Troll of the month

John Cozijn · Sep 2, 2007

... and you are entitled to whatever online personality you wish to maintain.

But let me share a couple of thoughts. My curiousity was aroused when your thread hit "hot" status and I noticed that you had in fact posted a picture in the Samples gallery here, about which you now say:

Quozl said:
Oh and the one pic I posted was from the e410 + kit lens (done in

HDR) hence no exif. I posted it just for fun not to prove anything.
But of course you know beter than I do with your wrong assumptions of
course (you also should be wise enough to know better than to
assume.. as the saying goes...)

The problem is that it does have EXIF, which is how I know it was taken at f/10 ISO100 and developed through CS3, for instance. But strangely, it is lacking the Olympus descriptor in the 2 places I would expect to see it, as well as the field that would have told me what lens was being used.

That anomaly led to me to browse over your other posts, which made for a very odd story that I shared in this thread. The new piece of information that is supposed to make sense of this story now is:

Quozl said:
I first bought a e410 on a work department budget! Oly refunded it

for your information due to problems they had no solution for at the
time (in their words).

But despite the fact you were at that stage posting regularly, there is no mention of this rather shocking event or the insoluable problem that had Olympus so stumped they refunded your money.

But since you say you are now the proud owner of both EOS 40D and an E510, you can easily clear the matter up by posting 2 images of the same scene with these two cameras, with EXIF intact.

In the meantime, you are still the winner of a magnificent tinfoil hat (the prize), which you can collected anytime that suits you.

Cheers, John

Timmy Toucan · Sep 2, 2007

Sorry to say I'm a Brit/Limey/Pom so I'm not qualified to award you a pass in 'Aussie-speak 101'...

...That said, all Aussies actually DO sound like that.

ZorSy · Sep 2, 2007

Quozl said:
hehehe... Yes I am laughing hard at all these people that continue to
have nothing better to do than defend their territory.

mate, enjoy your new camera - the reasoning behind 7-14 vs. 10-22 price is enough to put anyone off ( unless locked into particular brand). Or FL36 being sold in AU for more than SB800! Pardon me, someone has lost it here. Not trolling, just looking.

Glen Barrington · Sep 2, 2007

It may be my ego talking, but I think I'd make an excellent troll! God knows, I've accidentally started a few thread wars; how difficult could 'on purpose' be?
--
STOP Global Stasis! Change is good!

Now that you've judged the quality of my typing, take a look at my photos. . .
http://www.photo.net/photos/GlenBarrington

Dave Garwood · Sep 2, 2007

Hahahaha. EXCELLENT, Timmy

Timmy Toucan said:
Inflaming the semi-amused wrath of Oly DPR users isn't quite in the same
ballpark as enraging the Shaolin Monks. I feel we're being let down; I'm
hoping September can bring us some truly great examples, otherwise I'll
have to 'jump ship' to a site where the trolls really excel...

Yeah, If we don't get better trolling soon, I'm outta here too.
I hate these weenie, amateur, half-hearted, trolls.

--
Dave

"It's what you learn after you know it all that really counts."

tex · Sep 2, 2007

but anyway, i actually DO get train spotters, stamp collecters, photographers, birders, etc. i even get mean people to some degree, and terrorists and religious zealots too, to a point.

but i still don't get trolls. something about the uselessness of their activity combined with their passive aggressive qualities is beyond my ken.

but they sure do suck you in---even in this thread which isn't BY a troll, but is just ABOUT one. or is it? hmmmm....now i'm outa' here, come to think about it!

mmditter · Sep 2, 2007

I wonder if Phil would agree to ban the "winner" of the Troll of the Month for a week?

ecube · Sep 2, 2007

Couple of ideas.

Continental award - Australian Troll of the Month
Make it Troll of the Year

Changing the subject.

I own an inexpensive Olympus, just a point and shoot like a Kodak Brownie of old. I think it was an SP-350, but I am not sure because I gave it to my brother-in-law, last year, who like the simplicity, ease of use, and fairly good pictures I was able to take at the family re-union.

Does this qualify me for a troll candidate?

John Cozijn said:
Other forums have such awards, why not us?

And in any case, we have a clear winner this month, with Quozl, who
has managed to get a "hot" thread on the topic: "Goodbye Oly
e410/510... Hello Canon 40D"
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=24625602

[clipped]

John Cozijn said:
Oh what tangled webs are weaved, when trolls first practise to
deceive (apologies to WS)

Cheers, John

--
ecube

Joseph S Wisniewski · Sep 2, 2007

Seven or eight troll watchers active on dpReview exchange notes. One who's only interest in the Oly forum is Gene Windell (a legendary USENET troll who haunts the Oly forum as Nabal and Nebo) told me there was a good thread about trolls on the Oly forum).

Normally, I only pop by the Oly forum for two reasons. One is when I have a student in one of my classes with an Oly camera and I need a refresher in the particular quirks of that system. (and that's not an Oly slam, all systems have quirks. I could write a book on what's weird about Nikon).

And the other is when Oly or Panasonic do something that's actually interesting. The original launch was interesting, as was the porro E-300, the first live view, and the f2.0 lenses (especially since their designs appear to incorporate built in wide converters, a subject close to my heart). E-P1 is interesting (if the document is authentic, and it has just the right flavor of Engrish to make me believe it is) not because of the camera itself, but because of all the wild claims (world's fastest AF, world's most effective anti-shake, etc). It's like Schwin announcing that not only are they launching a new car model, but it's going to be better than the best from Toyota, Honda, BMW, and Volkswagen.

The new AF in live view Pany is borderline interesting.

tex said:
but anyway, i actually DO get train spotters, stamp collecters,
photographers, birders, etc. i even get mean people to some degree,
and terrorists and religious zealots too, to a point.

Mean is easy. We've got so much ape in our wiring (territorial behavior, etc) that being nice is a conscious decision that is only actually necessary a few times in our life (finding a mate, etc). The rest of the time, it's basically "play acting". We need a lot of "programming" (including literature, religion, etc) to get "nice" into the basic balance.

I don't get terrorists, except as an exercise in how a small number of brilliant madmen can manipulate a large number of mundanes into doing things they normally wouldn't do.

tex said:
but i still don't get trolls. something about the uselessness of
their activity combined with their passive aggressive qualities is
beyond my ken.

I agree, they can be confusing. You have to see some of them as "broken", and try to figure out exactly what's wrong with them. For example, dpReview member aruzinsky (Steven A. Ruzinsky, Ph.D.) engages in a great deal of trollish behavior. He's a highly intelligent person (even past my level) and although he doesn't actively promote his business here, he does represent it, so he should be making an effort to "play nice". I think the reason for his behavior is mainly that he simply doesn't understand how to relate to people. Not "know", but "understand". I believe he suffers from exactly the same mental disorder that I do, Asperger's syndrome, but he doesn't recognize it, and hasn't had the level of help and support that I've been lucky enough to enjoy in later life.

tex said:
but they sure do suck you in---even in this thread which isn't BY a
troll, but is just ABOUT one. or is it? hmmmm....now i'm outa'
here, come to think about it!

Trolls hate threads about trolls. It's the most effective way of adjusting their behavior. The old saw about ignoring them doesn't work, any more that it worked on schoolyard bullies. They just keep hitting you harder, until they get a reaction. The "ignore them" advice came from people who simply don't want to get involved, so they see virtue in their own apathy.

--
Normally, a signature this small can't open its own jumpgate.

Ciao! Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

WGArts2 · Sep 2, 2007

Quozl said:
hehehe... Yes I am laughing hard at all these people that continue to
have nothing better to do than defend their territory.

I was over in the canon forums reading about my new 40D and someone
pointed out I had one a prize so I came to look

You one a prize? But the Canon is so good, you should ten a prize.

Quozl said:
All the figures and comparisons in prices stack up here in

Australia. There was never a denial that the 7-14 would be better
than the 10-22 it was just best price to get in sub 20mm overall).
Are the maths that hard for some... then 7-14 here is $2800. Thats
the exact amount I just paid for the new package of canon 40D + 10-22
+ Several accessories.

This boggles the mind. One can easily do what I did and check the prices for these items on line at B&H Photo. I did that in the other thread and came up with the following (US dollars):

Current cost of 40D + 10-22 at B&H = $2000.
Current cost of E-410 + 7-14 at B&H = $2060

Yet you say that in Australia you can buy the Canon plus the lens plus "accessories" for the same price as ONLY the Oly 7-14???

Can anyone else in Oz verify this? Is there any possible reason that the Olympus lens costs about 33% more relative in Oz as it does in US? Or is the poster fudging the numbers?

John Cozijn · Sep 2, 2007

Joseph S Wisniewski said:
Trolls hate threads about trolls. It's the most effective way of
adjusting their behavior.

And I do think there is an inverse relationship between real-life social skills and the propensity to build a fantasy persona online.

ecube · Sep 2, 2007

Joe,

Like you, I only wander into Oly forum occasionally, that is when I see something interesting in the "Top Discussion", or when someone ask my opinion about a post in OLY DPR. I do pop-in in the Canon, Pentax, and Lumix forum for the same reason. Most of my surfing in the DPR is in the Nikon forum. I've seen your posting in other DPR platforms and am always impressed by your objectivity and analysis.

--
ecube

Joseph S Wisniewski · Sep 2, 2007

John Cozijn said:
Joseph S Wisniewski said:

their view of the Oly shooter is a tinfoil hat wearing loon believing
in conspiracy theories. It takes a lot of positive PR to clean up
after what one net-kook can do to the rep.

Click to expand...

A lovely image. And answers the question posed earlier about the
prize for "troll of the month" - clearly a tinfoil hat is the answer.
I'll mail it to Quozl as soon as I get an address!

I think you'd need a better award. The tinfoil hat would technically be an aspect of the "net kook". Their world overlaps trolls, but you can be a kook without being a troll, or a troll without being a kook. D. Q. E, for example, is a pure troll. Plusiotis is a kook and a troll (I've seen him go off on the US government and captured alien technology hidden at Roswell, surveillance helicopters, and other standard kook-cooking).

I envision a physical double entendre, a Norfin or Russ troll holding a fishing poll and dangling a line. Spraypaint it gold, but instead of the traditional marble base, it should be standing on a block of wood, to symbolize a boat deck or dock.

John Cozijn said:
There is a serious point behind this somewhere, however. If one looks
at forum statistics for SLRs, it is clear that this forum is clearly
much more active than the Canon or Nikon equivalents on the basis of
market share - ie, the number of cameras actually out there. Ditto
for Pentax.

Why is that?

Because, pound for pound, the four thirds cameras are surrounded in more hype than any other system. Open system, designed for digital, with a consortium, etc. Doesn't matter that the "open" system is patented, trademarked, and copyrighted, the "digital" lenses are actually less digital than a lot of Nikkors, and the consortium is only a group of Oly suppliers forced into doing joint press releases with Oly. And the cameras themselves are often quite interesting. E-1 was the first 100% viewfinder coverage, weather sealed machine in its price range, over $1000 less than the closest Nikon or Canon to offer those features.

Oly watching is a great spectator sport, because they seem to continually poise themselves on the threshold of great success, draw a mighty weapon, take aim, and shoot themselves squarely in the foot. Could anyone actually figure out what market the E-1 was targeting? They had advertisements featuring fashion and portrait work: but you don't capture that market with slow 4:1 zooms with the bokeh from h* . A semi-effective sports lens, but no ability to focus it in time to actually capture action, and too low a frame rate to attract a sports shooter. Look at E-300. Pen-F optics, but if they had given it a Pen-F appearance (instead of something that looked like it was designed by Fischer-Price), and launched a few nice small lenses to go with it, it could have ended up on top.

John Cozijn said:
And of course that would make the amount of trolling, both in here
and "out there" much higher in absolute terms.

It's easy to troll Oly, because their marketing folk are caught constantly with their hands in the cookie jar. "You need all new lenses for digital". I've used just about everything out there, and the best image quality I've seen was the Leica M-8, which can outperform Nikon and Canon (as well as being leagues ahead of any four thirds camera and lens) with positively ancient lens designs, and without any digital lenses, at all (technically, they have one digital lens, a new Tri-Elmar version, but I've never shot it, and don't know anyone in the area who has one to play with). And, by putting their design effort into a better sensor, instead of "near telecentric" lenses, they ended up with a system (camera + lens) that is physically much more compact than a four thirds camera.

John Cozijn said:
Food for thought.

Second course

--
Normally, a signature this small can't open its own jumpgate.

Ciao! Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

Joseph S Wisniewski · Sep 2, 2007

John Cozijn said:
Joseph S Wisniewski said:

Trolls hate threads about trolls. It's the most effective way of
adjusting their behavior.

Click to expand...

And I do think there is an inverse relationship between real-life
social skills and the propensity to build a fantasy persona online.

Very true. Real life social skills have to operate in real time. An internet persona, unless you're taking it to the chat rooms, can run way outside of real time. The trolls have plenty of time to plan.

My own online interactions are almost stream of consciousness, and although I can't type as fast as I talk, I do maintain about 100 words/minute

--
Normally, a signature this small can't open its own jumpgate.

Ciao! Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

John Cozijn · Sep 2, 2007

except me - I'm an insomniac

WGArts said:
Can anyone else in Oz verify this? Is there any possible reason that
the Olympus lens costs about 33% more relative in Oz as it does in
US?

Yep, expensive they are - like the UK. The B&H price $1520 translates into about $AU1850, but the cheapest online price for the 7-14mm here is in fact $2650.

One is well advised when buying a quality optic to just get someone to pick it up in NY (given Australians travel a great deal) than buying locally.

John

WGArts2 · Sep 2, 2007

John;

Geez, what is up with that? And do Canon products suffer similar price inflation or not? Cause if Oly Australia or whomever is arbitrarily raising prices like this, then maybe OP has a point in Oz, but not US?

Now get some sleep.

John Cozijn said:
WGArts said:

Can anyone else in Oz verify this? Is there any possible reason that
the Olympus lens costs about 33% more relative in Oz as it does in
US?

Click to expand...

Yep, expensive they are - like the UK. The B&H price $1520 translates
into about $AU1850, but the cheapest online price for the 7-14mm here
is in fact $2650.

One is well advised when buying a quality optic to just get someone
to pick it up in NY (given Australians travel a great deal) than
buying locally.

John

Joseph S Wisniewski · Sep 2, 2007

WGArts said:
Quozl said:

hehehe... Yes I am laughing hard at all these people that continue to
have nothing better to do than defend their territory.

I was over in the canon forums reading about my new 40D and someone
pointed out I had one a prize so I came to look

Click to expand...

You one a prize? But the Canon is so good, you should ten a prize.

You know he meant "won" a prize. Spelling flames are considered quite rude on an international forum, unless the person you flame first presents himself as an authority on the subject. (i.e. it's accepted to flame someone who criticizes someone else's spelling or grammar, if the critic also makes mistakes in this area).

WGArts2 said:
WGArts2 said:

All the figures and comparisons in prices stack up here in

Australia. There was never a denial that the 7-14 would be better
than the 10-22 it was just best price to get in sub 20mm overall).
Are the maths that hard for some... then 7-14 here is $2800. Thats
the exact amount I just paid for the new package of canon 40D + 10-22
+ Several accessories.

Click to expand...

This boggles the mind.

Welcome to the exciting world of international commerce. Limited access markets (such as Australia, and most of Europe) often have pricing that an American would consider strange, paradoxical, or totally apocryphal. If you only have one Canon distributor, one Oly distributor, and one Nikon distributor, each with an exclusive lock on your continent, you get weird situations. With aggressive competition, all distributors end up operating with the smallest markups that will allow them to survive. Without such competition, you may have the Oz Oly distributor decide he's going to try for a 40% markup, while the Canon distributor is content with 20, so an Oly that was 10% cheaper than the Canon in the US is now 10% more than the Canon.

In the US, you only see such "locks" on very small companies. For example, there is only one US distributor for Heliopan filters, Uni-Loc tripods, and Giottos tripods, so our selection and prices for these three lines are higher than Europe, but our selection and customer service is much worse. We get a taste of what Europe and Oz suffer on all their camera equipment, even from the major manufacturers.

WGArts2 said:
One can easily do what I did and check the
prices for these items on line at B&H Photo. I did that in the other
thread and came up with the following (US dollars):

Again, meaningless in the context of the current discussion.

WGArts2 said:
Current cost of 40D + 10-22 at B&H = $2000.
Current cost of E-410 + 7-14 at B&H = $2060

Yet you say that in Australia you can buy the Canon plus the lens
plus "accessories" for the same price as ONLY the Oly 7-14???

Can anyone else in Oz verify this? Is there any possible reason that
the Olympus lens costs about 33% more relative in Oz as it does in
US? Or is the poster fudging the numbers?

It's more than "possible", it's normal over there. I've helped Aussie friends camera shop in the US on several occasions. (Australians love visiting me: I never say anything about "tucker", "shrimp on the barbie", or "you call that a knife".

Want a cool counterexample? Whoever brings popular memory card brands Sandisk and Ridata into Oz does it with such a low markup Aussie retailers are actually able to ship them all over the world at competitive prices, even including international shipping.

--
Normally, a signature this small can't open its own jumpgate.

Ciao! Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

evshrug2 · Sep 2, 2007

credit to http://www.marriedtothesea.com for comic.
--
Evshrug

John Cozijn · Sep 2, 2007

WGArts said:
Geez, what is up with that? And do Canon products suffer similar
price inflation or not? Cause if Oly Australia or whomever is
arbitrarily raising prices like this, then maybe OP has a point in
Oz, but not US?

The Canon lens he mentions is $675 at B&H, which translates to $AU833 but online from Camera Warehouse here it is $1200. So the differential is not nearly as large as our poster makes out.

But yes, this kind of differential pricing is a pain, and it's even worse in the UK, with a more punitive taxing regime.

WGArts2 said:
Now get some sleep.

Yep. I've got to get my boy up for school in 3 hours, so some zzz's is probably a good idea.

Cheers, John

WGArts2 · Sep 2, 2007

Joseph S Wisniewski said:
WGArts said:

You one a prize? But the Canon is so good, you should ten a prize.

Click to expand...

You know he meant "won" a prize. Spelling flames are considered quite
rude on an international forum, unless the person you flame first
presents himself as an authority on the subject. (i.e. it's accepted
to flame someone who criticizes someone else's spelling or grammar,
if the critic also makes mistakes in this area).

Well:

won) I knew what he meant, I was just using his malaprop to refer back to him saying the Canon is 10 times better than the Oly in his OP, get it?

too) English is not the guy's second language so a mistake like this deserves to be pointed out. I dont really care if it's rude. To me it's rude for a schmuck who doesn't know the diff between 'one' and 'won' to be lecturing me on anything.

Joseph S Wisniewski said:
Joseph S Wisniewski said:

Joseph S Wisniewski said:

All the figures and comparisons in prices stack up here in

Australia. There was never a denial that the 7-14 would be better
than the 10-22 it was just best price to get in sub 20mm overall).
Are the maths that hard for some... then 7-14 here is $2800. Thats
the exact amount I just paid for the new package of canon 40D + 10-22
+ Several accessories.

Click to expand...

This boggles the mind.

Click to expand...

Welcome to the exciting world of international commerce.

Another reason u gotta love livin in the USA.

Joseph S Wisniewski said:
Joseph S Wisniewski said:

One can easily do what I did and check the
prices for these items on line at B&H Photo. I did that in the other
thread and came up with the following (US dollars):

Click to expand...

Again, meaningless in the context of the current discussion.

It's meaningless to check the relative cost of the products to compare and determine what the heck the OP is talking about? I dont think so. Neither you nor he have yet provided any information, except the whim of the distributor, as to why the Olympus lens is marked up horribly and the Canon stuff is cheaper. It makes no sense and makes me wonder why anyone in Oz would buy anything Olympus at all ever from a predatory distributor like that. Once again, he says he can get the 40D AND the 10-22 Canon AND "several accessories" for the same price as ONLY the Zuiko lens yet at B&H, the Canon stuff would be at LEAST 35-40% more. Ozzies - why do you buy Olympus under these circumstances?

Joseph S Wisniewski said:
Joseph S Wisniewski said:

Current cost of 40D + 10-22 at B&H = $2000.
Current cost of E-410 + 7-14 at B&H = $2060

Yet you say that in Australia you can buy the Canon plus the lens
plus "accessories" for the same price as ONLY the Oly 7-14???

Can anyone else in Oz verify this? Is there any possible reason that
the Olympus lens costs about 33% more relative in Oz as it does in
US? Or is the poster fudging the numbers?

Click to expand...

Troll of the month

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

ecube

Guest

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

ecube

Guest

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Keyboard shortcuts