???
Again i have only after being pushed to the limit of my patiente. I did ignore your post for couple of weeks but after being bashed over and over and you did never stop..i was tired of it and angry, what's your excuse?
