Officially declared...

Well it seems that my threads turned out totally different than I expected and that is not directly in favor of this forum.
You have to admit that your OP was a bit silly to begin with.
But I have to say that knowing the way they respond
Who are 'they' really?
On the other hand it's ridiculous that freedom of acting in a behave manner is hijacked by them.
Hijacked by whom? And how do you hijack something that by its very nature is meant to divert in different directions as people start to discuss various aspects?
Also that dpreview isn't able to deal appropriate with those people is a very big shame as they hijacked more than a thread.
Again, who are 'they' and what do you mean by hijacking?
I have asked them to remove this thread in favor of atmosphere of this forum. Amen :)
To hide what you did?
--
Rikke
 
Your very first response to me was confrontational and sarcastic.

I don't think our relationship is going in the right direction. I think I need a little space now. Don't worry, it's not you, it's me.
--
Whitefoot - Franklin, TN
 
Hi Gregg,
Would it be permitted to bet on oneself, as I believe i can do it one post :)
Jim

lol Jim i reckon the Mods have forsaken this forum, i think it would take something utterly spectacular to get banned right now.
--
Mandolin, haha, nope sorry! That, my friend, is a Banjo :)?
 
Whitefoot wrote:

Upon review, you really haven't been any more than confrontational.
Rikke Rask wrote:

That is a downright lie, Mister.
That's not fair. You've certainly been confrontational (as have I). I'm not saying you haven't had reason, and, as you know, take your side, and also appreciate your posts.

But that last comment was out-of-line, in my opinion. I can see how Larry Lynch's repeated over-the-top abusive posts have made you testy, but it's not cool to take it out on Whitefoot, and certainly not helping you make your case.
 
Whitefoot wrote:

Upon review, you really haven't been any more than confrontational.
Rikke Rask wrote:

That is a downright lie, Mister.
That's not fair. You've certainly been confrontational (as have I). I'm not saying you haven't had reason, and, as you know, take your side, and also appreciate your posts.

But that last comment was out-of-line, in my opinion. I can see how Larry Lynch's repeated over-the-top abusive posts have made you testy, but it's not cool to take it out on Whitefoot, and certainly not helping you make your case.
Could be wrong, but I saw Rikke's last comment as a joke ;-)
 
Steen Bay wrote:

Could be wrong, but I saw Rikke's last comment as a joke ;-)
In that case, my bad! Given the abuse she's suffered at the hands of Larry Lynch, and the lack of an emoticon, I misinterpreted.

But it would have been very hypocritical of me to not say something to Rikke just because we usually see eye-to-eye. For example:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=36086988

Anyway, again, my bad for missing the humor of the post. I guess I'll have to retake that IQ test, eh? ;)
 
Well, I certainly didn't take it as a joke. If it was, then ok...mix in an emoticon or something.

But, you can't call me a liar for FEELING that someone was being confrontational with me. I hope to be finished with this thread. I was simply answering the original question and now this has turned into a great war of semantics.

Bustard, thanks for trying to restore civility.
--
Whitefoot - Franklin, TN
 
Steen Bay wrote:

Could be wrong, but I saw Rikke's last comment as a joke ;-)
In that case, my bad! Given the abuse she's suffered at the hands of Larry Lynch, and the lack of an emoticon, I misinterpreted.
Yes, it was certainly easy to misinterpret (which I hope I didn't!).
But it would have been very hypocritical of me to not say something to Rikke just because we usually see eye-to-eye.
Yes, and that's how it should be. Myself, I'm probably more inclined to point out my friends misunderstandings and bad behaviour (not that they have such, of course! ;-)) than I am to people I don't know so well.
 
Hi Gregg,
Would it be permitted to bet on oneself, as I believe i can do it one post :)
Jim

lol Jim i reckon the Mods have forsaken this forum, i think it would take something utterly spectacular to get banned right now.
--
Mandolin, haha, nope sorry! That, my friend, is a Banjo :)?
Now Gregg, that sounds like a challenge :) , I know death threats swing it :)
Jim
 
...would you just mind clearing up this uncertainty about your attitude to the raising of issues of Tourette's syndrome on these forums. On the one hand you think an illusion of it in the context of someone making (and continuing to make) deeply insulting and offensive comments about others to be 'offensive and wrong the same time', but meanwhile you enter another thread designed entirely to mock people imagined to have Tourette's commending it as 'subtle' and make what can only be construed as an approving joke about it.

Could you please tell us how you square those two points of view, Lou? This is only the third time I've asked, but you don't seem very keen to answer. You should have thought of something to say by now.

In the meantime, I'd have thought that someone who seems to approve both of deeply and insulting comments (so long as they come from his friends) and also of the mockery of those imagined to have verbal tics (so long as that mockery is of his opponents) is the last person to lecture us on how DPR should deal with 'these people', unless, of course you were including yourself in 'these people'.
John,

Don't worry about my stress level and my blood pressure, they both fine. Thanks for the concern.

Well it seems that my threads turned out totally different than I expected and that is not directly in favor of this forum. But no whining, it's as easy to start one as to stop with it.

I decide to take the last option and got back to where I came for in the first place... reading about gear and participate in some image threads from others of my own. Btw I think it's partly my fault as well as I get tempt by them and get into those ugly discussions.

Also using the ignore button give some release, But I have to say that knowing the way they respond, it would be wiser not to start this kind of discussion, even it was a thread with a wink. On the other hand it's ridiculous that freedom of acting in a behave manner is hijacked by them. Also that dpreview isn't able to deal appropriate with those people is a very big shame as they hijacked more than a thread. I have asked them to remove this thread in favor of atmosphere of this forum. Amen :)

Thanks for your contribution John.

Regards Lou

This thread is closed, at least for me.
 
After reading this thread and getting totally lost as to who is arguing with who I am tempted to start a thread on "How many angels might dance on the head of a pin (with an E-whatever strapped to their neck, of course)." The only thing holding me back is my vow to keep my average of posts to the forum to one a week and my started threads to two per year. Three years and I'm pretty much on schedule.

Bob

--
DeWitt
http://www.rdewitt.net
 
Free at last....

Vjim
 
Another 100+ post thread that has absolutely nothing to do with photography

--



E-Five-Ten/E-One/E-Three-Hundred/E-Ten/C-Twenty-OneHundred-UZ/E-OneHundred-RS
DZ Eleven-TwentyTwo/DZ Fourteen-FiftyFour/DZ Fifty-TwoHundred
EC-Fourteen/FL-Fifty/FL-Forty
Oldma-cdon-aldh-adaf-arm-EI-EI-O
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top