Reading mode: Light Dark

Forum quality much lower without David Kilpatrick

  • Thread starter Thread starter Henry Richardson
  • Start date Start date
Go to last post
now I understand the natureman reference ... I didn't before sorry
--
F717 (Legendary)
A700 (what a fantastic machine)
A200 (Almost as fantastic)
 
HUM469 said:
Perhaps you need to put your harrassment on hold for just a moment
and read a few threads. Maybe you enjoy trying to pick fights, but
this post just clearly illustrates how little you read any of these
threads. There are plenty of disagreements on SSTF, some civil, some
not. David was civil even when his views weren't always accepted,
Barry, Ken_5D, jamesdak and many others have all disagreed on points
of opinion or been mistaken on a fact too, and for the most part
remained civil. The ones called trolls are the ones like yourself
who have contributed nothing what so ever but opinion claimed as
"truth" and abusive name calling on a regular basis. In other words
those who make a career out of harassment, trolling as definined in
the rules* and the complete lack of civility in anything you have to
say here. If you genuinely believe you are above everyone else as
you have said or implied over and over, why do you continue to stoop
to this level? Why not go off to where ever you feel is so high and
mighty and leave others to their discussion? Of course you can keep
throwing around your name calling and complaints of hypocrisy if you
like, but no one posted these threads to deliberately antagonize you,
though you deliberately antagonize regularly.

Will my post "deliberately antagonize" you this time? Yes and no.
Based on your history in these threads I am sure you will respond to
insult me on principle alone, truth or fact is irrelevant when we are
discussing opinion and so it will antagonize. However, it isn't
deliberate, it is my intention to voice my own opinion sch as it is.
You have posted 8 times in this 90+ post thread, each time to insult,
belittle, or otherwise antagonize the poster above you. You will
undoubtably reply once again to call me names directly or insinuate
some sort of mental defect as you have before. That's nearly 10% of
the thread. On the Petition #2 thread you posted 19 times out of
150, again deliberately antagonizing posters with comments of
delusion, hogwash, warped facts, etc. Is this one post here a troll
post to you? I guess it must be since my opinion is what it is. Is
it a troll post to anyone else around here? I would love to hear
what they have to say. If I should be banned (and as a technicality
I should), then you should have been banned at least 27 posts ago.
And since you aren't, and I am not, then yes, people here are right
that the rules don't factor in to it. That is A truth. Think about
it.

definition from the posting rules rules (Trolls - Anyone
deliberately antagonizing other forum users by posting 'flame bait'
type messages are not welcome.)

--
-Dylan Anderson
Click to expand...
What you're obviously missing is that it doesn't matter what's said in any thread about DKs ban. None of you know anything for sure and the ban is a ban. It's all just a bunch iof whining/complaining and bluffing threats. "Boycott dpreview". I'm leaving unless the ban is lifted! This forum is worthless without DK! We need our messiah back! Wah, Wah, Wah, Wah! What a bunch of crybabies.

DK is gone from these forums. Get a grip. Get over it. Move on.

And I'd still like to know why you don't just go to his website?

Oh, by the way, have you put any thought into whether all these DK threads are antagonizing dpreview?

And have you put any thought into the fact that dpreview has allowed the threads to remain here? Seems pretty generous of them to me. So much for censorship.
 
jimb100 said:
Henry Richardson said:
Just wondering.... :-)

--
Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com
Click to expand...
I absolutely agree that without David the forum quality is much lower.

We now have to wade through thread after thread with petitions and
eulogies, attacks on Phil and critiques of every word in every Sony
review.

Frankly, I'd like to know who here is on Sony's payroll either
directly or indirectly with samples, info etc.

To me, these are the real trolls as they don't identify themselves
themselves as such.
Click to expand...
Very well said.
 
Why would Phil care?

He's the one that sold out to Amazon and probably smiled all the way to the bank :)

In DPR it's not about Ethics,It's not about Rules and Regulations,It's not about who's the best Troll.(Ahem,,,,Natureman wins that title hands down :)

It's all about money,
Those who have the most money Wins!!!...AMAZON!
So by all means keep clicking that link and adding to their Piggy Bank.....
Hey AMAZON,You reading this.......?
natureman said:
Henry Richardson said:
Just wondering.... :-)
Click to expand...
That remark is likely going to make you real popular with Phil. Not!
natureman said:
--
Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
shooter00 said:
Why would Phil care?
He's the one that sold out to Amazon and probably smiled all the way
to the bank :)
In DPR it's not about Ethics,It's not about Rules and
Regulations,It's not about who's the best Troll.(Ahem,,,,Natureman
wins that title hands down :)
Click to expand...
I'd like to take this opportunity to thank the Academy and all the people who voted for me. Winning this award is truly an honor and I'll always be grateful. I couldn't have done it though without the help of my fellow forum members, and their help and support will always be appreciated. I will print out your post and have it professionaly framed so that I can hang it over my mantle, for all to see, in perpetuity. ;)

By the way, I find it interesting, ironic, and kind of funny that David Kilpatrick has Amazon ads on his website.
shooter00 said:
It's all about money,
Those who have the most money Wins!!!...AMAZON!
So by all means keep clicking that link and adding to their Piggy
Bank.....
Hey AMAZON,You reading this.......?
natureman said:
Henry Richardson said:
Just wondering.... :-)
Click to expand...
That remark is likely going to make you real popular with Phil. Not!
shooter00 said:
--
Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Man that was deleted fast....

Within about 10 mins of NatureMans last post I had a picture just for NM deleted.

How bout it NatureMan/Phil ????

Didn't you like my award I presented to you?????
 
... a miniscule portion of your brain smelled conspiracy! ;-)

Anyway; I'll admit that David was a good contributor to this site but he is banned, probably for reasons that you and I and all other forum members (excluding DPR staff of course) don't now nothing about.

I'm rather certain that David stretched something to far this last time, and therefore the permanent ban. So be it, it's not a human right to be accepted on a privately owned forum. By the way, he can still read posts here!

Davids followers and all those keen to learn from his insights and vast knowledge should bring their discussion topics to Davids own forum, instead of littering this forum with endless discussions of his ban.

I really don't think that David is willing to post here again... so go to his neck of the woods instead, http://www.photoclubalpha.com/forum/ , and chat about his brilliant personality. :-) I'm sure that he is a nice guy. Indeed we all are, right?

David has not vanished, although many here seem to think otherwise! :-)
 
shooter00 said:
Man that was deleted fast....
Within about 10 mins of NatureMans last post I had a picture just for
NM deleted.

How bout it NatureMan/Phil ????

Didn't you like my award I presented to you?????
Click to expand...
I had nothing to do with your picture being deleted. I didn't even see it. Apparently either some other people complained about it, or dpreview saw it and didn't think it belonged here.

Your insinuation that I'm Phil is really laughable. If I were Phil, you'd be history.

With love, natureman.
 
dormouse said:
HUM469 said:
I don't think it is fair
to hold Phil directly responsible for anything more than what MAY or
MAY NOT be a slide in the professionalism of the recently expanded
staff.
Click to expand...
But surely someone has to take responsibility for the actions (or
inactions) of staff, recently expanded or not.
Click to expand...
That is what I am saying. People have been accusing Phil of all sorts of terrible things that are all mearly speculation. The only thing that we can really be sure of is that he's in charge. It is his fault if the staff isn't acting professionally. What it takes to act professionally though is always going to be based on individual opinion, hence the reason I said "may or may not".

--
-Dylan Anderson
 
natureman said:
... It's all just a bunch iof whining/complaining and
bluffing threats. "Boycott dpreview". I'm leaving unless the ban is
lifted! This forum is worthless without DK! We need our messiah back!
Wah, Wah, Wah, Wah! What a bunch of crybabies.
Click to expand...
Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit is it? Have I said any of these things? I have said I can understand other's feelings about it, but I have never threatened to leave, and do think it is silly if one does not carry through with it.
natureman said:
And I'd still like to know why you don't just go to his website?
Click to expand...
I do, and I have said I do go to his site. For weeks I have had both open side by side. Again, haven't you read anything? Plenty of others have commented on participating on both sites. Why keep asking a question you have been answered repeatedly.
natureman said:
Oh, by the way, have you put any thought into whether all these DK
threads are antagonizing dpreview?

And have you put any thought into the fact that dpreview has allowed
the threads to remain here? Seems pretty generous of them to me. So
much for censorship.
Click to expand...
Yes and yes, didn't you even read the post you are responding to? The whole point all along that most are making is that for all outward appearances, DPR banned David for criticizing a terrible reviewer. DPR never does anything about rule breakers who harrass, abuse, or otherwise attack other members far more harshly and inappropriately than David did in critiquing the review, and those trolls remain. I and many others have put plenty of thought into the fact that these threads remain full of trolling. That is the point of the complaint. Despite banning him, they knew David was right and implemented his suggestions for the betterment of the review. People here want a betterment of the boards as well.

--
-Dylan Anderson
 
natureman said:
HUM469 said:
Perhaps you need to put your harrassment on hold for just a moment
and read a few threads. Maybe you enjoy trying to pick fights, but
this post just clearly illustrates how little you read any of these
threads. There are plenty of disagreements on SSTF, some civil, some
not. David was civil even when his views weren't always accepted,
Barry, Ken_5D, jamesdak and many others have all disagreed on points
of opinion or been mistaken on a fact too, and for the most part
remained civil. The ones called trolls are the ones like yourself
who have contributed nothing what so ever but opinion claimed as
"truth" and abusive name calling on a regular basis. In other words
those who make a career out of harassment, trolling as definined in
the rules* and the complete lack of civility in anything you have to
say here. If you genuinely believe you are above everyone else as
you have said or implied over and over, why do you continue to stoop
to this level? Why not go off to where ever you feel is so high and
mighty and leave others to their discussion? Of course you can keep
throwing around your name calling and complaints of hypocrisy if you
like, but no one posted these threads to deliberately antagonize you,
though you deliberately antagonize regularly.

Will my post "deliberately antagonize" you this time? Yes and no.
Based on your history in these threads I am sure you will respond to
insult me on principle alone, truth or fact is irrelevant when we are
discussing opinion and so it will antagonize. However, it isn't
deliberate, it is my intention to voice my own opinion sch as it is.
You have posted 8 times in this 90+ post thread, each time to insult,
belittle, or otherwise antagonize the poster above you. You will
undoubtably reply once again to call me names directly or insinuate
some sort of mental defect as you have before. That's nearly 10% of
the thread. On the Petition #2 thread you posted 19 times out of
150, again deliberately antagonizing posters with comments of
delusion, hogwash, warped facts, etc. Is this one post here a troll
post to you? I guess it must be since my opinion is what it is. Is
it a troll post to anyone else around here? I would love to hear
what they have to say. If I should be banned (and as a technicality
I should), then you should have been banned at least 27 posts ago.
And since you aren't, and I am not, then yes, people here are right
that the rules don't factor in to it. That is A truth. Think about
it.

definition from the posting rules rules (Trolls - Anyone
deliberately antagonizing other forum users by posting 'flame bait'
type messages are not welcome.)

--
-Dylan Anderson
Click to expand...
What you're obviously missing is that it doesn't matter what's said
in any thread about DKs ban. None of you know anything for sure and
the ban is a ban. It's all just a bunch iof whining/complaining and
bluffing threats. "Boycott dpreview". I'm leaving unless the ban is
lifted! This forum is worthless without DK! We need our messiah back!
Wah, Wah, Wah, Wah! What a bunch of crybabies.

DK is gone from these forums. Get a grip. Get over it. Move on.

And I'd still like to know why you don't just go to his website?

Oh, by the way, have you put any thought into whether all these DK
threads are antagonizing dpreview?

And have you put any thought into the fact that dpreview has allowed
the threads to remain here? Seems pretty generous of them to me. So
much for censorship.
Click to expand...
In the interests of clarity, let me summarize.

David K got thrown off the site for advertising his competitive site while harshly criticizing a DPreviewer in a post. Actually, multiple occasions of each.

Those who like reading his posts have taken up a crusade to get him reinstated, accusing DPreview of arbitrary banning and the founder, Phil, of many heinous crimes against humanity. How these bullying tactics will cause the desired effect is not clear.

Anyone who defends Phil's right to (moral, obviously not legal) to ban David is a troll and generally undesireable element, despite the fact that their cause is centered on "freedom of expression". Any comment defending Phil based on standard American business practices (you can't defame a competitors products while standing in his store) brings 4 or 5 David defenders to the attack with irrational spin, strawmen and personal attack that hypocritically deny freedom of expresson while using it as their cause celebre.

The easiest solution for the David supporters is to go read his words of wisdom on his own web site, but that seems to have escaped their notice while they act as if Phil has consigned David to one of the deeper reaches of hell where no communication is possible. Thus seemingly making their whole point moot.

The fact that they call for boycotts of DPreview from within DPreview would seem to make their claims of lack of freedom of expression here laughable, prima facia.

The fact that none have started a thread on David's website calling for boycotts of DPreview would seem to indicate they are no so much interested in the central issue of David's ban, but about bringing attention to themselves here on DPreview. Their noble cause elevates them to the status of crusaders for truth, justice and the American way. Except there are way to many contradicitons for that to be true.
 
Pomposity is your strong point, I'll give you that. Seems to me very clear that this was a simple and clear thread in which anyone who wanted to support DK could express their opinion. This thread has been continuously taken off topic by a couple of people who have no interest in the Sony SLR community, but who do really like the sound of their own voice and have far too much time on their hands. If anyone is an attention whore around here it's jimb100 and natureman. And wtf does the American way have to do with this you small-minded yank? DPR is a UK-based website and DK is a brit? How parochial can you be? geez...
jimb100 said:
The fact that none have started a thread on David's website calling
for boycotts of DPreview would seem to indicate they are no so much
interested in the central issue of David's ban, but about bringing
attention to themselves here on DPreview. Their noble cause elevates
them to the status of crusaders for truth, justice and the American
way. Except there are way to many contradicitons for that to be true.
Click to expand...
 
If you post a message the last forum rule is quite clear about this.

"Legal ownership - Each message posted is owned by and the opinion of the original poster. Neither dpreview.com nor its owners or webmaster are legally responsible for anything posted on these forums. The webmaster reserves the right to remove any or all of your messages at any time and ban you if he sees fit."

In the copyright page the first and fourth article are also clear about this. See http://www.dpreview.com/misc/copyright.asp

"1. All text, design, layout and graphics* (unless otherwise noted and excluding messages posted on the discussion forum) on this website are (c)1998-2008 Digital Photography Review™ a website owned by dpreview.com Limited."

"4. Portions of this Web Site may publish readers comments and opinion (notably the discussion forums). DPR does not assume or have any responsibility or any liability for the readers comments or opinions, nor do we claim ownership or copyright that belongs to the original poster."

So the content of the messages is the proporty of the poster and he or she can do with it what he or she wants. You could grant someone a free lifetime license to use it ...

--
tanti saluti,

coen

Remember http://www.pbase.com/mtf_foto_studies/mtf_faq
 
jimb100 said:
natureman said:
HUM469 said:
Perhaps you need to put your harrassment on hold for just a moment
and read a few threads. Maybe you enjoy trying to pick fights, but
this post just clearly illustrates how little you read any of these
threads. There are plenty of disagreements on SSTF, some civil, some
not. David was civil even when his views weren't always accepted,
Barry, Ken_5D, jamesdak and many others have all disagreed on points
of opinion or been mistaken on a fact too, and for the most part
remained civil. The ones called trolls are the ones like yourself
who have contributed nothing what so ever but opinion claimed as
"truth" and abusive name calling on a regular basis. In other words
those who make a career out of harassment, trolling as definined in
the rules* and the complete lack of civility in anything you have to
say here. If you genuinely believe you are above everyone else as
you have said or implied over and over, why do you continue to stoop
to this level? Why not go off to where ever you feel is so high and
mighty and leave others to their discussion? Of course you can keep
throwing around your name calling and complaints of hypocrisy if you
like, but no one posted these threads to deliberately antagonize you,
though you deliberately antagonize regularly.

Will my post "deliberately antagonize" you this time? Yes and no.
Based on your history in these threads I am sure you will respond to
insult me on principle alone, truth or fact is irrelevant when we are
discussing opinion and so it will antagonize. However, it isn't
deliberate, it is my intention to voice my own opinion sch as it is.
You have posted 8 times in this 90+ post thread, each time to insult,
belittle, or otherwise antagonize the poster above you. You will
undoubtably reply once again to call me names directly or insinuate
some sort of mental defect as you have before. That's nearly 10% of
the thread. On the Petition #2 thread you posted 19 times out of
150, again deliberately antagonizing posters with comments of
delusion, hogwash, warped facts, etc. Is this one post here a troll
post to you? I guess it must be since my opinion is what it is. Is
it a troll post to anyone else around here? I would love to hear
what they have to say. If I should be banned (and as a technicality
I should), then you should have been banned at least 27 posts ago.
And since you aren't, and I am not, then yes, people here are right
that the rules don't factor in to it. That is A truth. Think about
it.

definition from the posting rules rules (Trolls - Anyone
deliberately antagonizing other forum users by posting 'flame bait'
type messages are not welcome.)

--
-Dylan Anderson
Click to expand...
What you're obviously missing is that it doesn't matter what's said
in any thread about DKs ban. None of you know anything for sure and
the ban is a ban. It's all just a bunch iof whining/complaining and
bluffing threats. "Boycott dpreview". I'm leaving unless the ban is
lifted! This forum is worthless without DK! We need our messiah back!
Wah, Wah, Wah, Wah! What a bunch of crybabies.

DK is gone from these forums. Get a grip. Get over it. Move on.

And I'd still like to know why you don't just go to his website?

Oh, by the way, have you put any thought into whether all these DK
threads are antagonizing dpreview?

And have you put any thought into the fact that dpreview has allowed
the threads to remain here? Seems pretty generous of them to me. So
much for censorship.
Click to expand...
In the interests of clarity, let me summarize.

David K got thrown off the site for advertising his competitive site
while harshly criticizing a DPreviewer in a post. Actually, multiple
occasions of each.

Those who like reading his posts have taken up a crusade to get him
reinstated, accusing DPreview of arbitrary banning and the founder,
Phil, of many heinous crimes against humanity. How these bullying
tactics will cause the desired effect is not clear.

Anyone who defends Phil's right to (moral, obviously not legal) to
ban David is a troll and generally undesireable element, despite the
fact that their cause is centered on "freedom of expression". Any
comment defending Phil based on standard American business practices
(you can't defame a competitors products while standing in his store)
brings 4 or 5 David defenders to the attack with irrational spin,
strawmen and personal attack that hypocritically deny freedom of
expresson while using it as their cause celebre.

The easiest solution for the David supporters is to go read his words
of wisdom on his own web site, but that seems to have escaped their
notice while they act as if Phil has consigned David to one of the
deeper reaches of hell where no communication is possible. Thus
seemingly making their whole point moot.

The fact that they call for boycotts of DPreview from within DPreview
would seem to make their claims of lack of freedom of expression here
laughable, prima facia.

The fact that none have started a thread on David's website calling
for boycotts of DPreview would seem to indicate they are no so much
interested in the central issue of David's ban, but about bringing
attention to themselves here on DPreview. Their noble cause elevates
them to the status of crusaders for truth, justice and the American
way. Except there are way to many contradicitons for that to be true.
Click to expand...
Brilliant, simply brilliant. Seriously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top