I've Fuc*in had it all

[Caroline55590]

Paul please stick around!

I may be one of those who doesn't like your subject matter (not for religious reasons BTW, I am actually an atheist!) but among many others here I do appreciate your photographic and business experience and knowledge, and that's what counts.

No-one is going to agree all of the time about any subject, glamour photography is controversial at the best of times but just because I personally detest the way it portrays women does not mean I can't see how helpful you have been to a lot of people here or how technically knowedgeable you are.

I think you should stay - and on a personal level I can see why you're so hacked off at being mail bombed :-( Attacks like this are not justified even if you disagree 100% with someone else's opinion - I wish you every success with your complaint to AOL.

Regards,
Caroline

In here ........................
use your D60's for whatever you like I'm not employed as a
educational consultant ....... if you still can't figure out why
your 550 is underexposing the only hint I will give you is its YOU.
I'm not nice ....F*ck off
I tried to give alll o you BUSINESS experience but the 23000 emails
from Christian extemists who figured out who I am are not worth it
I assure you Hustler willl continue without you regardless ......
To alll those who understand..................
Its been 2 years and I've recently lost alll my patience ...follow
Biggles he actualy gives a F*ck about good photos
I am obviously relegated to porn.... and I will not abide that.

--

 

[Larry H. Smith]

And alas, no- no relation to my George Costanza. But he is my
favorite character on television.

Good pick!

Couldn't go wrong with ANY of that original cast (when they were together, that is)!!

Larry (Hey, ...maybe the sniper-poster thought Paul stole his "Jesus-fish"!?

 

[eL47288]

Comes across with the integrity of a vindictive Troll. eL

In here ........................
use your D60's for whatever you like I'm not employed as a
educational consultant ....... if you still can't figure out why
your 550 is underexposing the only hint I will give you is its YOU.
I'm not nice ....F*ck off
I tried to give alll o you BUSINESS experience but the 23000 emails
from Christian extemists who figured out who I am are not worth it
I assure you Hustler willl continue without you regardless ......
To alll those who understand..................
Its been 2 years and I've recently lost alll my patience ...follow
Biggles he actualy gives a F*ck about good photos
I am obviously relegated to porn.... and I will not abide that.

--

 

[biggles]

but i get the feeling you fit that discription quite well..........

Comes across with the integrity of a vindictive Troll. eL

 

[biggles]

23,000 emails is a sign of evil is as evil does..........sorry you had to endure such a thing Paul, but personally, i'd laugh at it.

don't you leave either.......if anything, let's see some provacative shots.......

In here ........................
use your D60's for whatever you like I'm not employed as a
educational consultant ....... if you still can't figure out why
your 550 is underexposing the only hint I will give you is its YOU.
I'm not nice ....F*ck off
I tried to give alll o you BUSINESS experience but the 23000 emails
from Christian extemists who figured out who I am are not worth it
I assure you Hustler willl continue without you regardless ......
To alll those who understand..................
Its been 2 years and I've recently lost alll my patience ...follow
Biggles he actualy gives a F*ck about good photos
I am obviously relegated to porn.... and I will not abide that.

--

 

[Danny Cardenas]

Just please- nothing with priests & children, I don't care how well lit.

Gotta draw the line somewhere...

biggles wrote:
...

if anything, let's see some

provacative shots.......

 

[Larry H. Smith]

This thread can be toasted!

As I write this there have been over 80 posts by apparently-interested parties with comment on various aspects of this thread.

But now, out-of-the-blue (NO prior participation in said thread) riding up on a white horse (blare of trumpets) "TA-DAAAHHH!!" , comes a saviour-judge.

With one casual glance Super-astute comprehends what should have been all too obvious to the rest of us fools, ...this thread has no merit!

"Toast it!" he shouts, wheeling and rearing his horse, lingering on the hilltop only long-enough to see whether his words have registered on the dimmer-witted.

Then (thundering hooves) OFF!, ...to the next thread where he is undoubtedly sorely uneeded, ... yes, ...Off!, to make another "contribution".

"OFF", alright ;-) !!

Happens all the time.

Larry

 

[Danny Cardenas]

You should write movies! The only thing missing from the description was the whinny from the horse as he wheeled and reared! (and maybe a fair maiden fainting)

-dc
----------------------------------------
"The sea was angry that day my friends,
like an old man trying to send back soup in a deli"
—George Costanza

This thread can be toasted!

As I write this there have been over 80 posts by
apparently-interested parties with comment on various aspects of
this thread.

But now, out-of-the-blue (NO prior participation in said thread)
riding up on a white horse (blare of trumpets) "TA-DAAAHHH!!" ,
comes a saviour-judge.

With one casual glance Super-astute comprehends what should have
been all too obvious to the rest of us fools, ...this thread has no
merit!

"Toast it!" he shouts, wheeling and rearing his horse, lingering
on the hilltop only long-enough to see whether his words have
registered on the dimmer-witted.

Then (thundering hooves) OFF!, ...to the next thread where he is
undoubtedly sorely uneeded, ... yes, ...Off!, to make another
"contribution".

"OFF", alright ;-) !!

Happens all the time.

Larry

 

[DavidP #28649]

I don't think anybody said what happened to Paul was OK. Nor have I seen anybody post (haven't read everything yet) that seems to be a "sympathizer" with whoever did this, either.

All that was said was that Paul's initial post was misleading. And it is. And the way in which it was written appears to be an attempt to throw mud on all Christians. THAT has nothing to do with Paul's complaint about what happened.

He was clearly (and rightfully) enraged after being mail bombed.
It may seem as if it's just one person, but who's to say there
isn't more than one person involved. He implies that the
perpetrator came from this board, and it certainly seems as if he
or she has sympathizers here.

Regardless of any confusion as to the number of people involved,
what happened is not effin okay-

--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise

 

[Larry H. Smith]

...glamour photography is controversial at the best of times but just because
I personally detest the way it portrays women...

Caroline, I respect your principled appreciation/sympathy for Paul's contibutions/problem-of-the-moment.

If you will accept, for the duration of this comment, that I am not some kind of jerk, I'd like to ask you a question, in a limited (!) context .

Can we look at "the best of times", and at "the way it portrays women"?

B.o.T. being those where there are no coersive/ill-intent elements at work, and portrayal as described below;

Fact; men (and many women )enjoy looking at what they consider to be an attractive woman, sometimes with hints (or blatent expression) of sens/sex-uality.

Fact; some women enjoy being seen (portrayed)as such an "attractive woman", and appreciated therefore.

Leaving aside "assumptions" that could be made beyond these facts, which might be either true or false, and also leaving aside the misuse that too-often, but not-necessarily is made of these "facts", ...your problem with them being acknowledged and acted-upon (AS I HAVE DESCRIBED) is...???

Thanks for any comment,

Larry

 

[DavidP #28649]

First, thanks for saying Paul should stick around.

Second, thanks for demonstrating (finally) that there are those who are non-religious (even atheist) who find Paul's subject matter distasteful.

It's not even beyond belief that an atheist could email bomb somebody like Paul over something like this. Though I doubt he'd use the words "burn in hell". Then again, in an effort to smear Christians, he might just do that, too.

Paul please stick around!

I may be one of those who doesn't like your subject matter (not for
religious reasons BTW, I am actually an atheist!) but among many
others here I do appreciate your photographic and business
experience and knowledge, and that's what counts.

No-one is going to agree all of the time about any subject, glamour
photography is controversial at the best of times but just because
I personally detest the way it portrays women does not mean I can't
see how helpful you have been to a lot of people here or how
technically knowedgeable you are.

I think you should stay - and on a personal level I can see why
you're so hacked off at being mail bombed :-( Attacks like this are
not justified even if you disagree 100% with someone else's opinion

• I wish you every success with your complaint to AOL.

--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise

 

[Larry H. Smith]

You should write movies! The only thing missing from the
description was the whinny from the horse as he wheeled and reared!
(and maybe a fair maiden fainting)

The subject is only worth so-much effort. (...but the full novel has all the detail-work ;-)

I appreciate your constructive criticism. In the same spirit let me suggest that you maintain consistancy in you subject-line capitalization. Terribly upsetting!

Or should we blame the editor/proof-reader, ...they're supposed to catch these typos that we all make! (Oh, wait a minute, ...they're US!)

Best wishes,

Larry

 

[Danny Cardenas]

I KNOW! As an acronym, LMAO, IMHO, FYI, etc. ought to be typed in all caps, but once again, Phil's diabolical censure software won't allow it. I even tried L M A O & L.M.A.O. but nothing would work. "lmao" just doesn't seem right. I can't tell you how upset I got.

Thanks for the criticsm.



-dc

----------------------------------------------------
"I know less about women than anyone in the world."
—George Costanza

I appreciate your constructive criticism. In the same spirit let me
suggest that you maintain consistancy in you subject-line
capitalization. Terribly upsetting!

Or should we blame the editor/proof-reader, ...they're supposed to
catch these typos that we all make! (Oh, wait a minute, ...they're
US!)

Best wishes,

Larry

 

[Larry H. Smith]

Hi David,

I think it was more a matter of a poster who DIDN'T say it WASN'T! (reading them all will turn it up, I believe.

the way in which it was written appears to be an
attempt to throw mud on all Christians.

I would disagree with your asterisked use of the word "appears" here. I would accept that it "COULD HAVE " been such an attempt., but as to appearance, I think Danny says it here:

He was clearly (and rightfully) enraged after being mail bombed.

...and the "burn-in-hell" thing certainly lends itself to believing that the offender was a religious type, as they see such as the ultimate fate of "sinners".

THAT's the way it "appears" to me.

Agreed, certainly, that the Christian and the non-Christian camps each have their nut-cases. It is what I percieve as the institutionalized-nuttiness of (almost every) religion that IMO does harm to humankind.

I say "almost every" religion, because I consider myself to have a "religion" (depending on definition of the term), and believe it every much as strongly, and for what I consider much better reason, as/than most organized-religion adherents. (but that's another story ;-)

Respectfully,

Larry

 

[BryanS]

from Christian extemists who figured out who I am are not worth it
I assure you Hustler willl continue without you regardless ......

Maybe the message wasn't intended for you at all. Perhaps, they quickly read your message and thought you were Pope Paul, who any decent fundy knows is ALREADY burning in hell.

--
BryanS

 

[Larry H. Smith]

I KNOW! .... I can't tell you how upset I got.

Thanks for the criticism.

Want more? "Censure" is not quite the same thing as "censoring" ;-)

Larry

 

[eL47288]

It won't matter when this thread is deleted. The language mispelled is not appropriate. No debate there! eL

Comes across with the integrity of a vindictive Troll. eL

 

[Larry H. Smith]

Perhaps, they quickly read your message and thought you were Pope Paul, > who any decent fundy knows is ALREADY burning in hell.

--
BryanS

How much fun could a fun-dee-dee, if a fundy could de-fun!

A whole BUNCH, if he had any choice in the matter, I'Il bet!



Larry

 

[DavidP #28649]

I think it was more a matter of a poster who DIDN'T say it WASN'T!
(reading them all will turn it up, I believe.

Not saying "that's terrible" should never be equated with saying that "it's OK to do so".

I would disagree with your asterisked use of the word "appears"
here. I would accept that it "COULD HAVE " been such an attempt.,

Whether intentional, a Freudian slip, or just an oversight, the appearance is still there.

Just as you imply (above) that a lack of saying "Paul, that's terrible" gives the apperance of "what the guy did was OK by me", I could argue that the lack of an apology (or explanation) by Paul about his statement could mean that he actually intended it.

Now, I'm not asking for an apology or explanation from Paul. However, what he originally said IS very easily construed as slap on Christianity (intentional or not), given that it was only ONE person who sent all 23,000 emails.

I'll tell you how I interpreted what he said. I assumed that he had received a few dozen (maybe a few hundred) emails from a bunch of folks. Most of which who don't normally hang out here, but were shown the thread by a few individuals from here who wanted to "send Paul a message". Then, Paul got PO'd (rightfully so), and came here and vented (not-so-rightfully) and exaggerated these hundred or so messages into 23,000 messages. And in doing so, was slamming them as "Christian extremists".

Obviously, that was wrong. But that's how it appeared.

How much less controversial would it have been for him to simply say "some guy email bombed me with over 23,000 emails" ? That's REALLY the heart of the matter, isn't it?

Agreed, certainly, that the Christian and the non-Christian camps
each have their nut-cases. It is what I percieve as the
institutionalized-nuttiness of (almost every) religion that IMO
does harm to humankind.

I think you'll find that a very large percentage of the world affiliates themselves with a relgion. Therefore, it's not unexpected at all that a very large percentage of whacko's are also affiliated with religions.

Does religion CAUSE the whacko, or just give him his "reason" for justifying whatever he does? I vote for the latter.

--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise

 

[biggles]

sure doesn't take much to amuse some of you .......LMF'uc_ingAO.

How much fun could a fun-dee-dee, if a fundy could de-fun!

A whole BUNCH, if he had any choice in the matter, I'Il bet!



Larry